Vicky:
I don't know much about human perception of bird songs beyond obvious facts
about overall frequency ranges etc. And would love to hear someone's discussion
about what "sweeter" means.
There is literature about main frequency ranges used by different birds and
relating this to their habitat --- forest dwellers tending to use lower
frequencies, open country birds using higher ones. There's lots of hypotheses
about this situation concerning tradeoffs between absorption of sound by the
habitat, impedance of air at different frequencies, and easy or difficulty of
(a predator say) locating a sound source of different frequencies.
As you suggest about your Lyrebirds, I bet that many singers optimize the
location of their singing perches.
Cheers!
Steve P
--- In vickipowys <> wrote:
>
> Curt and others,
>
> I found Curt's comments most interesting re the sweet spot for mic
> placement being 18-24" off the ground. Lyrebirds sing usually in the
> 1-4 kHz frequency band, and from a low mound of earth on the ground,
> and I guess that 18-24" would be about beak height for a singing
> lyrebird. I am thinking the lyrebirds are smart, and understand how
> sound transmits and is received.
>
> Curt, do you have any information on which frequencies of bird song
> sound 'sweeter'? i.e. what are the most used channels of sound for
> your local birds. 1-4 kHz, or higher?
>
> cheers,
>
> Vicki Powys
> Australia
>
>
> On 05/08/2009, at 5:11 AM, Curt Olson wrote:
>
> > Thanks Greg,
> >
> > I've experimented with ground effect quite a bit over the last year.
> > To my ear, the "fuller sound" you mention seems to become quite
> > noticeable at about 15" or so and increases rapidly to the point of
> > serious ugliness at ground level. But in the 18" to 24" range, there
> > seems to be a certain sweet clarity that seems to drop off ever so
> > slightly as the mic moves upward to about head height -- at least
> > that's what I've ovserved.
> >
> > I've never done any serious experiments with higher elevations like
> > Walt and Dave have done. Hmmm... yup, that's definitely another
> > element to look into.
> >
> > Curt Olson
> >
> > Greg Weddig wrote:
> >
> >> Curt,
> >> I would generally agree with you, though I don't have any evidence
> >> of such. Most of my ORTF recordings are done in that same range. I
> >> think the ground effect most likely provides a bit of a fuller
> >> sound, much like a PZM microphone would.
> >>
> >> Mostly I am trying to keep the mics out of the wind, and keeping
> >> them low I find, depending on the geography, helps shield them from
> >> nearby highway and city noise.
> >>
> >> --greg weddig
> >> http://gregweddig.net
> >> Paradise, CA
> >>
> >>
> >> --- In Curt Olson <cro@> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Ever the respectful contrarian, I've recently discovered -- much to
> >>> my surprise -- that the head-spaced barrier type mic rigs I'm
> >>> currently using seem to render a slightly cleaner image when I have
> >>> them in a "sweet spot" approximately 18" to 24" above the ground.
> >>> This improvement is very subtle, and might be peculiar to my
> >>> current rigs. I'm curious if anyone else has experienced the same
> >>> thing.
> >>>
> >>> Curt Olson
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > "While a picture is worth a thousand words, a
> > sound is worth a thousand pictures." R. Murray Schafer via Bernie
> > Krause
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
>
|