Hi David,
I think that the confusion is caused by the unusual 32 bit file format
of Doug's recording. When I first tried to open it, I also got those
strange waveform patterns. However, my old Cool Edit Pro LE opened the
file correctly. I just uploaded a 16 bit version of Doug's file:
http://www.avisoft.com/scratch/insect_hi_freq1_16bit.wav
Regards,
Raimund
David Ellsworth wrote:
>
> Listen to my filtered version of Doug's recording and tell me if you
> still think it's an insect:
>
http://ad2004.hku.nl/naturesound/David_Ellsworth/insect_hi_freq1.filtered.w=
av
> I converted a graph of the locally-averaged amplitude of the original
> recording into a waveform, and made every other pulse negative.
>
> For comparison, here's the same filtering done on the recording of
> the Roesel's bush-cricket:
> http://ad2004.hku.nl/naturesound/David_Ellsworth/metr_roe_.filtered.wav
> There was no odd-even pattern here, and there wasn't enough
> dilineation between pulses to make every other pulse negative. If you
> want a pure comparison:
>
http://ad2004.hku.nl/naturesound/David_Ellsworth/insect_hi_freq1.filtered2.=
wav
> (I suggest looking at the waveform of this one)
>
> (Thanks for the upload space, Anton!)
>
> At 2007-06-08 00:25, Raimund Specht wrote:
>
> >I believe that it is a bush-cricket species. Unfortunately, I'm not an
> >expert in North American insects. However, there are similar species
> >here in Europe. For instance Roesel's bush-cricket (Metrioptera
roeselii):
> >
>
><http://www.avisoft.com/sounds/metr_roe_.wav>http://www.avisoft.com/sounds=
/metr_roe_.wav
> >
> >(original speed, re-sampled at 44.1 kHz)
>
|