May I interfere here, without having read all postings...??
If I hear just 10 recordings of a Blyth's warbler, background dead
silent, no manmade sounds, - I may very well get the impression that
such a warbler is a one that never sings in a town. But it does.
A few years ago I recorded one in Helsinki, with lots of cars around
and an ambulance passing by.
I like that recording.
And what about a recording of a Robin, sitting at a car antenna at
Trafalgar Square? Isn't that "a natural sound"?
I think it is.
Or have I missed something?
Klas.
At 01:56 2007-08-22, you wrote:
>This may sound like a dumb question, but I'm curious about where
>people on this site draw the line between recordings of nature and
>recordings of non-nature, and why the line is drawn where it is.
>
>Is a recording of a fog horn on topic on this site?
>
>A recording of a ferry and the water through which it is moving?
>
>A recording from the 30th floor balcony of a New York apartment of
>the city breathing at night?
>
>A recording of crickets with the sound of city traffic in the background?
>
>A recording of torrential rain from inside a car? From under an umbrella?
>
>To give a specific example...
>
>Last week I recorded nesting seabirds at Cape St. Mary's in
>Newfoundland. I made a separate recording of the Cape St. Mary's fog
>horn. If I upload the first recording to this site, would it be "off
>topic" to upload the second recording? If so, the distinction
>strikes me as a bit odd. Hence my question.
>
>Cheers
>
>
>
>
>"While a picture is worth a thousand words, a
>sound is worth a thousand pictures." R. Murray Schafer via Bernie Krause
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
Telinga Microphones, Botarbo,
S-748 96 Tobo, Sweden.
Phone & fax int + 295 310 01
email:
website: www.telinga.com
|