Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
handheld audio test signal generator with an internal speaker,all-in-one unit
I'm looking for a handheld audio test signal generator that has its own speaker.
That is, i'm looking for a device small enough that i can hold in my hand, that i can enter a frequency in (such as 261 Hz), and that will play a sine wave with that frequency, and does not require me to attach a speaker or other system to it. So i'd like it to be entirely self-contained, independent of just about everything, so that, e.g., if i'm out taking a walk in the woods and hear a sound, i can play a sine tone to see if i can match its pitch, on the spot. Does such a thing exist? I've been looking around on amazon and youtube and cannot find it, but my searches all return either no results, or some huge set that includes lots of poor matches. If there is no such thing, what's the nearest i can get to one (without building one myself --- i suppose i could write a piece of software and put it on a laptop, and lug around the laptop, but that's not the sort of thing i'd like to do: i'm not looking for software for a laptop or smartphone, but a dedicated piece of hardware that's easy to carry). TIA for any info! dan |
#2
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
handheld audio test signal generator with an internal speaker,all-in-one unit
wrote:
I'm looking for a handheld audio test signal generator that has its own spe= aker. That is, i'm looking for a device small enough that i can hold in my hand, = that i can enter a frequency in (such as 261 Hz), and that will play a sine= wave with that frequency, and does not require me to attach a speaker or o= ther system to it. For acoustic testing, or the speaker is just to provide a check signal to make sure everything is okay? Some of the NTI testers have speakers for checking signal, but they are never going to accurately reproduce 261 Hz. So i'd like it to be entirely self-contained, independent of just about eve= rything, so that, e.g., if i'm out taking a walk in the woods and hear a so= und, i can play a sine tone to see if i can match its pitch, on the spot. Does such a thing exist? Oh, you want a tuner! Get a Roland one from your local MI store. Aside from the frequency discriminator they also will act as an infinite set of tuning forks. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#3
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
handheld audio test signal generator with an internal speaker,all-in-one unit
|
#4
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
handheld audio test signal generator with an internal speaker,all-in-one unit
|
#5
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
handheld audio test signal generator with an internal speaker,all-in-one unit
On 22/05/2017 6:41 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
.. So i'd like it to be entirely self-contained, independent of just about eve= Oh, you want a tuner! Get a Roland one from your local MI store. Aside from the frequency discriminator they also will act as an infinite set of tuning forks. --scott .... or an app for your phone. Probably free. geoff |
#6
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
handheld audio test signal generator with an internal speaker,all-in-one unit
On 22/05/2017 10:21 PM, Trevor wrote:
Strange, this is the sort of thing that's pretty easy to do on a smart phone with speaker phone ability (most of them) without spending anything if you already have the phone, and nothing extra to carry if you usually have your phone on you. Trevor. Hey, we agree on something ! Though we often do, but we are each a bit pedantic on the minutae . geoff |
#7
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
handheld audio test signal generator with an internal speaker,all-in-one unit
On 5/22/2017 2:41 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
Oh, you want a tuner! Get a Roland one from your local MI store. Aside from the frequency discriminator they also will act as an infinite set of tuning forks. Or if you have a smart-ish phone, try a spectrum analyzer app. Then, not only do you have a way of determining a frequency, you have a recorder, so you don't have to determine the frequency in real time, you can study it later. Now, if that was just an example and you really want it for something else, tell us more. -- "Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be operated without a passing knowledge of computing, although it seems that it can be operated without a passing knowledge of audio" - John Watkinson Drop by http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com now and then |
#9
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
handheld audio test signal generator with an internal speaker,all-in-one unit
Or if you have a smart-ish phone, try a spectrum analyzer app. +1 N track studios tuner app has a nice portable spectrum analayzer. m |
#10
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
handheld audio test signal generator with an internal speaker, all-in-one unit
On Mon, 22 May 2017 06:01:04 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
Or if you have a smart-ish phone, try a spectrum analyzer app. +1 N track studios tuner app has a nice portable spectrum analayzer. m Bird song tends to be a bit dynamic in frequency for spectrum analyser apps to be particularly useful. Also the background noise doesn't help. I reckon something that involves listening is more likely to work. d --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus |
#11
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
handheld audio test signal generator with an internal speaker,all-in-one unit
On Sunday, May 21, 2017 at 10:56:13 PM UTC-6, wrote:
I'm looking for a handheld audio test signal generator that has its own speaker. That is, i'm looking for a device small enough that i can hold in my hand, that i can enter a frequency in (such as 261 Hz), and that will play a sine wave with that frequency, and does not require me to attach a speaker or other system to it. So i'd like it to be entirely self-contained, independent of just about everything, so that, e.g., if i'm out taking a walk in the woods and hear a sound, i can play a sine tone to see if i can match its pitch, on the spot. Does such a thing exist? I've been looking around on amazon and youtube and cannot find it, but my searches all return either no results, or some huge set that includes lots of poor matches. If there is no such thing, what's the nearest i can get to one (without building one myself --- i suppose i could write a piece of software and put it on a laptop, and lug around the laptop, but that's not the sort of thing i'd like to do: i'm not looking for software for a laptop or smartphone, but a dedicated piece of hardware that's easy to carry). TIA for any info! dan The Pano Tuner tuner app on my iPhone will do that. It has a few things that you can do with it. First of all it has a reasonably decent frequency reader. Also you can go into the app and set "A" for any frequency you desire and play it back. My friends and I have checked out about 10 different apps for guitar tuning and found this one to be the most accurate along with being the easiest to use. I find it really handy for setting playback speed on my cassette decks from a 3kHz test tape, lots easier than hooking up the Sound Technology or a computer. |
#12
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
handheld audio test signal generator with an internal speaker,all-in-one unit
On Monday, May 22, 2017 at 12:56:13 AM UTC-4, wrote:
I'm looking for a handheld audio test signal generator that has its own speaker. That is, i'm looking for a device small enough that i can hold in my hand, that i can enter a frequency in (such as 261 Hz), and that will play a sine wave with that frequency, and does not require me to attach a speaker or other system to it. So i'd like it to be entirely self-contained, independent of just about everything, so that, e.g., if i'm out taking a walk in the woods and hear a sound, i can play a sine tone to see if i can match its pitch, on the spot. Does such a thing exist? I've been looking around on amazon and youtube and cannot find it, but my searches all return either no results, or some huge set that includes lots of poor matches. If there is no such thing, what's the nearest i can get to one (without building one myself --- i suppose i could write a piece of software and put it on a laptop, and lug around the laptop, but that's not the sort of thing i'd like to do: i'm not looking for software for a laptop or smartphone, but a dedicated piece of hardware that's easy to carry). TIA for any info! dan I have an old Eico tube signal tracer, maybe 5 pounds, even a cats eye tuning thing. Oh, here it is!!!.... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A2T7j48FPXA Oh, you want a signal generator! Whoops! Jack |
#13
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
handheld audio test signal generator with an internal speaker,all-in-one unit
On 23/05/2017 12:22 AM, Don Pearce wrote:
Your application doesn't really match what you are asking for. Typing in a frequency would be a poor way to do this. You need a knob you can turn quickly to match the frequency, then a readout of what it is. Alternatively, how good a musical ear do you have? Carry a tuning fork and get the note from the pitch interval. Bird song is all pretty approximate so this would work well. No batteries to worry about either. If the sound tyoo quiet or masked by background noise, just basic personal pitch acuity whistle the first or one significant note along with the bird and check the freq on the SA running on your phone . geoff |
#14
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
handheld audio test signal generator with an internal speaker,all-in-one unit
On Monday, May 22, 2017 at 1:08:46 PM UTC-7, geoff wrote:
On 23/05/2017 12:22 AM, Don Pearce wrote: Your application doesn't really match what you are asking for. Typing in a frequency would be a poor way to do this. You need a knob you can turn quickly to match the frequency, then a readout of what it is. Alternatively, how good a musical ear do you have? Carry a tuning fork and get the note from the pitch interval. Bird song is all pretty approximate so this would work well. No batteries to worry about either. If the sound tyoo quiet or masked by background noise, just basic personal pitch acuity whistle the first or one significant note along with the bird and check the freq on the SA running on your phone . geoff Thanks Scott, Don, Mako, Trevor, Geoff, Mike, Richard, and Jack. A tuner (meaning a piece of electronics that reports the frequency) is along the right lines --- thanks Scott for suggesting that. That's not what i want, but it sounds useful, and i'm so out of it i didn't know that they exist so commonly and cheaply. I don't want anything that requires a smart phone, because although i have a smart phone, i want to minimize my dependence on it (and for a lot of reasons would like to get rid of it completely). Nevertheless i appreciate knowing about what smartphones can do, so thanks for all of the smart phone suggestions everybody. A set of tuning forks would be ideal (thanks Don), in principle, except that the number required would be very large (i'd like to tune to within 1%, so considerably closer than a semitone). (So even if i had a knob, i'd want to be able to fine tune it.) Thanks again for posting!!! dan |
#15
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
handheld audio test signal generator with an internal speaker,all-in-one unit
On 22/05/2017 9:16 PM, geoff wrote:
On 22/05/2017 10:21 PM, Trevor wrote: Strange, this is the sort of thing that's pretty easy to do on a smart phone with speaker phone ability (most of them) without spending anything if you already have the phone, and nothing extra to carry if you usually have your phone on you. Hey, we agree on something ! Though we often do, but we are each a bit pedantic on the minutae . :-) Trevor. |
#16
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
handheld audio test signal generator with an internal speaker,all-in-one unit
On 23/05/2017 1:17 AM, Richard Kuschel wrote:
I find it really handy for setting playback speed on my cassette decks from a 3kHz test tape, lots easier than hooking up the Sound Technology or a computer. Haven't used my cassette deck for a decade, hope I never have to find out if it still works, but can't see why I'd ever want to! :-) Trevor. |
#17
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
handheld audio test signal generator with an internal speaker,all-in-one unit
|
#18
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
handheld audio test signal generator with an internal speaker,all-in-one unit
wrote:
A tuner (meaning a piece of electronics that reports the frequency) is alon= g the right lines --- thanks Scott for suggesting that. That's not what i = want, but it sounds useful, and i'm so out of it i didn't know that they ex= ist so commonly and cheaply. As I said in the original post, most tuners will also produce a reference tone, like an infinite set of tuning forks. You set the note on the front, and with one switch it produces that note and with another it reads your pitch with respect to it. As I said in the original post, try the Roland. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#19
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
handheld audio test signal generator with an internal speaker,all-in-one unit
On 5/22/2017 11:17 PM, wrote:
A set of tuning forks would be ideal (thanks Don), in principle, except that the number required would be very large (i'd like to tune to within 1%, so considerably closer than a semitone). (So even if i had a knob, i'd want to be able to fine tune it.) How's your memory for pitch? If you had a bag full of tuning forks, unless you were measuring something that produced a constant pitch for a fairly long time (as long as it took to find a tuning fork that was close enough) you'd need to be able to remember the pitch you heard that you want to measure. If you're really talking about bird chirps, that's practically instantaneous. If you're talking about a babbling brook, that contains a lot of frequencies. There are ear training programs, some probably even on line by now, that will help you to learn absolute, or at least accurate relative pitch. You don't have to be born with "perfect pitch," but you can learn to detect an interval relative to a standard like a tuning fork. I don't know how well you can learn to estimate how far off standard pitch but you can certainly learn to tell if what you're hearing is between C and C#, and which is closer. So you don't need a smart phone if you make your ears or brain smarter. Have you considered an inexpensive handheld recorder? Unless whatever you're doing must be done in real time, bringing home a recording will let you do as detailed analysis as you want. A Zoom H1 or TASCAM DR-5 are under $100 -- For a good time, call http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com |
#20
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
handheld audio test signal generator with an internal speaker,all-in-one unit
On Monday, May 22, 2017 at 11:17:47 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Monday, May 22, 2017 at 1:08:46 PM UTC-7, geoff wrote: On 23/05/2017 12:22 AM, Don Pearce wrote: Your application doesn't really match what you are asking for. Typing in a frequency would be a poor way to do this. You need a knob you can turn quickly to match the frequency, then a readout of what it is. Alternatively, how good a musical ear do you have? Carry a tuning fork and get the note from the pitch interval. Bird song is all pretty approximate so this would work well. No batteries to worry about either. If the sound tyoo quiet or masked by background noise, just basic personal pitch acuity whistle the first or one significant note along with the bird and check the freq on the SA running on your phone . geoff Thanks Scott, Don, Mako, Trevor, Geoff, Mike, Richard, and Jack. A tuner (meaning a piece of electronics that reports the frequency) is along the right lines --- thanks Scott for suggesting that. That's not what i want, but it sounds useful, and i'm so out of it i didn't know that they exist so commonly and cheaply. I don't want anything that requires a smart phone, because although i have a smart phone, i want to minimize my dependence on it (and for a lot of reasons would like to get rid of it completely). Nevertheless i appreciate knowing about what smartphones can do, so thanks for all of the smart phone suggestions everybody. A set of tuning forks would be ideal (thanks Don), in principle, except that the number required would be very large (i'd like to tune to within 1%, so considerably closer than a semitone). (So even if i had a knob, i'd want to be able to fine tune it.) Thanks again for posting!!! dan Allow me to ramble ( signal generator). I was heavily into CB radio. Even met my wife there. Anyway, I knew enough to replace a "crystal" with a LC circuit, so I could go "in between" allotted CB channels. My first attempt failed, because I used "audio" coax cable to connect. Later tried a piece of, what was the number, RG58U coax cable and it worked, but so, so unstable!! One Sunday morning, I decided to use my Dad's old vacuum tube driven signal generator to replace the crystal. Though it probably required LONG warm-up period to stabilize output frequency, I managed to talk to someone in Texas from New Jersey! Okay, so the 150W linear amplifier helped, too :-) Jack |
#21
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
handheld audio test signal generator with an internal speaker,all-in-one unit
On 24/05/2017 12:20 AM, Mike Rivers wrote:
On 5/22/2017 11:17 PM, wrote: A set of tuning forks would be ideal (thanks Don), in principle, except that the number required would be very large (i'd like to tune to within 1%, so considerably closer than a semitone). (So even if i had a knob, i'd want to be able to fine tune it.) How's your memory for pitch? If you had a bag full of tuning forks, unless you were measuring something that produced a constant pitch for a fairly long time (as long as it took to find a tuning fork that was close enough) you'd need to be able to remember the pitch you heard that you want to measure. If you're really talking about bird chirps, that's practically instantaneous. If you're talking about a babbling brook, that contains a lot of frequencies. There are ear training programs, some probably even on line by now, that will help you to learn absolute, or at least accurate relative pitch. You don't have to be born with "perfect pitch," but you can learn to detect an interval relative to a standard like a tuning fork. I don't know how well you can learn to estimate how far off standard pitch but you can certainly learn to tell if what you're hearing is between C and C#, and which is closer. So you don't need a smart phone if you make your ears or brain smarter. Have you considered an inexpensive handheld recorder? Unless whatever you're doing must be done in real time, bringing home a recording will let you do as detailed analysis as you want. A Zoom H1 or TASCAM DR-5 are under $100 How bizarre. Record the birds for later analysis, and/or run an SA (or tuner) on smartphone. Anything else then ask yourself how much you really need to find out about what you are trying to do versus the reason for smartphone disdain. If the real reason is simply ear-training, then there are more straightforward methods. geoff PS Smartphones need only be as smart as a smart user wants them to be. |
#22
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
handheld audio test signal generator with an internalspeaker, all-in-one unit
geoff wrote:
On 24/05/2017 12:20 AM, Mike Rivers wrote: On 5/22/2017 11:17 PM, wrote: A set of tuning forks would be ideal (thanks Don), in principle, except that the number required would be very large (i'd like to tune to within 1%, so considerably closer than a semitone). (So even if i had a knob, i'd want to be able to fine tune it.) How's your memory for pitch? If you had a bag full of tuning forks, unless you were measuring something that produced a constant pitch for a fairly long time (as long as it took to find a tuning fork that was close enough) you'd need to be able to remember the pitch you heard that you want to measure. If you're really talking about bird chirps, that's practically instantaneous. If you're talking about a babbling brook, that contains a lot of frequencies. There are ear training programs, some probably even on line by now, that will help you to learn absolute, or at least accurate relative pitch. You don't have to be born with "perfect pitch," but you can learn to detect an interval relative to a standard like a tuning fork. I don't know how well you can learn to estimate how far off standard pitch but you can certainly learn to tell if what you're hearing is between C and C#, and which is closer. So you don't need a smart phone if you make your ears or brain smarter. Have you considered an inexpensive handheld recorder? Unless whatever you're doing must be done in real time, bringing home a recording will let you do as detailed analysis as you want. A Zoom H1 or TASCAM DR-5 are under $100 How bizarre. Record the birds for later analysis, and/or run an SA (or tuner) on smartphone. Anything else then ask yourself how much you really need to find out about what you are trying to do versus the reason for smartphone disdain. If the real reason is simply ear-training, then there are more straightforward methods. geoff PS Smartphones need only be as smart as a smart user wants them to be. Why not a phone? Why does the accuracy needs to be within 1%? 1% of what? Regarding the phone, I'd give him a pass on that and not even ask: It could be that he's trying to get over an addiction of sorts that's facilitated by his phone. E.g., it could be work calling when he's "off-call" and he has a hard time not worrying about whether they need him; it could be he just broke up with his girlfriend but can't stop hooking up even though it's mentally unhealthy. It could be anything. But, answers to the other questions I listed might help him get a better answer to his question, especially "1% of what?" -- Matt |
#23
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
handheld audio test signal generator with an internal speaker,all-in-one unit
On 5/23/2017 7:30 PM, Matt Faunce wrote:
Why does the accuracy needs to be within 1%? 1% of what? There's always the possibility that he doesn't know quite what he's talking about, but it could be interpreted as 1% of the number of Hz, or 1% of a musical half-step, or 1 cent. That's pretty darn close - one study suggests that most humans can detect a change of 5 or 6 cents. -- For a good time, call http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com |
#24
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
handheld audio test signal generator with an internalspeaker, all-in-one unit
Mike Rivers wrote:
On 5/23/2017 7:30 PM, Matt Faunce wrote: Why does the accuracy needs to be within 1%? 1% of what? There's always the possibility that he doesn't know quite what he's talking about, but it could be interpreted as 1% of the number of Hz, or 1% of a musical half-step, or 1 cent. That's pretty darn close - one study suggests that most humans can detect a change of 5 or 6 cents. That sounds about right for melodic differences, but, when two tones are heard harmonically, i.e., at the same time, then finer differences can be judged by listening to the interference beats. For example, on a perfectly equally tempered guitar the fifth harmonic of the low E string against the seventh fret harmonic of the low A string, will be 1.98 cents different, and will make beats frequency (I think) a little over a second long. (Gerald Klickstein wrote a book on how to tune the guitar, and he has you tune so those beats are timed to occur with a specific metronome setting. I kinda wish I knew what that setting was, but not so much that I'll buy the book.) -- Matt |
#25
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
handheld audio test signal generator with an internal speaker,all-in-one unit
On Tuesday, May 23, 2017 at 9:29:39 PM UTC-4, Matt Faunce wrote:
Mike Rivers wrote: On 5/23/2017 7:30 PM, Matt Faunce wrote: Why does the accuracy needs to be within 1%? 1% of what? There's always the possibility that he doesn't know quite what he's talking about, but it could be interpreted as 1% of the number of Hz, or 1% of a musical half-step, or 1 cent. That's pretty darn close - one study suggests that most humans can detect a change of 5 or 6 cents. That sounds about right for melodic differences, but, when two tones are heard harmonically, i.e., at the same time, then finer differences can be judged by listening to the interference beats. For example, on a perfectly equally tempered guitar the fifth harmonic of the low E string against the seventh fret harmonic of the low A string, will be 1.98 cents different, and will make beats frequency (I think) a little over a second long. (Gerald Klickstein wrote a book on how to tune the guitar, and he has you tune so those beats are timed to occur with a specific metronome setting. I kinda wish I knew what that setting was, but not so much that I'll buy the book.) Maybe like the whining noise when the different carrier frequencies of two AM radio stations are mixed, the difference is heard or maybe beat frequency? I hear it in music, too, sometimes I think I hear a phone ringing or my watch alarm going off!! Strange. Jack -- Matt |
#26
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
handheld audio test signal generator with an internalspeaker, all-in-one unit
Matt Faunce wrote:
Mike Rivers wrote: On 5/23/2017 7:30 PM, Matt Faunce wrote: Why does the accuracy needs to be within 1%? 1% of what? There's always the possibility that he doesn't know quite what he's talking about, but it could be interpreted as 1% of the number of Hz, or 1% of a musical half-step, or 1 cent. That's pretty darn close - one study suggests that most humans can detect a change of 5 or 6 cents. That sounds about right for melodic differences, but, when two tones are heard harmonically, i.e., at the same time, then finer differences can be judged by listening to the interference beats. For example, on a perfectly equally tempered guitar the fifth [fret] harmonic of the low E string against the seventh fret harmonic of the low A string, will be 1.98 cents different, and will make [the] beats frequency (I think) a little over a second long. Correction: I meant "fifth fret harmonic", not "fifth harmonic." I fixed it above. (Gerald Klickstein wrote a book on how to tune the guitar, and he has you tune so those beats are timed to occur with a specific metronome setting. I kinda wish I knew what that setting was, but not so much that I'll buy the book.) -- Matt |
#27
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
handheld audio test signal generator with an internal speaker, all-in-one unit
On Wed, 24 May 2017 03:53:49 -0000 (UTC), Matt Faunce
wrote: Matt Faunce wrote: Mike Rivers wrote: On 5/23/2017 7:30 PM, Matt Faunce wrote: Why does the accuracy needs to be within 1%? 1% of what? There's always the possibility that he doesn't know quite what he's talking about, but it could be interpreted as 1% of the number of Hz, or 1% of a musical half-step, or 1 cent. That's pretty darn close - one study suggests that most humans can detect a change of 5 or 6 cents. That sounds about right for melodic differences, but, when two tones are heard harmonically, i.e., at the same time, then finer differences can be judged by listening to the interference beats. For example, on a perfectly equally tempered guitar the fifth [fret] harmonic of the low E string against the seventh fret harmonic of the low A string, will be 1.98 cents different, and will make [the] beats frequency (I think) a little over a second long. Correction: I meant "fifth fret harmonic", not "fifth harmonic." I fixed it above. (Gerald Klickstein wrote a book on how to tune the guitar, and he has you tune so those beats are timed to occur with a specific metronome setting. I kinda wish I knew what that setting was, but not so much that I'll buy the book.) This thread appears to have got away from itself. This is about assessing the frequencies of bird song. What we know about bird song is that it is typically brief, and it chirps. And chirping is a rapid frequency sweep contained within the actual pulse. What this means is that the concept of "within 1%" may be literally meaningless. The idea of doing this on the fly is really not very sensible. Far better is the suggestion to record it and try to make sense of it later. To do this I would probably not use a spectrum analyser - because of the chirp - but the spectrogram view on a DAW. That would present the frequency as it changes against time. Exactly what is needed to extract the information the OP is after (although he hasn't really made it very clear what he is trying to achieve). d --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus |
#28
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
handheld audio test signal generator with an internal speaker,all-in-one unit
On 5/24/2017 1:41 AM, Don Pearce wrote:
This thread appears to have got away from itself. This is about assessing the frequencies of bird song. Do we really know it's about bird sounds? In the original post, he wrote "if i'm out taking a walk in the woods and hear a sound . . . " Maybe he's talking about a bear growling, a snake slithering, a twig snapping, or a tree falling. What we know about bird song is that it is typically brief, and it chirps. And chirping is a rapid frequency sweep contained within the actual pulse. What this means is that the concept of "within 1%" may be literally meaningless. Very true for birds, and, in fact, almost any natural sound. The idea of doing this on the fly is really not very sensible. Agreed. But maybe he walks in some magic woods where birds whistle sustained, single frequencies. -- For a good time, call http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com |
#29
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
handheld audio test signal generator with an internal speaker,all-in-one unit
On 24/05/2017 10:27 PM, Mike Rivers wrote:
On 5/24/2017 1:41 AM, Don Pearce wrote: This thread appears to have got away from itself. This is about assessing the frequencies of bird song. Do we really know it's about bird sounds? In the original post, he wrote "if i'm out taking a walk in the woods and hear a sound . . . " Maybe he's talking about a bear growling, a snake slithering, a twig snapping, or a tree falling. All starting to sound maybe a little bit wacky to me. OP - maybe a follow-up post with exactly what you are attempting to do, why, and why excluding several of the easiest (and best ?) methods suggested ? geoff |
#30
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
handheld audio test signal generator with an internal speaker,all-in-one unit
On 24/05/2017 10:27 PM, Mike Rivers wrote:
Agreed. But maybe he walks in some magic woods where birds whistle sustained, single frequencies. I walk in the bush often, and where I am there are many birds that whistle easily repeatable and identifiable series of pitches. Granted, some trills may be a little trickier to pin down to a particular prime note, but most not. geoff |
#31
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
handheld audio test signal generator with an internal speaker,all-in-one unit
|
#32
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
handheld audio test signal generator with an internal speaker,all-in-one unit
On 24/05/2017 11:54, geoff wrote:
On 24/05/2017 10:27 PM, Mike Rivers wrote: Agreed. But maybe he walks in some magic woods where birds whistle sustained, single frequencies. I walk in the bush often, and where I am there are many birds that whistle easily repeatable and identifiable series of pitches. Granted, some trills may be a little trickier to pin down to a particular prime note, but most not. For many birds I hear, the frequency modulates many times a second, and for decent analysis, the sound needs to be slowed down to reveal even the basic note in the sequence. -- Tciao for Now! John. |
#33
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
handheld audio test signal generator with an internal speaker, all-in-one unit
On Wed, 24 May 2017 06:27:10 -0400, Mike Rivers
wrote: On 5/24/2017 1:41 AM, Don Pearce wrote: This thread appears to have got away from itself. This is about assessing the frequencies of bird song. Do we really know it's about bird sounds? In the original post, he wrote "if i'm out taking a walk in the woods and hear a sound . . . " Maybe he's talking about a bear growling, a snake slithering, a twig snapping, or a tree falling. What we know about bird song is that it is typically brief, and it chirps. And chirping is a rapid frequency sweep contained within the actual pulse. What this means is that the concept of "within 1%" may be literally meaningless. Very true for birds, and, in fact, almost any natural sound. The idea of doing this on the fly is really not very sensible. Agreed. But maybe he walks in some magic woods where birds whistle sustained, single frequencies. Here is a spectrogram of birdsong, and it makes it pretty easy to see why a) the idea of 1% matching is crazy, and b) this kind of spectrogram is the only sensible way to look at it http://www.soundthoughts.co.uk/look/birdsong.png d --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus |
#34
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
handheld audio test signal generator with an internal speaker,all-in-one unit
On Wednesday, May 24, 2017 at 7:35:35 AM UTC-4, Don Pearce wrote:
On Wed, 24 May 2017 06:27:10 -0400, Mike Rivers wrote: On 5/24/2017 1:41 AM, Don Pearce wrote: This thread appears to have got away from itself. This is about assessing the frequencies of bird song. Do we really know it's about bird sounds? In the original post, he wrote "if i'm out taking a walk in the woods and hear a sound . . . " Maybe he's talking about a bear growling, a snake slithering, a twig snapping, or a tree falling. What we know about bird song is that it is typically brief, and it chirps. And chirping is a rapid frequency sweep contained within the actual pulse. What this means is that the concept of "within 1%" may be literally meaningless. Very true for birds, and, in fact, almost any natural sound. The idea of doing this on the fly is really not very sensible. Agreed. But maybe he walks in some magic woods where birds whistle sustained, single frequencies. Here is a spectrogram of birdsong, and it makes it pretty easy to see why a) the idea of 1% matching is crazy, and b) this kind of spectrogram is the only sensible way to look at it http://www.soundthoughts.co.uk/look/birdsong.png d here is another intresting link http://www.avisoft.com/compression.htm m |
#35
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
handheld audio test signal generator with an internal speaker,all-in-one unit
On Wednesday, May 24, 2017 at 6:51:48 AM UTC-4, geoff wrote:
On 24/05/2017 10:27 PM, Mike Rivers wrote: On 5/24/2017 1:41 AM, Don Pearce wrote: This thread appears to have got away from itself. This is about assessing the frequencies of bird song. Do we really know it's about bird sounds? In the original post, he wrote "if i'm out taking a walk in the woods and hear a sound . . . " Maybe he's talking about a bear growling, a snake slithering, a twig snapping, or a tree falling. All starting to sound maybe a little bit wacky to me. I liked to hear the Byrds sing, Turn, Turn, Turn!! Jack OP - maybe a follow-up post with exactly what you are attempting to do, why, and why excluding several of the easiest (and best ?) methods suggested ? geoff |
#36
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
handheld audio test signal generator with an internal speaker,all-in-one unit
geoff wrote:
On 24/05/2017 10:27 PM, Mike Rivers wrote: On 5/24/2017 1:41 AM, Don Pearce wrote: This thread appears to have got away from itself. This is about assessing the frequencies of bird song. Do we really know it's about bird sounds? In the original post, he wrote "if i'm out taking a walk in the woods and hear a sound . . . " Maybe he's talking about a bear growling, a snake slithering, a twig snapping, or a tree falling. All starting to sound maybe a little bit wacky to me. Much of the problem is that people think they have a good memory for pitch, but really they don't. Play someone a note and then play the same note 20 seconds later and unless they are very good they will not be able to tell if one is slightly sharp or flat of the other. My ex could tell, but she was pretty amazing at assessing pitch, and I'm not sure how much was learned vs. innate. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#37
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
handheld audio test signal generator with an internal speaker, all-in-one unit
Don Pearce wrote:
Here is a spectrogram of birdsong, and it makes it pretty easy to see why a) the idea of 1% matching is crazy, and b) this kind of spectrogram is the only sensible way to look at it http://www.soundthoughts.co.uk/look/birdsong.png Clearly this depends on the bird, though. Here is Coco, the electus: http://www.panix.com/~kludge/beep.mp3 Warning: this is a very loud and annoying beeping noise that comes from a bird. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#38
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
handheld audio test signal generator with an internal speaker,all-in-one unit
On 25/05/2017 12:22 p.m., Scott Dorsey wrote:
Don Pearce wrote: Here is a spectrogram of birdsong, and it makes it pretty easy to see why a) the idea of 1% matching is crazy, and b) this kind of spectrogram is the only sensible way to look at it http://www.soundthoughts.co.uk/look/birdsong.png Clearly this depends on the bird, though. Here is Coco, the electus: http://www.panix.com/~kludge/beep.mp3 Warning: this is a very loud and annoying beeping noise that comes from a bird. --scott Here is what I get at 5AM in summer : http://www.doc.govt.nz/Documents/con...ui-song-50.mp3 geoff |
#39
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
handheld audio test signal generator with an internal speaker,all-in-one unit
On 5/24/2017 6:35 AM, Don Pearce wrote:
On Wed, 24 May 2017 06:27:10 -0400, Mike Rivers wrote: On 5/24/2017 1:41 AM, Don Pearce wrote: This thread appears to have got away from itself. This is about assessing the frequencies of bird song. Do we really know it's about bird sounds? In the original post, he wrote "if i'm out taking a walk in the woods and hear a sound . . . " Maybe he's talking about a bear growling, a snake slithering, a twig snapping, or a tree falling. What we know about bird song is that it is typically brief, and it chirps. And chirping is a rapid frequency sweep contained within the actual pulse. What this means is that the concept of "within 1%" may be literally meaningless. Very true for birds, and, in fact, almost any natural sound. The idea of doing this on the fly is really not very sensible. Agreed. But maybe he walks in some magic woods where birds whistle sustained, single frequencies. Here is a spectrogram of birdsong, and it makes it pretty easy to see why a) the idea of 1% matching is crazy, and b) this kind of spectrogram is the only sensible way to look at it http://www.soundthoughts.co.uk/look/birdsong.png d I wonder if the OP is related to JackA or thekmanrocks? I have to wonder about someone that says he needs 1% and the simplest, most portable equipment and has no idea how to achieve this not to mention what he intends to do with the data. |
#40
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
handheld audio test signal generator with an internalspeaker, all-in-one unit
Don Pearce wrote:
On Wed, 24 May 2017 06:27:10 -0400, Mike Rivers wrote: On 5/24/2017 1:41 AM, Don Pearce wrote: This thread appears to have got away from itself. This is about assessing the frequencies of bird song. Do we really know it's about bird sounds? In the original post, he wrote "if i'm out taking a walk in the woods and hear a sound . . . " Maybe he's talking about a bear growling, a snake slithering, a twig snapping, or a tree falling. What we know about bird song is that it is typically brief, and it chirps. And chirping is a rapid frequency sweep contained within the actual pulse. What this means is that the concept of "within 1%" may be literally meaningless. Very true for birds, and, in fact, almost any natural sound. The idea of doing this on the fly is really not very sensible. Agreed. But maybe he walks in some magic woods where birds whistle sustained, single frequencies. Here is a spectrogram of birdsong, and it makes it pretty easy to see why a) the idea of 1% matching is crazy, and b) this kind of spectrogram is the only sensible way to look at it http://www.soundthoughts.co.uk/look/birdsong.png d After learning that Mozart and other composers would take a notebook out on walks and jot down birdsongs, I listened to birds myself while thinking about what those composers' notations probably looked like. I quickly realized that in most cases if I wanted to capture it into conventional notation, both in pitch and time, I'd have to do some 'active interpretation', by which I mean something analogous to looking at a cloud that kinda looks like a car then drawing that car but with much more definition than the cloud. This active interpretation comes naturally, and in many cases it needs to be unlearned. I've read that most people think snow is pure white, but a trained artist will see it as the yellowish it actually is, or the something-slightly-other-than-white it is. Proofreaders need to unlearn automatically correcting mispelled words. I assume that recording engineers hear what is actually sounded much better than lay people; contrasted with amateur musical composers -- i.e., those who think in melodies creatively but aren't trained to meticulously copy other music like the pros are -- who probably very actively listen without realizing it. So, if the OP's intention is to listen to a birdsong, repeat the melody as he actively hears it by whistling it, and then match what he whistles with a device he's asking about, then the most sophisticated device he needs is a simple chromatic pitch pipe and the simple ability the transpose octaves. If I'm right about this, he thinks he needs more accuracy because he doesn't realize that his active listening is not only artificially rendering the melodies as discrete tones but also that it's almost certainly ramrodding them into the equal-tempered 12-pitches-per-octave system. -- Matt |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
A high precision audio signal generator | Pro Audio | |||
Internal signal path of audio interface. | Pro Audio | |||
FS: HP 3551A Audio Test Set - Generator, Digital Voltmeter, Frequency Counter | Marketplace | |||
FA Heathkit tube audio signal generator 5844553842 | Pro Audio | |||
FA: Hewlett Packard Audio/Signal Generator | Marketplace |