naturerecordists
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Reviewing long recordings

Subject: Re: Reviewing long recordings
From: "chrishails50" chrishails50
Date: Tue Apr 9, 2013 12:41 pm ((PDT))
Dear all,

Thanks to Gianni, Anders, John, Caspar, Eric and Peter (sorry if I missed 
anyone) for your responses. ALL very much appreciated.

So there is no missing out the grunt work it seems (am I surprised ?). But 
amongst all your ideas I found most appealing:

1) using spectral view (duh - should've thought of that)
2) speeding up things (4x) using eyes and ears together
3) sampling

For my owls I would try 1) and 2). I think sampling is probably fine for day 
time regular noises, but for an irregular night-time noise like an owl it may 
be easy to miss between samples.

Several of you use a page skip function which is a great idea - I need to find 
that on Audition.

Many thanks all, your time and experience much appreciated.

C 


--- In  "klangstrand" <> 
wrote:
>
> I suggest reducing the fft window size. At least in Soundtrack Pro it enables 
> me to view a longer sample at a time, and gives a smoother experience, since 
> it takes away  some of the strain on the processor.
> As of my understanding, I believe the resolution is only critical on lower 
> frequencies. So a reduction in resolution and some tweaking of the frequency- 
> and amplitude display, should point out any anomaly pretty quickly. I usually 
> get 15 minutes worth of recordings on screen at a time, where most activity 
> is fairly protruding.
> Lowering the resloution to, say 512, makes scrolling unproblematic.
> I may not fully understand the science of it, but in my experience this works 
> pretty well.
> Best
> -A
> 
> 
> --- In  Peter Shute <pshute@> wrote:
> >
> > I can see that it would be useful for short listing sections to include in 
> > an edited version, but remember that the original request was for methods 
> > of finding owl calls in long recordings.
> > 
> > Peter Shute
> > 
> > Sent from my iPad
> > 
> > On 08/04/2013, at 11:14 PM, "rapsac" <rapsac@<rapsac@>> wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Well, you don't get much of an impression from a single fragment, but
> > you get a feeling for changes over time and if anything stands out you
> > can just stop skipping. It's not a great method but it saves the time of
> > trying to think of a smart solution ;)
> > 
> > Caspar
> > 
> > Peter Shute skrev 2013-04-08 12:46:
> > > Caspar, are you listening to a short burst every few seconds though the 
> > > recording? What sort of impression can you get from a fraction of a 
> > > second?
> > >
> > > Peter Shute
> > >
> > > Sent from my iPad
> > >
> > > On 08/04/2013, at 6:28 PM, "rapsac" 
> > > <rapsac@<rapsac%40bredband.net><rapsac@<rapsac%40bredband.net>>>
> > >  wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I first divide the recording into shorter manageable files, then scan
> > > them using Sound Forge by clicking through the waveform while playing
> > > back. With some practice you only need to listen to a fraction of a
> > > second for each "click".
> > >
> > > Caspar
> > >
> > > chrishails50 wrote 2013-04-07 18:20:
> > >> Dear all
> > >>
> > >> Related to my last question, I wonder if anyone has any great tricks for 
> > >> reviewing long duration recordings ?
> > >>
> > >> I have over the years amassed enough reasonable mics and machines to 
> > >> have at least two sets (and maybe a third) that can be left out 
> > >> unattended overnight. I would like to survey my local woods and forests 
> > >> and catch some of the owls that are out there that I have not yet 
> > >> recorded.
> > >>
> > >> But my question is how to review an 8-10 hour session efficiently ? In 
> > >> the past I have had them playing background whilst I do other tasks, but 
> > >> normally I can only spend maybe 2 hours doing that. I then moved on to 
> > >> scanning the waveform files (for night-time this works I think): I apply 
> > >> a 100% notch filter below 600Hz to get rid of passing planes and boy 
> > >> racers then scroll the waveform (I use Audition 3)and look for peaks 
> > >> that could be interesting sounds. But as I have just discovered even 
> > >> this takes a chunk of time if I have two machines running overnight.
> > >>
> > >> I know a real field guy would spend the night wandering the forest with 
> > >> his parabola, but I have a day job too.....has anyone else faced this ?
> > >>
> > >> Thanks for any tips or ideas.
> > >>
> > >> Chris
> > >> http://www.wildechoes.org
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> ------------------------------------
> > >>
> > >> "While a picture is worth a thousand words, a
> > >> sound is worth a thousand pictures." R. Murray Schafer via Bernie Krause.
> > >>
> > >> Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------------------
> > >
> > > "While a picture is worth a thousand words, a
> > > sound is worth a thousand pictures." R. Murray Schafer via Bernie Krause.
> > >
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>








<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