My guess was based on your "Pin in the map" location which shows it on the =
beach in an agriculture and vacation village about a third of a mile from t=
he main group of buildings on the main stretch of road.
The pics linked on Google Earth surrounding the location have me yearning f=
or travel.
John Hartog
--- In Marinos Koutsomichalis <=
.> wrote:
>
> absolutely not.. this place is not exactly civilized.. it' s an isolated =
beach - there is not chance there is no sewing system around for lots of ki=
lometers..
>
>
>
>
> On 01 =C3=8E`=C3=8F=C2=85=C3=8E=C2=B3 2010, at 1:38 =C3=8F=C2=80.=C3=8E=
=C2=BC., hartogj wrote:
>
> >
> > Maybe you were near a sewer outlet pipe. Could be sounds from a pump.
> >
> > John Hartog
> >
> > --- In Marinos Koutsomichalis <marino=
s@> wrote:
> > >
> > > well,
> > >
> > > whatever it is, I like it - and that' s what matters probably..
> > >
> > > but I still, I tend to believe that it has to be sth buried in the sa=
nd,
> > >
> > > This beach is pretty isolated - there' s not much going on there - Ju=
st a couple of houses and a tavern, or sth like that. No radio stations, ca=
bles or people using mobile phones.. Well, in our century electromagnetic r=
adiation could be everywhere, of course.. There is a military airport somew=
here in the greater area, indeed, but we are talking about a distance of mo=
re than 10 kms. It' s highly unlikely that their radar would cause such a s=
ound underwater..
> > >
> > > The most logical thing to me is that some kind of crustacean or sea-w=
orm lived there or sth else. (it' s not flattering to record radar sounds i=
n a beach anyway..)
> > >
> > > just for the record - The hydros were a set of dolphinEar Pros, I bou=
ght them second hand from a guy that bought them together for a never-to-be=
-realised-project - so probably they are of the same set - plugged into a m=
arantz PMD661 recorder.
> > >
> > >
> > > On 31 =C3=83=C2=8E=C3=A2=C2=84=C2=A2=C3=83=C2=8E=C3=82=C2=BF=C3=83=C2=
=8F=C3=A2=C2=80=C2=A6=C3=83=C2=8E=C3=82=C2=BB 2010, at 5:59 =C3=83=C2=8E=C3=
=82=C2=BC.=C3=83=C2=8E=C3=82=C2=BC., James Shatto wrote:
> > >
> > > > > --- On Sat, 7/31/10, Marinos Koutsomichalis <marinos@>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > From: Marinos Koutsomichalis <marinos@>
> > > > > Subject: Re: [Nature Recordists] what is this creature/sound ?
> > > > > To:
> > > > > Date: Saturday, July 31, 2010, 12:33 AM
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > There are some military radars within the greater area,
> > > > > but in a distance of several km, if that was the case,
> > > > > the other mic should pick that kinds of sounds I think.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Not necessarily. If you didn't buy them as a matched pair. Manufact=
ured as part of the same lot with the same materials. Like if you bought th=
em used from two different sources at different times. The mics could be di=
fferent enough to respond differently. It could be things other than the mi=
cs as well. Are you using the same brand of cable with the same connectors,=
of about the same age? And various other possibilities with the field reco=
rder and stuff.
> > > >
> > > > I've thought about building a faraday type cage for my field record=
er and preamps. Which would double as a rain shelter. While I'm mostly immu=
ne to most cell phone handshakes and stuff like that, I have picked up a ra=
dio station at least once. There was visual contact with the transmission t=
ower, just a couple of blocks away. Lowering the elevation of the mics help=
ed. Tucking the field recorder under the aluminum bleachers I was sitting o=
n helped. Even making sure that the 1/4" adapter on the 1/8" tip of my head=
phones was secure helped. While it didn't remove the sound from the recordi=
ngs in it's entirety, it did achieve a balance where the radio station stat=
ion can only be heard when using studio monitors and at a volume that wasn'=
t pleasant to listen at in the first place.
> > > >
> > > > Although the monitoring environment at the time of capture made it =
seem much worse than it actually ended up being. The odd thing was that I a=
lmost didn't bring the headphones to monitor with on that occasion. Now I a=
lways bring them regardless. Even if you trust your gear, you never know wh=
at you're recording at the time of capture unless you monitor what you're r=
ecording. Having that immediate feedback lets you know that it's there, and=
otherwise makes you search for the source. If you go back after the fact a=
nd it was a military aircraft carrier at sea, it might not be there anymore=
. And you'll never be able to replicate the problem. And always wonder what=
that was. If it is the mics you might be able to identify if it was just a=
loose connection or something else easily preventable. And otherwise corre=
ct the problem on site and get a flawless recording.
> > > >
> > > > It could have also been a bird standing over your mic making noise.=
Or baby turtles buried in the sand near by hatching. Without a visual reco=
rd or being there to investigate, we may never know.
> > > >
> > > > - James
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
|