[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Re: Elk bugling

Subject: Re: Re: Elk bugling
From: Aaron Ximm <>
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 19:31:37 -0800
> setting centered at 827 Hz.  Is it just me, or do our elk sound like
> they are underwater once the hiss is removed?  This may be something I
> am going to have to live with, because it seems at this point that I
> can either have background hiss or aquatic elk :)

Fwiw, I'd say about 80% of the digital-sounding "aquatic" artifacts I
hear I also hear in the original MP3 you sent me(!); I don't hear
*too* much added distortion from the noise reduction process (though
there is some). Btw if you can send me an uncompressed minute at full
fidelity I'd be curious if I can get results that are less
"aquatic"... :)

...but to answer one of your questions, your source recording does
have a quite low signal/noise ration relative to what I shoot for (and
can regularly get) -- you should be able to get a "cleaner" source
recording pretty easily with a good mix of practice (e.g. proximity to
sound source, recording without other noise sources around) and
still-inexpensive gear.

By way of comparison, here's another elk recording made by [group
participant] Lady Raven using an older MD recorder and a relatively
"noisy" Sony ECM957 consumer stereo mic:

This is a great recording, and the total gear cost for those things
used today would be < $300 I'd guess.


PS I am grateful she lent me this recording for the "one-minute
vacation" for October 13, 2003; see:


  83% happy
   9% disgusted
   6% fearful
   2% angry


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>

The University of NSW School of Computer and Engineering takes no responsibility for the contents of this archive. It is purely a compilation of material sent by many people to the naturerecordists mailing list. It has not been checked for accuracy nor its content verified in any way. If you wish to get material removed from the archive or have other queries about the archive e-mail Andrew Taylor at this address: andrewt@cse.unsw.EDU.AU