naturerecordists
[Top] [All Lists]

13. Re: High Sample Rates

Subject: 13. Re: High Sample Rates
From: "Michael Oates" msohooates
Date: Wed Aug 19, 2009 11:09 pm ((PDT))
Opps, after closer look I just realised the range should read "from 46kHz-6=
4kHz" and not
48kHz-65kHz


Hi,

Just because a manufacture says the mics response goes up to 20kHz, does no=
t mean it will
not allow you record higher frequencies.

Take the following as an example that I recorded last month: The Sennheiser=
 MKH20
published response is 12Hz-20,000Hz yet when I recorded in my garden as a t=
est I recorded
a bat which had a strong signal ranging from 48kHz-65kHz. This was recorded=
 at 192kbps on
a SD 744T. I did see the bat visually, but not well enough to identify it.

See this sonogram: http://www.mikeoates.org/wildlife/img/sonogram-bat.jpg

Ok this is a particular good mic, but what ever you have just try it, it ma=
y work well
above 20kHz.

While I am here, can anyone identify this bat from the image, I believe it'=
s a Pipistrelle
but it has a higher frequency than other sonograms I have seen, could it be=
 a Soprano
Pipistrelle?

Mike


>All,
>
>Is there any point in using a higher sample rate if the mics we use
>only go up to 20 kHz?  We would not be able to capture animal sounds
>above 20 kHz no matter what the settings on the recorder.
>
>I note that the Sennheiser MKH 800 goes up to 50 kHz but is very
>expensive.  Most other Sennheiser mics only go up to 20 kHz.
>
>When Raimund recorded Noctule bats (20-45 kHz) with inbuilt mics on a
>Sony PCM D50 recorder, he noted that the mic sensitivity went up to
>30 kHz.  Does anyone know what the inbuilt mic sensitivity is for the
>Olympus LS-10?  I cannot find that in the specifications.
>
>Vicki Powys
>
>
>On 20/08/2009, at 2:42 AM, John Hartog wrote:
>
>> Hi Curt,
>> I don't see the bottom line yet.
>> How does metadata being important suggest that high sample rates
>> are not? Maybe they are both important. These listening tests that
>> we refer to are about marketing music only, and they only show we
>> think we can hear no difference. There are many things that we
>> cannot consciously describe that do indeed affect mind and body.
>> And then there is species and ecosystem documentation - what about
>> all that communication above 20k?
>>
>> John Hartog







<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • 13. Re: High Sample Rates, Michael Oates <=
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