[linux-audio-user] recording bats?

[derek holzer]

This might be an interesting starting point:

http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?pid=S0001-37652004000200040&script=sci_arttext&tlng=en

Chris is correct that the sound acquisition equipment must be able to 
register the ultrasonic frequencies before the A/D converter can do much 
about it. I would assume that any Linux audio software capable of 
recording at 96 KHz, along with a 96 KHz sound card [the model mentioned 
in the above article records at 16 bit, BTW] would work just fine with 
an ultrasonic receiver.

I would recommend posting to the Phonography list [it's a Yahoo group, 
unfortunately], as this is a bunch of folks dedicated to 
nature/field/environmental sound recording.

best,
d.

Chris Cannam wrote:
> On Monday 08 Nov 2004 20:17, Eric Dantan Rzewnicki wrote:
> 
>>I just had a crazy idea ... Sorry if this is off topic a bit. Does
>>anyone know what frequency ranges bats use? Would a 96KHz 24bit card be
>>able to capture anything useful from their sounds?
> 
> 
> Depends on the bats, but generally yes.  Some of them are on the edge of the 
> human hearing range (I used to be able to hear the bats at my parents' house, 
> although my hearing is no longer quite good enough).
> 
> First Google hit for "frequency range of bats" is a bit less optimistic than I 
> am:
> 
>   http://hypertextbook.com/facts/1998/JuanCancel.shtml
> 
> Either way, wouldn't the microphone be more of a limiting factor than the 
> soundcard?
> 
> 
> Chris
> 


-- 
derek holzer ::: http://www.umatic.nl
---Oblique Strategy # 174:
"Water"