[Don Pearce[_3_]]

On 24 May 2017 20:22:06 -0400, (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

Even your tone-like bird is a lot more complex than it seems. Here's
its spectrogram. There is an underlying tone at 2875Hz, but the first
half of the sound is much thicker, with plenty of sound down to about
2630Hz. So even something as clear as this can't be assessed to 1%

http://www.soundthoughts.co.uk/look/scotts_bird.png

d

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

[geoff]

On 25/05/2017 5:36 PM, Don Pearce wrote:


Even your tone-like bird is a lot more complex than it seems. Here's
its spectrogram. There is an underlying tone at 2875Hz, but the first
half of the sound is much thicker, with plenty of sound down to about
2630Hz. So even something as clear as this can't be assessed to 1%

http://www.soundthoughts.co.uk/look/scotts_bird.png

As before, we really have no idea what the purpose was, and if the 1%
figure was something plucked out of the air, so to speak.

geoff

[Don Pearce[_3_]]

On Thu, 25 May 2017 18:22:52 +1200, geoff
wrote:

On 25/05/2017 5:36 PM, Don Pearce wrote:


Even your tone-like bird is a lot more complex than it seems. Here's
its spectrogram. There is an underlying tone at 2875Hz, but the first
half of the sound is much thicker, with plenty of sound down to about
2630Hz. So even something as clear as this can't be assessed to 1%

http://www.soundthoughts.co.uk/look/scotts_bird.png

As before, we really have no idea what the purpose was, and if the 1%
figure was something plucked out of the air, so to speak.

geoff

Well, the only sounds in nature I can think of that have anything like
a note are bird song. That or whales, but that probably involves being
a bit wetter than most electronics will appreciate.

d

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

[Scott Dorsey]

Don Pearce wrote:
On 24 May 2017 20:22:06 -0400, (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.

Even your tone-like bird is a lot more complex than it seems. Here's
its spectrogram. There is an underlying tone at 2875Hz, but the first
half of the sound is much thicker, with plenty of sound down to about
2630Hz. So even something as clear as this can't be assessed to 1%

http://www.soundthoughts.co.uk/look/scotts_bird.png

It's even worse than this, since what you're seeing is MP3 encoded and it has
lost some of the fine detail as a result. I think I have a .wav file
around here if you are curious.

To my ears, it sounds like a 3kc beep. My ex could likely get it down
much closer than that. But the spectroscope can see it with far more detail.

Interestingly, Coco was preceded by a now-deceased bird of the same species,
Kalani, who made a sound at the same pitch but much screechier and with more
obvious sidetones. My wife referred to it as "the fanbelt noise" and it was
far more annoying even than Coco's beep but clearly was a different version
of the same sound.
--scott


--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[John Williamson]

On 25/05/2017 10:44, Don Pearce wrote:
eoff

Well, the only sounds in nature I can think of that have anything like
a note are bird song. That or whales, but that probably involves being
a bit wetter than most electronics will appreciate.

Round here, the foxes, feral and domesticated cats and deer all make
complex pitched sounds that vary according to the situation and individual.

In the field, some animals such as wolves can often be identified down
to a particular region of origin or pack by their calls, occasionally
down to the individual animal level, much like recognising someone's
voice even if you can't understand what they are saying.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

[Don Pearce[_3_]]

On 25 May 2017 09:35:15 -0400, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:
On 24 May 2017 20:22:06 -0400, (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.

Even your tone-like bird is a lot more complex than it seems. Here's
its spectrogram. There is an underlying tone at 2875Hz, but the first
half of the sound is much thicker, with plenty of sound down to about
2630Hz. So even something as clear as this can't be assessed to 1%

http://www.soundthoughts.co.uk/look/scotts_bird.png

It's even worse than this, since what you're seeing is MP3 encoded and it has
lost some of the fine detail as a result. I think I have a .wav file
around here if you are curious.

To my ears, it sounds like a 3kc beep. My ex could likely get it down
much closer than that. But the spectroscope can see it with far more detail.

Interestingly, Coco was preceded by a now-deceased bird of the same species,
Kalani, who made a sound at the same pitch but much screechier and with more
obvious sidetones. My wife referred to it as "the fanbelt noise" and it was
far more annoying even than Coco's beep but clearly was a different version
of the same sound.
--scott

I'd like to peer inside that .wav, so yes, please post it.

d

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

[Les Cargill[_4_]]

Don Pearce wrote:
On 24 May 2017 20:22:06 -0400, (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

Even your tone-like bird is a lot more complex than it seems. Here's
its spectrogram. There is an underlying tone at 2875Hz, but the first
half of the sound is much thicker, with plenty of sound down to about
2630Hz. So even something as clear as this can't be assessed to 1%

http://www.soundthoughts.co.uk/look/scotts_bird.png

d

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


I totally want to make a wrap of the png and put it on a van now.
( not really

--
Les Cargill

[[email protected]]

On Tuesday, May 23, 2017 at 12:47:32 AM UTC-7, Scott Dorsey wrote:
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."


Thanks Scott.

I was too dense to understand the bit about the reference pitch in your original.

I looked at some youtube videos about Roland Boss tuners, and didn't see anything that looked like a small speaker on them (such as their clip-on tuner) that would emit an acoustic wave. (There were some that had output ports, but i presume that would be for daisy-chaining and in the case of a tuner would just pass through the input signal.)

But maybe i was looking at the wrong tuners (clip-on and pedal).

Do you have a Roland tuner that provides a direct audio (acoustic) out? Or do you have to attach another piece of gear to it to make the signal audible?

If you do have a Roland tuner, i'd sure appreciate knowing the model so i can check it out.

Thanks again for the info, and TIA for any more specifics that you'd care to share.

(Also thanks everybody else for all the info, advice, and suggestions. I'll also try to respond to the questions, but i'll have to make another sweep through this thread to be systematic about it.)

dan

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 5/28/2017 2:35 AM, wrote:

I looked at some youtube videos about Roland Boss tuners, and didn't
see anything that looked like a small speaker on them (such as their
clip-on tuner) that would emit an acoustic wave.
But maybe i was looking at the wrong tuners (clip-on and pedal).

Do you have a Roland tuner that provides a direct audio (acoustic)
out?

You were looking at the wrong thing. To find a tuner with a speaker,
you'll need to look for hand-held or table-top tuners, or maybe a
different brand. If you're still stuck on the tuner idea, you'll
probably find just what you want he

http://www.korg.com/us/products/tuners/

I have the original version of what's now the OT-120 with a big analog
meter. In the tone generator mode, you can find the approximate note,
then turn a knob to sweep it +/- 50 cents to match the pitch, and read
the number of cents off pitch it is directly from the meter. That's as
close as you'll get to to a direct measurement "within 1%."



--

For a good time, call http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com

[[email protected]]

On Sunday, May 28, 2017 at 3:45:43 AM UTC-7, Mike Rivers wrote:
On 5/28/2017 2:35 AM, wrote:

I looked at some youtube videos about Roland Boss tuners, and didn't
see anything that looked like a small speaker on them (such as their
clip-on tuner) that would emit an acoustic wave.
But maybe i was looking at the wrong tuners (clip-on and pedal).

Do you have a Roland tuner that provides a direct audio (acoustic)
out?

You were looking at the wrong thing. To find a tuner with a speaker,
you'll need to look for hand-held or table-top tuners, or maybe a
different brand. If you're still stuck on the tuner idea, you'll
probably find just what you want he

http://www.korg.com/us/products/tuners/

I have the original version of what's now the OT-120 with a big analog
meter. In the tone generator mode, you can find the approximate note,
then turn a knob to sweep it +/- 50 cents to match the pitch, and read
the number of cents off pitch it is directly from the meter. That's as
close as you'll get to to a direct measurement "within 1%."



--

For a good time, call http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com

Awesome Mike, thanks so much!!!

We'll see how the OT-120 does and proceed from there, but it sure sounds like exactly what i was looking for.

Thanks everybody else for all the input and interesting ideas and links.