naturerecordists
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Auto recording

Subject: Re: Auto recording
From: "Walter Knapp" waltknapp
Date: Sun Oct 28, 2007 11:03 am ((PDT))
Posted by: "Ted Coffey"
> 
> 
> I am not suggesting that you can't do what you want.
> I am only stating my preference and don't see why they don't make the
> instrument more versatile.  I don't like wading through hours of
> recordings trying to find passages that I intended to record.
> Ted

The problem with adding remote control is you have to continuously power 
the receiver for it in the auto recorder. This will way shorten the life 
of the batteries. Normally that unit is only running the timer in the 
off intervals and that's extremely low power. For equipment like this it 
could be on the other side of the state, hundreds of miles away and a 
ways off in the brush/swamps/etc., so limiting trips is very valuable. 
You want long service intervals.

Note this is a recorder intended for scientific survey use. Before 
starting the survey you come up with a protocol that specifies the 
record intervals. You don't change them during the middle of the survey 
or your data is compromised for some uses. And you'd probably not pass 
peer review for publishing. Changing protocol on a scientific study is 
not done lightly.

I like the idea of this unit, though I'd really prefer compact flash 
instead of SD. I have both cards, but SD is easier to misplace. It also 
would have been nice if the unit had phantom power or plug in power.

You don't have hours of recordings exactly in typical froglogger use. 
Generally they record just a few minutes several times a night. They are 
not run continuously. Over the course of months that can add up, of 
course. Thus the advent of computer sound recognition analysis.

I'm waiting to see what the froglogger group comes up with, but probably 
going to get a logger or two. I'd love to have a dozen or more, but 
that's too much money for me.

On the amphibulator that was mentioned, the pdf has to be bought from 
IEEE. Won't help a whole lot, the concept is described but not enough to 
build one. Sounds very similar to what the froglogger folks are building 
for their next model. The froglogger that's current requires a Marantz 
660 for each logger, making it quite expensive. That's one of the 
advantages of the Song Meter, it's complete as it comes.

Walt








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

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