Editor’s note about the following article: The welfare of the birds must come first. Please be mindful that flash photography can cause distress to birds. Photographers are reminded to use artificial light sparingly for photography. Please also be respectful of other birders around you when photographing birds. See links below for the ABA’s code of conduct and British Birds Photography Code of Conduct. In the UK, photographers are reminded that it is a criminal offence to be disturbing Schedule 1 breeding species.
ABA Code of Conduct
British Birds – Photography Code of Conduct

OVERCOMING FLASH FEAR, CAVES AND GHOSTS FOR BETTER PHOTOS

By Tom Stephenson and Scott Whittle

 

DSLR cameras are becoming ubiquitous these days in the birding community. We were at Magee Marsh in May photographing warblers for our upcoming Warblers in Real Life book and apps,  and it seemed that two-thirds of the birders there had long-lens

Digital SLR camera rigs.

 

Typical gathering of birders with cameras…two Canons, one Nikon\

 

In general, these cameras are a boon to the birding world – they help with the identification process, create a vast and unprecedented documentation of the birds of the world, and are fun!   Of course, that doesn’t mean they are easy to use, especially in difficult lighting.

 Getting a sharp, beautiful photo on a sunny morning is often not too difficult.  But shooting on a dark, overcast day, or in the deep shade of the woods, can be downright tough. Oftentimes our photos wind up blurry (despite good focus), too grainy, or just weirdly lit – more photos for the “outs” pile.  The problem is that many of the options we have on a sunny day disappear as the light fades, and we are left with only high ISO settings that result in grainy shots, or a slow shutter speed that guarantees blurry photos. There is a solution that can solve all those problems, and that solution is flash.

          1/250th no flash   

          

1/250th with flash  (my cat…strictly indoors…)

 

 

1.2 sec no flash

 

For many photographers, overcoming “flash fear” is the single most important way to improve their photos.  In this article we’ll talk a little about external flashes and their accessories, show you some basic settings for getting great flash photos, and explain some of the details of how it all works. In the next article, we’ll discuss the benefits of using flash in brighter light.

 

THE GEAR

 First, what gear do you need for flash photography?  The built-in flash on many cameras certainly will work, but with limited success and only when the bird is very close and the ambient light isn’t very high.   This may be a good place to start, but to really get the benefits of flash photography we recommend an external flash.  For Nikon or Canon systems, use one of their dedicated flashes, and buy the best flash you can afford.   Unfortunately, bird photography tends to demand the best possible performance from your photographic gear, and that comes only from fairly expensive cameras, lenses, and yes, flashes – the top end flashes on these systems are around $450.

 

Once you’ve chosen a flash, there are two excellent accessories to add.  The first is a dedicated external battery pack that uses AA batteries.  Canon and Nikon both make battery packs for their flashes that are lightweight, and can be carried in a pocket or attached to the camera’s strap (our preference).  We highly recommend using Sanyo’s Eneloop batteries in these packs, which are not only rechargeable, but won’t discharge over time if they aren’t being used.  Using a battery pack, we find we can often shoot multiple shots with flash in quick consecutive order without having to wait for the flash to recycle.

 

Second, a Better Beamer is a must, especially in brightly lit situations or distant, poorly lit birds.  The Better Beamer is a magnifying lens that attaches to the front of the flash, and improves output significantly when using long lenses.  They provide a much greater flash range, as well as faster recycle times, and thus are a very inexpensive way to boost flash performance. 

 

 Canon 7D with 300 F4IS lens, 1.4xTC and Better Beamer

 

 USING FLASH IN LOW LIGHT

 Now that we have a flash setup, let’s look at a typical problem situation where flash can help.   It’s May, and we’re in Ohio admiring the fantastic spectacle of a good warbler day on the famous boardwalk at Magee Marsh.  We’re especially excited to have windy, wet weather, which has driven many of the warblers to eye level and below; very close for photographs.  The problem is the weather that’s bringing the warblers to us is also reducing our available light, which was already limited by the forested setting.

 Without a flash, chances are that are most photos are going to be either blurry or very grainy.  In low light, our shutter speeds get slower, and if they drop under 1/500th of a second, a lot of the photos we take will probably be soft.  Of course, we can open up the lens to a low f-stop (like f/4) and let in more light, but lenses all have limits to the size of their largest f/stop, and even if we had a very expensive and heavy lens like the 300mm f/2.8, we still probably wouldn’t have enough light to give us a fast enough shutter speed.   We could use a tripod, but below a certain shutter speed the problem won’t be camera shake (which the tripod can limit), but blur from the bird’s movements.  Finally, we can even raise our ISO (the sensor’s receptivity to light…equivalent to film speed in film cameras), but for most SLRs going over ISO 800 means we wind up with photos that are very grainy, and look less detailed.  In other words, without a flash we’re stuck.

 Happily, using flash can solve these problems.  By adding our own light to the photo, we can turn the situation completely around.  Now we can shoot at a normal ISO and f/stop, and still get sharp, low-grain photos that freeze the bird and eliminate camera shake. 

 

SUGGESTED SETTINGS

As a starting point, we suggest you use these settings when taking pictures using a flash in low light (we’ll explain these settings momentarily). 

• First, put your camera in Manual Mode.   This gives you complete control over the exposure time and F Stop, and prevents the camera from trying to “help” you by raising the exposure time.
• Next, set your f/stop to 5.6 and your shutter speed to 1/250th of a second. 
• Make sure your ISO is at 400 and that Auto ISO is off. 
• Set your flash to TTL or its default basic setting. 

 

One last point: whenever we use flash, we like to keep our shutter release on single shot (instead of continuous high or low), since firing many frames per second will quickly outpace the flash’s ability to recycle, and may even overheat and damage the flash.

 That’s it!  You can now start shooting in low light conditions and you should have sharp and well-exposed photos.

 

WHY THEY WORK WELL

Now let’s go back over and explain the reason for these settings, starting with shutter speed, and then we’ll talk about refining those settings for a specific situation.  Some of you may be thinking, “If we want to shoot at a high shutter speed to freeze the bird and get sharp photos, why are we using 1/250th when we use flash?  Won’t that lead to blurry photos?”  It’s true that, without a flash, 1/250th would almost always be too slow in low light situations. 

But it’s a different story when you use flash. First of all, in basic flash mode, all cameras limit the speed of the shutter to around 1/250th of a second. The reason is complex but simply put, if we shoot at a faster speed, the shutter will actually be “out of sync” with the flash and part of the image may get cut off.

 

But here’s the magic of using a flash:  the shutter speed actually doesn’t matter!  When almost all of the light for your exposure comes from the flash, it’s not how long the shutter is open, but how long the flash takes to fire that determines whether the image is sharp. 
And the duration of most flashes range from 1/800th to 1/10,000th (!) of a second – plenty fast to freeze most birds.  So it doesn’t matter that the shutter is open for 1/250th…the speed of the flash is fast enough to give you a sharp photo.

[Footnote:  For you advanced users, the duration of the flash is directly related to the power that the flash outputs.  For a full-power pop (ie. 1/1), you get the longest duration of flash (something like 1/800th), while for a lower-power pop (like 1/16) you get a roughly proportional shorter flash duration (in this case, 1/6000th).  This can be a useful bit of information for shooting birds that are particularly small and quick…hummingbirds come to mind.]

 

So the bird is sharp because of the flash, but what about the background?  If the flash doesn’t reach the background behind the bird, won’t it be dark?  And even if it does reach the background, won’t it look “flashed” and unnatural?   The answer is “yes, unless you control your ambient light”. It’s simple to balance the ambient background light with the primary exposure light from your flash – let’s discuss that now.

CAVES AND GHOSTS 

Once you get your flash working, there are two problems you may find in your photos:  we call them “caves” and “ghosts” (sounds like Halloween, doesn’t it?).  In “cave” photos, the bird looks like it was shot in a cave…i.e. the background is totally dark behind the bird.  This is not a very natural look, and probably not what you saw when you took the photo. 

 

This Cassin’s Sparrow shot shows the “cave” effect:  the camera settings didn’t let in enough ambient light, and made the background go black. 

 

In a “ghost” photo, you often see a little softness, or even some ghosting or “double imaging”. The photo looks like two photos of the same bird were layered on top of each other.  In fact, that is exactly what has happened, and provides the clue to a solution to both of these problems. 

 

So how many wings does this Calliope have? 
Notice that the body, which was relatively still, is fairly sharp, even though ambient light and the flash exposed the wings in different positions.

 

 When that flash goes off at 1/800th or faster, it freezes your subject.  The problem is that the camera shutter still stays open for 1/250th of a second, and therefore lets in any background light there may be, creating a “second exposure” on top of the flash photo.  So in effect you’re working with two “layers” of exposure. If there is too much light in addition to the flash, and you or the bird are moving, then you will have a blurred or ghost effect. But if there is too little light, the bird will look like it’s in a cave.

 How do you stay out of the caves and fight off the ghosts?  Easy – by changing your f/stop and/or your ISO settings.  First, note this very important point: when you use a flash in dim light, the flash will take care of itself.  In most situations you don’t control whether the flash is “brighter” or “darker”.  If your flash is working correctly and the subject isn’t out of range, the flash will expose the bird perfectly almost every time.  What you can control is the background light.  And you do that by adjusting your f/stop and your ISO.

 [Footnote:  Note that this is the opposite of using flash as a fill-light in bright light situations…in that scenario you set your ambient exposure, and then adjust the amount of flash that you “layer” on top of it.]

 So if the image looks like it was shot in a cave, try lowering your f/stop – for example to f/4 (if you can). This will let in a bit more ambient light.  If the background is still too dark, try raising your ISO, for example to ISO 800.  This will amplify the camera’s sensor thus increase the amount of light captured during that 1/250th of a second, and the photo should look more natural. 

 If your image looks a little soft (and you’re sure your focus is good), or if you’re getting ghosts, try raising your f/stop or lowering your ISO (you might go to f/8, or ISO 200, or both).  Either of these will decrease the amount of extra light let in from the background, and will help freeze the bird.   Be vigilant when you check for softness – sometimes images that appear sharp are actually a little soft, so be sure to zoom in when you look at the image on your camera’s monitor.

 

We find that in most low-light situations, we can work in a range of f/4 to f/8, and use ISO settings of 200 to 800, and get the right amount of background light for our photos. 

 

 This shot allowed less ambient light in, making the background darker, while the bird stays properly exposed.

 

 

This White-eared Hummingbird has a lighter background because the camera settings allowed more ambient light in.  Note how both these hummingbirds are correctly exposed, separate from the background.

 

In either case, the key point is that you’re adjusting the level of ambient light, not the flash.  If you want to quickly see the “two layers” of your exposure, just turn off the flash (leaving your settings on manual) and take a shot.  This is the background light that’s being let into the exposure.  You can raise or lower it by changing your settings, but remember that you want it to be darker than normal. 

If you want to be precise about it, we find that when our settings make the background light 2 stops darker than normal, that gives us a good balance using flash.  Now turn on the flash and you’ll see how the background light affects the image, even though the flash itself hasn’t been adjusted.

 

Here are a couple more tips when you use flash in low light situations. 
First, don’t go over 1/250th of a second.  Even if you’re using high-speed sync or Auto FP settings that allow for faster shutter speeds with flash, the output will be greatly reduced.  (We’ll discuss the effective use of those settings in the next article).  
Second, try and keep the aperture at f/8 or below.  Anything higher and you’re asking the flash to put out a very powerful pulse, and that is going to cut down its range and increase the recycle time. 

SUMMARY 

To sum up, flash is a critically useful tool in bird photography.  It can help you get images that would otherwise be impossible, and improve images that might otherwise be unacceptably lit.  In dark situations, the flash provides all of the light and the speed we need for the primary exposure. We use f/Stops or ISO to increase or decrease the level of ambient light that gets incorporated in the image, and thus remove the cave effect or prevent ghosting. 

A good starting point is:

* Manual Mode

* Flash on in standard or basic TTL mode

* 1/250th second

* f 5.6, with the option to try f/4 or f/8 to control background light, ghosting and caves

* ISO at 400 to start, with the option to try ISO 200 or 800 to control background light, ghosting and caves

 

 Hopefully by now you see that flash can really save the day in any kind of dim-light situation where you can’t get a fast enough shutter speed.  But what about sunny days, when shutter speed is not a problem?  Is there any reason to use flash then?  The answer is absolutely!

 

NEXT ARTICLE
In bright situations, we do the opposite:  leave the camera’s settings alone, and adjust the flash to add as much or as little additional light as we’d like to fill in harsh shadows or just make some of the detail “pop”.  We also use a “secret” setting called high-speed sync that lets us get around the 1/250th of a second shutter speed limit.  We’ll explain in detail in our next article on using flash in bright light. 

 In both cases, using flash adds a whole new layer of creative control to our images, and is an excellent and important tool in our photographic bag of tricks.

 

 

Copyright 2011 Tom Stephenson, Scott Whittle

 

USING SONOGRAMS AND SLOW SPEED PLAY TO LEARN DIURNAL AND NIGHT FLIGHT PASSERINE CALLS

This column continues the theme started in my last article, Using Audio Spectrograms to help you learn bird vocalizations.
We explored what sonograms are, how to read and use them, and ended with an analysis of the confusing vocalizations of the thrashers found in SE Arizona.

In this article, I’ll cover learning the shorter diurnal and nocturnal calls of passerines. As I mentioned in the last article, sonograms help you "see" inside a bird’s vocalization. For short sounds like bird calls, visualizing the inner structure of such short notes is very useful in training your ear to hear subtle differences between similar-sounding species’ calls. And many do sound very similar!!

In addition to sonograms, another useful learning tool is listening to the call played back at a slow speed; and importantly, this process is most helpful if the pitch of the call is not changed during slow playback. Although programs like Raven from Cornell let you slow down a vocalization, the pitch is also changed and sounds lower than the original; at half speed playback, the sound is an octave lower. Translating this lower pitch to what you hear in the real world is difficult. However at-pitch slowed down calls are very easy to relate to what you actual hear in the field.

In this article I’ll use sonograms and slow-speed, at-pitch playback to look at distinguishing passerine "calls". Much of the material I’ll be using is based on the really valuable collection of recordings found on Flight Calls of Migratory Birds by William Evans and Michael O’Brien. This is a very comprehensive collection of bird vocalizations, that was compiled after years of researching migratory night flights. I highly recommend you buy a copy.

http://www.oldbird.org/fcmbirds.htm

My plan is to soon add another article about the networks of night flight call recording stations and the correlation of that data with radar tracking of birds. There is a lot of very exciting work done on the recording side by researchers such as Andy Farnsworth and Michael Lanzone, as well as work on the radar tracking of migrating birds by David LaPuma and others.
More on that in future articles.

 

HELPFUL SOFTWARE
I mentioned in the last article that the easiest program to download and use to create sonograms is Raven from Cornell University. It’s a free, Mac or PC, program that you can use to edit recordings and then create audio spectrograms of the results.

http://www.birds.cornell.edu/brp/raven/RavenVersions.html

When using Raven, it’s very important, when trying to analyze short vocalizations, that you "zoom in" so that you are just seeing one or two call notes. Otherwise the internal structure of the call will not be visible.

Yellow Warbler songs and calls

By selecting a section of a recording, you can zoom the sonogram so that it shows that portion magnified.

Selection tool

Yellow Warbler Call Zoomed to 3 Iterations

You can also use Raven to edit out the names spoken at the beginning of a recording or extraneous noise or just to highlight parts of the vocalization you want to work on. You do this by just dragging your mouse over an area you want to edit and then doing the standard CMD X CUT command.

When comparing two or more vocalizations, it’s very useful to edit out any silence at the beginning of the calls, and then zooming in to examine similar time lengths. Doing this makes it much easier to analyze the songs.

Raven will also let you play back a recording at a slow speed by changing the number in the RATE box at the top of the screen as mentioned above. However the pitch will also be lower, proportional to the change in speed. While useful, this is a bit disorienting and not nearly as helpful a learning tool as playing back a song slower but still at the original pitch.

This can be accomplished by a number of audio programs. I use Sonar by Cakewalk, which is a PC-only program. Its speed-change algorithm works fairly well for bird songs. It does run on Parallels or Boot Camp on a Mac.

Another option is using a free program called WINAMP along with a companion plug-in program called Chronotron. The plug-in costs about $25 or so after a free trial period ends. Unfortunately for Mac users, Winamp is also only for the PC. It’s trying to compete with iTunes and its user interface is very annoying..lots of web connections..buy this, etc. And the plug-in interface that allows you to store a processed sound is very confusing. However it does work well.

http://www.winamp.com/media-player/en

http://www.chronotron.com/

Unfortunately I had to abandon the Mac platform after being a loyal user for many years (since the 128k Mac..) due to business pressure, so I’m a bit out of the loop on free Macware. However, all of the main Mac music programs like Logic, Protools and Digital Performer will allow you to change the length of a file without changing its pitch. I’m not sure about how well the freeware programs work.

 

SOME SIMPLE DIURNAL CALLS
Let’s start examining calls using the four species mentioned in my last article. This time we’ll include both the original call and a slowed down, but at-pitch version.

Since the sonogram can be enlarged, there isn’t really any advantage in using a sonogram from the slower version. But your ear will find it easier to listen to the shape and characteristics of the call when it’s slower.

Here’s a call from a Yellow Warbler including a sonogram, an original and a half-speed at-pitch version.

Yellow Warbler Call

CALL AT PITCH

CALL SLOW

This call is actually fairly long..almost 1/10th of a second…wow!!
The shape is complex for a call, with a very fast up slur and longer down slur that ends lower than the starting pitch.
In fact, the pitch hits a high of 9KHz before plunging to the depths of 3KHz or so.
The prominent downslur ending low makes the call sound "naggy".

Here’s the call of the Common Yellowthroat.

Common Yellowthroat Call

CALL AT PITCH

CALL SLOW

It’s also fairly long, as calls go, but the shape is completely different from that of the Yellow Warbler’s call. There is almost no change of pitch, and the call looks banded. If we zoom into the sonogram a bit, the banding is more obvious.

Common Yellowthroat Call Zoomed In

The banding indicates that the call consists of fast re-iterations of a basic noise-like vocalization, making it sound more like a very fast rattle than a smooth slur like the Yellow Warbler’s. And the pitch is very low, centered around 3KHz.

Here’s the call of another very vocal bird, the Northern Waterthrush.

Northern Waterthrush Call

NORWAT CALL

Several things are very obvious that make this call different from the other two above. First, of all, it’s much shorter, in fact, about half as long at about .05 seconds. It’s also much higher, ranging from 8KHz to 6KHz.

Let’s zoom in on the graphic a bit.

Graphic of Northern Waterthrush Zoomed In

The shape of this call is also very different than the shape of the other calls. It starts with a fairly fast downslurred attack, and then slurs upwards. The pitch change is a fairly even "U" shape, giving the call a relaxed feel. (This is all very relative, isn’t it!)

Listen to the call slowed down. It’s very distinctive.

NORWAT CALL SLOW

Now let’s hear the call of it’s congener, the Louisiana Waterthrush. As might be expected, this is a heftier, bigger-billed bird than the Northern and the call is deeper.

Louisiana Waterthrush Call

CALL OF LOUWAT

This call, in some ways, is a deeper, compressed version of the Northern’s. It lasts only about half as long, at .02 seconds.
The attack is faster and the rise steeper. And the pitch’s is lower, averaging from 4-5 KHz with 6KHz found at the beginning with a very fast-attack.

Here it is slowed down.

AUDIO FILE: CALL OF LOUWAT SLOW

As you can see/hear, these two calls are very different. Of course when you hear an isolated call it can be difficult to know if it’s high or low. If you can imitate the call by humming or whistling, you can often have better luck telling how high or low it is. You could also use the new iPhone pitch ap to help you locate the exact frequencies.

 

Finally, here’s another vocal "caller", the American Redstart. This call, to me, sounds "kissy"…with a fairly rich quality. It’s also the first call we’ve considered that has a strong downward trend in pitch, falling from about 8.5KHz to 3.5KHz. That’s a long fall for such a fast, about .05 second, call. This profile is certainly distinctive in the group we’ve been examining.

American Redstart Call

AUDIO FILE, AMERED CALL

AUDIO FILE: AMERED CALL SLOWED

 

NIGHT FLIGHT CALLS

Now let’s turn down the lights and discuss the calls that birds make while migrating at night. These calls are very often different than the calls these same birds make during the day. For example, the naggy, downslurred diurnal call of the Yellow Warbler is changed to an almost buzzy call when the bird is migrating.

Yellow Warbler Night Flight Call

AUDIO FILE: YELLOW WARBLER NF ZEEP

Some birds, like Yellow-rumped Warblers, often mix a different call with their normal diurnal call.

Not also, that, as pointed out on the Evans/O’Brien DVD notes, birds often vocalize using their night flight calls during the day when flying from perch to perch or at other times as well. I’ve found you can hear this very often during Fall migration on the East Coast.

By the way, did I mention that this DVD is really awesome and you should run out and buy it??

 

One of the great benefits of this DVD is that Evans and O’Brien used their incredibly extensive experience with bird calls to create a number of very useful vocalization categories that can help you differentiate and learn these very short and similar-sounding calls; or at least learn how to distinguish the different groups of call types.

For the duration of this article we’ll look at examples from the main categories they have created for most of the Eastern warbler species, using examples from their DVD.

The first step in learning to separate different species is to be able to hear the differences between these categories. Once you can put a bird with it’s group, then some other subtle differences, time of year, and, during a morning flight, the flight style and overall shape of the bird, can usually help clinch an ID. (But not always…..I assure you…not always!)
There are also differences in pitch, duration and timbre that, with experience, can be used to separate most species.

If you are interested in pursuing learning these calls, one great way is to go to Cape May in the Spring or Fall and attend the Morning Flight station there, where experts are counting the birds that are flying by. You can check with the CMBO to find out exact schedules.

http://www.birdcapemay.org/

The vocalization grouping that we’ll look at will be the following four groups:

Short Rising Seeps including Double-banded Up Seeps
Descending Seeps
Zeeps
Buzzes

SHORT RISING SEEPS
This is a large group of warblers and sparrows including Clay-colored Sparrow, Vesper Sparrow, Mourning Warbler, Prothonotary Warbler and many others. The birds in this group have quite high, short calls that have a rising quality.

Some of these birds qualify for inclusion in another category created by Evans and O’Brien, the Double-banded Up Seeps. Passerines have two syrinxes or voice boxes. Sometimes these two organs will create different sounds that make the resulting song or call complex.

This double sound is visible on a sonogram with two lines very close to the same pitch and of approximately equal volume. Instead of being harmonics of one fundamental pitch, that could be created by one instrument or voice box, these are created by two separate "devices".

You’ll notice this "double sound" in sonograms of birds in other groups as well.

Tennessee Warbler "Double-banded Up Seep" call
From the Evans/O’Brien DVD

By the way, the phase difference that is sometimes created by simultaneous sounds from a bird’s two syrinxes can also make birds very difficult to locate by ear. I wrote an article about this for Birding Magazine a number of years ago. If you’re interested in some nerdy stuff…it’s in the April, 1999 edition.

Now let’s look at some calls from the general Up Seep group.
First of all, play through all four examples, look at their sonograms and listen to the rise of the pitch of these calls. It’s easy to see this on a sonogram and fairly easy to hear, even though the calls are short.
Telling these calls from the next category, Descending Seeps, is fairly easy.
Telling them apart from each other, more difficult, but not too hard for the examples I’ve chosen here.

YELLOW-RUMPED WARBLER
The Yellow-rump’s call is the lowest, consistent with the size of the bird. It’s slightly buzzy or dense sounding. And it’s fairly long and lazy sounding (all relative!!!)

Yellow-rumped Warbler Night Flight Call

AUDIO FILE: YERUWA NF CALL

AUDIO FILE: YERUWA NF CALL SLOW

Compare that call with the Orange-crowned Warbler’s call, which is higher, shorter and much thinner.

 

Orange-crowned Warbler Night Flight Call

AUDIO FILE, ORCRWA NF CALL

AUDIO FILE: ORCRWA NF CALL SLOW

Here’s a composite audio file of both calls in sequence.

Yellow-rumped and Orange-crowned Warbler calls

AUDIO FILE, YERUWA + ORCRWA

AUDIO FILE: YERUWA + ORCRWA NF CALLS SLOW

TENNESSEE WARBLER
As shown above, the Tennessee warbler really is a "double-banded" call note, hence with a very complex sound. Even though it has sound elements as low as the ORCRWA, it actually sounds even higher because it has equally loud elements at a higher pitch.

AUDIO FILE: TENWAR NF CALL

AUDIO FILE TENWAR NF CALL SLOW

Here are all three in sequence.

 

Yellow-rumped, Orange-crowned and Tennessee Warbler NF calls

AUDIO FILE: YERUWA, ORCRWA, TENWAR COMP

AUDIO FILE: ABOVE SLOW

Even though these are very similar-sounding vocalizations, you can see and hear that in fact they are separable.

Now on to the next group.

DESCENDING SEEPS
This is a smaller group consisting of mostly sparrows and some warblers including Yellow-throated, Pine and Palm Warblers as well as Savannah, American Tree and other sparrows. As the group name implies, the calls are fast, descending vocalizations that are usually not too hard to separate from, at least, the Rising Seeps group.

Listen to these examples, which are fairly easy to tell apart.

NORTHERN PARULA

The Northern Parula’s call is fast, simple and downward pitched. It starts high but goes fairly low to about 5.5KHz, giving it a long, fast sweep down.

Northern Parula Night Flight Call

AUDIO FILE: NORPAR NF CALL

AUDIO FILE: NORPAR NF CALL SLOW

SAVANNAH SPARROW
The Savannah Sparrow’s call shows the "double-banded" complexity, even more than the TENWAR, and is long, .08 sec vs about .05 for the NORPAR. In fact, it seems to me that most sparrow night flight calls are longer than those of warblers. and that the larger the bird, the longer the calls.

Savannah Sparrow Night Flight Call

AUDIO FILE: SAVSPA NF CALL

AUDIO FILE SAVSPA NF CALL SLOW

Here they are together.

Northern Parula, Savannah Sparrow NF call comp

AUDIO FILE, NORPAR, SAVSPA NF COMP

AUDIO FILE NORPAR, SAVSPA NF COMP SLOW

Now compare them with the Rising Seeps

Rising and Descending Seep Comp

 AUDIO FILE: RISING AND DESC SEEP COMP

AUDIO FILE: RISING AND DESC SEEP COMP SLOW

 

ZEEPS
This group of mostly warblers contains Northern Waterthrush, Blackpoll, Cerulean and others.
These calls are somewhat buzzy or modulated, separating them from the first two groups. The pitch can rise, stay the same or fall, so the key defining point is the "zeepy" timbre.

The birds in this group are fairly difficult to tell apart.

Here are a couple of examples:

NORTHERN WATERTHRUSH
This call is very thick and buzzy, and you can see the double band of equal level components. It has a slight rising quality.

Northern Waterthrush Night Flight Zeep Call

AUDIO FILE: NORWAT ZEEP CALL

AUDIO FILE: NORWAT ZEEP CALL SLOW

YELLOW WARBLER
The Yellow Warbler, on the other hand, is rich and slightly buzzy, but is shorter and doesn’t change pitch. I’ve heard this call during the day fairly often on the West coast, not as often in the East (maybe just coincidence…?? or maybe the trees are further apart at the migrant traps…)
The monolithic sonogram helps show why this is in the Zeeps and not another category.

 

Yellow Warbler Night Flight Zeep Call

AUDIO FILE: YELWAR NF ZEEP

AUDIO FILE: YELWAR NF ZEEP SLOW

BUZZES
This final group contains birds that have a buzzy-sounding call. Some birds in this group have a very distinct, long, modulated buzz, like the Dickcissel, Painted Bunting and Blue Grosbeak. Others have a more subtle buzzing quality like Lincoln Sparrow and Hooded Warbler. In general, these buzzes are coarser, meaning their modulation is slower, than the Zeeps group. The calls are often deeper and longer as well, which makes the buzziness more pronounced.

Here are some samples.

Indigo Bunting Night Flight Buzz Call

AUDIO FILE: INDBUN NF CALL

AUDIO FILE: INDFUN NF CALL SLOW

The Indigo Bunting’s call is a good one to start with as it’s really long and buzzy! Whereas all of the other calls so far have been about .06 or .07 seconds long, this one is longer than .1 seconds. Wow…an eternity in the call world. It’s fairly low, and almost sandy-sounding, with slow loose modulations.

HOODED WARBLER
The Hooded Warbler’s call is much shorter, only about .06 seconds. It has a unique quality, which you can "see" by the fact that the lowest elements of the song are actually softer than the higher part of the buzz. This gives it a bit of a hollow feeling.
And you can see the coarseness of this call as well, although it’s short so it’s harder to hear.

Hooded Warbler Night Flight Buzz Call

AUDIO FILE: HOOWAR NF CALL

AUDIO FILE: HOOWAR NF CALL SLOW

LINCOLN SPARROW
This final call is very long, almost .2 seconds. It has a rising quality, and again, it’s very buzzy. It also has softer lower elements, which give it a unique quality.

Lincoln Sparrow Night Flight Buzz Call

AUDIO FILE: LINSPA NF CALL

AUDIO FILE: LINSPA NF CALL SLOW

Now, here’s a comp of one example from each of the groups we’ve covered. As you can see, there are definitely detectable differences between the different types of the calls.

 Orange-crowned Up Seep, Northern Parula Descending Seep, Northern Waterthrush Zeep, Lincoln Sparrow Buzz calls Compared

AUDIO FILE: 4 GROUP COMP

AUDIO FILE: 4 GROUP COMP SLOW

SUMMARY
Once again, I hope that this article shows the value audio spectrograms have in helping you learn how to distinguish similar-sounding vocalizations. Hearing a call at-pitch but slowed-down is also very useful for helping your ear distinguish calls that are similar and also very short. For European birds, the main CD collection has diurnal calls "up front" as the first sounds heard for each species. In the US, the main song collections from Stokes and Peterson usually have calls for a species, but it’s at the end of the track. You can use Raven to edit the call into its own sound file for easier study.

And of course for more diurnal calls and a range of examples of night flight calls, the Evans/O’Brien Flight Calls of Migratory Birds DVD is definitely the way to go.

The more practice you put into studying vocalizations this way at home, the easier it will be to begin to ID species in the field. Of course that transition will require time and patience with the more difficult calls. However the process will make you more sensitive not only to these calls but also to the shape and quality of all kinds of sounds.

 

Copyright Tom Stephenson 2010

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

UNDERSTANDING SONOGRAMS

Recent technology has given us the ability to "see" into many heretofore invisible parts of the world. From X-Rays of broken bones, to CAT scans of the brain, to ultrasound images of yet-to-be born infants; modern technology reveals important and useful information about our world.

One such tool that can be very helpful for birders is the sonogram, or more accurately, the audio spectrogram. Audio spectrograms (AS) allow birders to "see" inside a bird vocalization and can provide important clues on how to differentiate one call or song from another. Sometimes they help by showing subtle variations in short calls; other times by helping the birder recognize differences in the larger patterns of complex songs. Once these differences are discerned in spectrograms, they often become much easier to hear and differentiate in the field.

In this article I’ll provides some guidance on how to read audio spectrograms, and then I’ll use them to demonstrate how they can be helpful in differentiating the easy-to-confuse songs of the thrashers found in SE Arizona.

 WHAT ARE AUDIO SPECTROGRAMS

An audio spectrogram is a two dimensional graphical representation of an audio source. Spectrograms are created using a principal, called Fourier Analysis, that states that complex phenomenon like sounds, other physical phenomena, or even equations, can be more easily understood when they are broken down into smaller pieces.

To make it possible to "see" a sound, a Fourier analysis is made of the audio and the resulting information is converted into graphical form. Here’s how the process works.

First of all, the target sound is broken down into very short sections or samples, usually a millisecond or less in length. So a one second sound would be broken down into 1,000 or more short samples.
 
The analyzer then checks each sample to see if there is an sound present at that moment in time. If audio is present, then it checks the sound at each of many different frequencies to determine which frequencies are present at that time. The presence of any audio content in a band is then graphically represented by a short line or dot at each frequency  present at the time of the sample. The intensity or loudness of the audio at each frequency is represented usually as a lighter or darker line on a continuum from very soft (light mark) to very loud (much darker mark).

This analysis is repeated for every short time "sample" for as long as the sound lasts. The resulting graphic is a collection of all of these instantaneous representations of frequency content placed on a time line. The horizontal axis is time, showing the length of the audio. The vertical axis is frequency, with dots or lines showing what, if any, content there was at each frequency.

SOME SIMPLE AUDIO EXAMPLES

Let’s look at a very simple example of an audio spectrogram. Suppose we wanted to make an audio spectrogram of a whistle that started at a low pitch and gradually and smoothly rose to a very high pitch over 30 seconds. And let’s say the analyzer sampled the sound at each of 30 frequencies, once every second. The resulting graphical representation of the sound would show one dot at each sample for the frequency of the tone at that time. It would look like this:

Now let’s look at the audio spectrogram of a simple sine wave. If you remember back to your physics class (you weren’t sleeping were you…) a sine wave is the purest of all tones. It consists of only 1 pitch, with no overtones, and is similar to the sound you would hear from a flute or a very pure whistle. A sonogram of a one second sine wave at one pitch would have only one line, representing the pitch of the sound, and the length would be one second’s worth of distance on the graphic.

A second pure whistle of the same length, but at a lower pitch, would have a single line also lasting a second, but the line would be lower on the graphic than the first line.

Here’s an Audio Spectrogram of 12 pure tones, each lasting 1 second. The tones are in groups of 3 tones at the same pitch. Each group is lower in pitch than the prior group. The whole selection lasts about 4 seconds, from the 7 second mark to the 11 second mark on the time scale.

Notice that the frequency of the first set of tones is about 1kHz or 1,000 cycles per second. (Middle C on a piano is about 260 cycles.)

Here’s a sonogram of "row row row your boat" performed with a flute which has no overtones.

 

 

If you take two sounds of different pitches but equal volume and play them at the same time, you would hear them both at once and it would sound like a chord. The AS would look like this:

 

Now let’s take five sounds and stack them on top of each other. This time we’ll make all but the lowest much softer and place each an octave higher than the next. Instead of sounding like a chord, it would sound like just one pitch, the pitch of the lowest note. However it would sound much richer than a simple sine wave.
If you remember back to your physics class again, this is what happens when a bow excites a string and the resulting sound consists of one or more harmonics. The more harmonics, the richer sounding the sound.

When you are reading a sonogram for a bird song, it’s important to remember that the more harmonics visible in the audio spectrogram, the richer the sound.

 

 

Here’s how a simple upslurred bird call or song would look like.

 

Now here’s part of song that is a fast upward then downward slur and contains two harmonics, making the song sound fairly "rich".

 

If the pitch of the sound varies very quickly during its duration, but only by a small change in pitch, then this would be visible on an AS as a ripple or wave in the graphic. Here’s an example of part of "row row row your boat" played with a sine wave that has vibrato, or fast, small variations in its pitch.

Notice the different notes, and also that each note has very fast changes in pitch caused by the vibrato.

 

 

If the pitch of the sound varies quickly and very widely, then it would sound like a trill. Here’s the sonogram of a trill, in this case a Cedar Waxwing. Notice the harmonics that show the trill is fairly round or rich and not "dry".

 

 

Finally, if you stack a lot of unrelated sounds very close in pitch to each other, instead of hearing a rich tone, you’ll hear noise. The "ultimate" noise is actually the simultaneous sounding of equal levels of every possible pitch you can hear as a human. Here’s a sonogram of part of a Seaside Sparrow’s song that contains almost pure, pitchless noise.

In summary, the more simultaneous sounds that are harmonics of the lowest tone, the richer the sound. The more simultaneous sounds that are not harmonics, the noisier or raspier the sound. Keep this in mind as we now look at some bird songs.

 
ON TO BIRD SONGS

So what does all of this nonsense, that once put you to sleep in physics class and is starting to sound pretty soporific now, have to do with birds? Well, plenty. In order to read an Audio Spectrogram effectively, you need to be able to interpret it in two main ways.

First of all, you need to understand the tone of the bird by seeing how many sounds are stacked at any one moment of time and if they look like harmonics or just amount to some kind of noise.
And secondly you need to interpret the rhythm and patterns of the song as it unfolds over time.

Let’s take a look at a couple of simple bird songs that demonstrate some of the basics we have been discussing above.
Here is an audio spectrogram of the very clear tones of a Lesser Yellowlegs. Notice the harmonics, denoting a rich tone; and the downward slur of each note.

 

 

Here is the familiar spring song of a Northern Cardinal (familiar at least for those of us in the Eastern US.) Notice all of the harmonics, denoting a very rich song. The song starts with two very slow upslurs. It then continues with a very steady, fairly rapid sequence of rich tones. If you look closely you can see that each of the rapid notes has a prominent downslur.

 

 

The Ovenbird’s song starts quietly and increases in volume. As you can see in this sonogram, it also increases in richness of tone. You can also see the two parts of each song element ("tea   cher………tea    cher….)

 

COMPARING CHICKADEE CALLS

Now let’s examine two different species’ vocalizations and see how an AS might help us learn to differentiate them in the field.

Here’s an AS of a Black-capped Chickadee’s "phoebe" call.

 

There are several useful things to notice about this call.
First of all, the sound is very pure. There is a basic pitch and a couple of harmonics. We’re pretty sure they are harmonics and not noise because they are evenly distribute above the fundamental pitch. Both notes of the two part call have the same level of "purity" since they contain about the same harmonic content. So they will sound similar in quality.

The first tone falls a bit in pitch, but not a lot. The second tone is lower than the first.
There’s a clean break between the two notes, so they will sound distinct and separate.

Now let’s take a look at a Carolina Chickadee’s call. Although these calls are often confused in the field, they are actually very different. And this difference is quite evident when you look at the audio spectrograms.

 

 

The most obvious difference is that the CACH’s call has four notes vs the BCCH’s two. But let’s look a bit deeper to see some more revealing differences, since the BCCH can double its call or the CACH truncate it’s call.

Another striking difference between the two calls is the pitch difference between the first and second notes in the CACH’s call. Whereas the BCCH’s two notes were very close to the same pitch, 4.5kHz to 3.75kHz, there is a big pitch jump from the first note to the second note in the CACH: from 6kHz to 3.5kHz. And oddly enough, the second note of the CACH’s call is lower than the notes of the BCCH! This can explain some confusion caused by field guides that describe the CACH as being a higher call than the BCCH. Indeed it starts higher, but the second notes are lower.

Take a look at the first two notes. Notice the differences in the harmonics between the first note, with only one harmonic, and the second note, with three harmonics. The first note is thin and pure sounding, the second more complex. Certainly the two notes do not sound as similar to each other as the BCCH’s notes, which are basically the very same tonal quality.

Now look at the graphic area between the first two notes of the CACH’s call. You can clearly see a line between the two notes that extends lower than the second note. Since the line indicates many different frequencies in the same very short period of time, this part of the call will not be a clear note, but rather some kind of noise. And it will sound a bit lower than the second note. Since it’s short and noisy, then, it will sound a bit like a hiccup or glitch in the song. This glitch is very obvious when you listen to the CACH’s song and is very different from the two pure, simple notes of the BCCH.

Finally, the length of the CACH’s call is about 1.5 seconds, the same length as the two notes of the BCCH, which therefore sounds slower and more relaxed.

As you can see, an audio spectrogram can make it easier to "see" inside vocalizations and find the important differences between two species.

TRILLS AND NOISY CALLS

Trills usually consist of the same note or inflected note repeated many times in a very short period of time.
Here are four fairly similar bird songs that are trills. The audio spectrograms reveal some interesting points about each song.

Notice that both the Worm-eating and Pine Warblers start their songs softly and then quickly increase to full volume. The Pine Warbler’s trill also has a lot of variability in pitch.

The Dark-eyed Junco’s song shows two very distinct harmonics. This indicates that the song is much richer than the other trills. There also is a rich, very short note between each iteration of the trill, that would help in learning the song.

The Chipping Sparrow’s song is the simplest, with less internal variation in each individual note and abrupt beginning and ending. Spending more time with these spectrograms will reveal some other differences as well.

As another example of trills, here’s the song of a Savannah Sparrow.

 

Notice the song starts with some relatively clear slurs, and that the buzzes have some remants of harmonics and a distinct change of pitch. Since the Savannah Sparrow’s trill shows much denser lines than the trills in the above warbler examples, it will sound much noisier. However it won’t sound as noisy as the Seaside or Nelson’s Sharptailed Sparrows in the example below.

 NOISY VOCALIZATIONS

I mentioned above that noise is the simultaneous sounding of many unrelated, close pitches. In an audio spectrogram it looks like a big block of dark color. If the graphic of the noise shows black from the very bottom to the top of the AS, then there will be no pitch content at all. Our ear will not hear the sound as having any pitch. However if the "blob" is concentrated in one part of the audio spectrogram, then the noise can sound high or low, especially in relation to other noises in the song.

Here are two songs that contain noise.

 

 

The noise at the end of the Seaside Sparrow’s song is a very dense, fairly even "mass" in the AS. This indicates that the noise has very little pitch, but just sounds like broad spectrum noise.

In addition to the noise, it’s interesting to notice that before the last large section of noise there are three "notes" that are broad, simultaneous sounding of many pitches near each other. That indicates this section won’t sound like a clear tone, or a whistle.

But the noise isn’t monolithic. Notice that there actually 4 different wide lines on top of each other, with space between them. This indicates the sound will have some of the characteristics of a tone with harmonics. So this section of the Seaside Sparrow’s song will have a much more "musical" or rich sound for these three notes. And in fact this change of characteristic within the song is useful in separating the Seaside Sparrow from other sparrows that share their reedy habitat.

The Nelson’s Sharp-tailed Sparrow’s song has a less "broad" noise characteristic. The graphic for the first section of noise is concentrate in the lower 2/5ths of the spectrogram. This indicates that there will be some sense of pitch to the noise. It won’t sound rich as there are no indications of harmonic content. However you will hear a definite change in pitch of the noise as the song progresses from the first section of noise to the second section.

 
ANALYZING CALL NOTES

Short call notes are the bain of many birders. Songs of many species can sound very similar, and many otherwise audio-oriented birders balk at the threshold of learning call notes. Here again, audio spectrograms can help out, at least in some cases.
Let’s look at the notes of five different birds that can be found calling near each other during migration on the East Coast of the US.

A couple of initial ideas: Call notes can vary from being almost pure "pitched" noise to a whistle-like tone. As we have discussed, in an audio spectrogram, noise is indicated by a block of black. As mentioned above, if the block covers the whole audio spectrum, then there will be no indication of pitch. If the block is restricted to one small part of the audio spectrum, our ear will hear the referenced vocalization as having some pitch, maybe sounding basier or darker or higher or lighter than other birds or other parts of the same call. If there are harmonics, even harmonics that approach being noise themselves, as seen above, the vocalization will be richer than noise without harmonics.
With this in mind, let’s look at the call notes of five warblers.

 

 

The calls of the Hooded Warbler and the Common Yellowthroat are basically pure noise. Not full spectrum noise, but there are no harmonics to add any richness to the call. Looking closer, we can see that the COYE’s call is actually made up of several very fast iterations of noise with small intervening spaces. This call, then, will sound more like a very fast rattle than a pure monolithic sound. If you listen for this fast variation, the call becomes much easier to ID.

In contrast, the Hooded Warbler’s call is very monolithic. Notice also that it is, relatively speaking, a very long call note, and trails off towards the end of the call note. In fact, the note is more than twice as long as the COYE’s call note.

The Chipping Sparrow’s call note is very short and simple. It’s basically one very fast event. Notice that, even though it is the highest of the call notes we’re discussing, it has one harmonic, showing that it is a fairly rich tone.

The Yellow and Magnolia Warblers both have much more pitched call notes. Both show harmonics and considerable variation in pitch within the note. The Yellow Warbler’s call note ends lower than it starts and has a fast up and down movement, with most of the energy of the call in the downward movement.

The Magnolia Warbler’s note is more gentle sounding, with most of the energy of the call at the highest point in the call and then a short falling off of the pitch.

Of course when discussing call notes, we’re referring to very short vocalizations. The variations we’ve seen are taking place often in less than 1/10th of a second. Although the Hooded Warbler’s call is twice as long as that of the Common Yellowthroat, the difference is only 1/20th of a second. These differences are difficult to pick up when hearing the birds in the field. However one of the contentions of this article is that if you study audio spectrograms, particularly of these difficult vocalizations, you can discover much more easily what you need to listen for in the field. And these discoveries will in fact help you become much better at ID’ing birds from their call notes. In other words, it IS possible to hear these differences. But it helps a lot to know what you are listening for!

ON TO THE THRASHERS

Now let’s see how audio spectrograms can help us distinguish the differences between the songs of a difficult group of birds, the thrashers found in Southeast Arizona. We’ll examine the songs considering the following criteria: the rhythm of the song, whethere there are stops or spaces in the song, the number of different song elements and how they vary, and the tonal or "pitched" range of the song.

These audio spectrograms are of the first 7 or so seconds of the thrasher songs found in the Stoke’s Field Guide to Western Birds if you’d like to listen along.

The song of the Crissal Thrasher is a good place to start.

 

Notice first that the song is divided into very obvious sections with very visible short or longer pauses separating the sections. The sections all look fairly different from each other, including a two-part slow slur, a trill, and a three-part faster slur. There is also clear variations in pitch from section to section.
This song will sound divided into sections and will have a lot of variation.

Now let’s contrast the Crissal’s AS with the similar LeConte’s Thrasher.

 

 

This song also has some long pauses, in fact even longer and more relaxed pauses than the Crissal’s song. Now notice that the sections of the song all look much more similar to each other than the Crissal’s repertoire, indicating less variation in the song.

Also, you can see a number of "spikes" or short long lines indicating chip-like fast notes. These chips seem to puntuate much of the song, unlike the Crissal which has a lot more variety made up mostly of slurs and trills. 
The rhythm of the LeConte’s song is also fairly similar from section to section. There isn’t nearly as much variation as you’ve seen in the Crissal’s song.

Finally, the pitch of this song stays in the same general range. Although individual sections have slurs, the basic pitch from section to section is very similar. Again this is in contrast with the more variable Crissal’s song.

The Bendire’s Thrasher has a very constant, almost run on song indicated by a steady rhythm with virtually no pauses. This is very different than the previous two species, that have variable and fairly long pauses from section to section.

 

The Bendire’s song shows elements that are often repeated three or four times, so the song will have some feel of repetition, however the sections are not set off from each other by pauses as they are in the Crissal.

Notice that the pitch of the elements fall in the same basic range, but that in many song elements thare is a very fairly wide range of harmonics. That indicates the song will be fairly "rich" sounding: not thin and not deep. However there won’t be much of a sense of change in pitch. So the song will sound like a very rich, run on collection of repeated sections.

The Sage Thrasher also has a run on song with few pauses. Notice, however, that there are "pick up" chips, or very light single lines throughout the song. This is not present in any of the other thrasher songs so consistently.

Also, the pitch range is very limited and much lower, with fewer harmonics than the Bendire’s. That indicates the song will seem to be of consistent tonal quality and pitch throughout, and will seem lower and quite a bit less rich than the Bendire’s.

Finally let’s consider the Curve-billed Thrasher.

 

 

Unlike the Bendire’s and Sage Thrasher’s songs, the song contains distinct pauses and much more variability in pitch. This suggests the Crissal’s song. But notice that the pauses are very brief and infrequent, unlike the longer and more variable and relaxed pauses in the Crissal’s song.
 
Also, the Curve-billed song contains many shorter, chip-like sounds as distinct elements within the vocalization. This makes the song sound a bit harsher and can be very easy to pick out in the field.
So the Curve-billed Thrasher’s song will seem faster, with fewer and shorter pauses, and will have distinct chips that are song elements, not pick up chips as in the Sage Thrasher’s song.

In summary, the audio spectrograms make it very clear that three species of thrasher have significant, regular pauses in their songs and two do not. This should make it very easy to distinguish, for example, a Bendire’s from a Crissal Thrasher’s song.
 
In the run on songs, the Bendire’s song is much richer, contains more repeated elements, and is not punctuated by chips as is the more monotonic Sage Thrasher’s song.

For the group with pauses, the Crissal is fairly relaxed, and contains a lot of variety and pitch change. The LeConte’s has even longer pauses, but the elements are much more similar,are repeated more times, and are often punctuated by chips as part of the repeated song elements. The Curve-billed song is more "nervous" with fewer and shorter pauses. It contains chips that are their own elements, not part of a larger pattern. And there is much less repetition of song elements than than the more relaxed LeConte’s and Crissal songs.

 

CONCLUSION

Hopefully this article has been able to demonstrate how useful audio spectrograms can be in aiding you in identifying difficult songs and calls. Of course any exercise that helps you focus more intently on a song will be beneficial. Audio spectrograms offer a unique opportunity for you to analyze and compare the rhythm, tonal quality, and overall form of bird vocalizations and, by seeing "inside" the song, become more familiar with the harder to hear elements. Once you are in the field you will then be able to focus more easily on these elements and identify the vocalizations of previously difficult to ID species.

 

Copyright 2009 Tom Stephenson

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

How to easily carry all of your gear
and save your shoulders
(As long as you don’t mind looking like a Geek)

 

Anyone who has seen Clint Eastwood’s movie The Outlaw Josey Wales knows how important it can be to get to your gear fast.
And the same is true for birders. Although not as dangerous as the Federales, birds do have a habit of popping up
unexpectedly. And you want to be ready, with your scope, your microphone and your cameras instantly available.

GEAR LISTS ARE GROWING

The list of gear typically carried by birders in the field is growing.
Now it is not uncommon to carry a shotgun microphone, field recorder, ipod for playback, speaker,
binoculars, telescope and tripod. In addition many birders are carrying a DSLR camera complete with a long (and heavy) lens.
And the body parts bearing the brunt of these loads are typically the neck and shoulders.

Typical group of camera-lugging birders

 

In recent years binocular straps have evolved to a harness-like system that takes the weight off the neck.
Especially with some of the newer and heavier high-powered binocs, using a harneFss can mean the difference
between feeling like you’re carrying a lodestone and not even noticing the weight of your optics.
But what about the camera, scope and other gear?

TRADITIONAL CARRYING METHODS EXPLOIT THE SHOULDERS

For short stints of an hour or two, the traditional method of carrying your scope over one shoulder and a camera over
the other works OK. But if you’re going into the field for longer periods, especially for trips of day
after day of birding, you can soon start to feel like you’ve been worked over by the Marquis de Sade,
or the Inquisition. And, although you’re sure your gear originally weighed only 5 or 6 pounds,
towards the end of the day you can start to feel like you’re dragging a small refrigerator around with you
(and without the benefits of quick access to a cold beer….)

The shoulder-based method of carrying gear has other downsides. First of all, if you’re holding your scope dangling over one shoulder
you’ve lost the use of one hand. If your camera is slung over your other shoulder, then navigating rough or narrow trails
becomes a dangerous balancing act. Tilting one direction unbalances the other side. Stepping over obstacles becomes an unruly
game of Twister complete with contortions and unnatural moves as you try to keep all the gear secure and in place without losing your balance.
Add to that a slippery fabric like a rain coat or wind breaker and you have to start shrugging your shoulders and flexing like a
Yogi just to keep everything from falling off in a destructive and expensive clatter. And does your health insurance policy
cover the chiropractor who will inevitably become a regular necessity?

 

A BETTER WAY

Of course anyone who has ever done a few days of hiking knows the worst possible place to place the brunt of a load
is on your shoulders. All well-designed backpacks have a weight-bearing strap that fastens around your midsection, distributing the weight
more efficiently to your torso and keeping the load off your much less capable and pain-sensitive shoulders.

Scope and camera carrying backpacks are available. But what about the Josie-Wales factor? How fast can you get to your scope or camera if they’re
packed away on your back?

 

MY OWN GEAR LIST

 

Here’s the list of the gear I wanted to carry:

• Binocs (my trusty Zeiss 10x42s)
• Scope and tripod (Zeiss 85mm with Gitzo CF tripod)
• Canon 40D DSLR with 300mm F4 and 1.5x TC
• Canon A720 digiscoping camera with adapter
• Sennheiser ME66/K6 shotgun mic
• Edirol R-09HR digital recorder
• iPod Nano
• Radio Shack speaker
• Laser pointer
• GPS
• Water
• Bird book
• Foul Weather protection: umbrella and poncho
• Spare batteries and memory cards

This gear list may seem a bit extreme, but I use all of this often when I’m in the field, especially on a trip to some new country.

 

THE GEEKY PAIN-FREE SOLUTION

After years of pain, I decided it was finally time to find a good solution to this problem of how to carry my gear in the field, without losing fast access to it, and while keeping the load as comfortable as possible.

To find a solution I studied camera-carrying equipment, back packs, and also checked out modular military and law enforcement weight-bearing systems.

The basis of the carrying system I finally created to carry all this gear is not pretty.
It will not be something you would want to wear to a singles bar, or in any public arena not populated solely by avid birders.
However it does solve the problem of providing fast access to a lot of gear, distributing the load as painlessly as possible,
and it eliminates the constant vigilance needed when trying to keep shoulder straps from falling off.
Furthermore, it’s a great exercise in overcoming the negative effects of pride….

 

The system is based around a waist belt and a shoulder harness. Most of the weight is taken by the belt itself and the
shoulder harness keeps everything stable and in place, without bearing much of the load. This is similar to the strategy
used by backpacks that allow hikers to carry very heavy loads for many days of hiking by keeping the load on the torso and not on the shoulders.
Both the belt and the harness also provide multiple attachment points for the smaller items like the iPod and recorder.

I found a few harness systems from military-gear suppliers like Blackhawk and the camera-gear suppliers like Lowepro.
I evaluated systems from both these companies and decided on using a hybrid Lowepro system.
The Blackhawk gear is very well made. However I found that there was only one attachment point on the harness, and it was positioned too high on the shoulder.

http://www.blackhawk.com/product/Load-Bearing-SuspendersHarness,37,2.htm

Blackhawk gear also looks very "military". In some countries it’s important not to look like you’re in some foreign army, so I went with the milder Lowepro camera look.

 

The belt I chose is the Lowepro Lightbelt

http://products.lowepro.com/product/S-F-Light-Belt,2027,31.htm

The harness is from the Lowepro Field and Street series
http://products.lowepro.com/product/S-F-Shoulder-Harness,2028,32.htm

The Field and Street belt designed for the harness is too wide for the camera-carrying system I describe below. And, although comfortable, it might have been a bit bulky and hot in the tropics.

To make the light belt attach to the F&S harness, I had to add a 2" wide webbing buckle I took from a briefcase strap.

ATTACHING THE SCOPE AND CAMERA

After choosing the belt and harness I had to find a way to attach my scope and tripod to the belt. That would distribute the weight and also eliminate the problem of the strap slipping off my shoulder. I wanted to be sure whatever attachment I used, it would allow for a fast way to attach and detach  the scope.

I tried using just a carabiner on the belt, but because it could flop forwards and backwards, it was not always easy to attach or detach the scope clip. I probably could have found a way to stabilize it with tape or something else, however I decided to bolt a pipe U Bolt clamp onto the belt. This makes the attachment very easy and fast since the clamp is actually bolted onto the belt and doesn’t move at all.

On the scope side I attached a strap to the top and bottom of the tripod’s center post. By putting a knot in the middle I could find the right balance point so I can actually carry the scope with the legs out.

For the digiscoping camera I just attached a case to the tripod. This allows me to quickly get to the camera without even looking away from a bird. And the case hangs easily from the tripod when it is attached to the belt.

 

On the DLSR camera side, I tried a clamping systems similar to the one I used on the scope, but none worked that well due to the length of the lens
and the balance of the camera system.

At a recent photo show in NYC I found a company with the perfect solution, Think Tank. They make a pouch that is large
enough to hold the full 14" length of my lens, TC and hood, with the camera securely balanced at the top of the pouch.

The pouch attaches very firmly to the belt with large velcro flaps.
With the camera body so readily accessible, and the pouch large enough so that it doesn’t offer much resistance, I can grab the camera and shoot
more quickly than I could even with a shoulder strap.

The product is the LC 75 Popdown.
http://www.thinktankphoto.com/ttp_product_LC75PpDwn.php

 

 

ATTACHING THE OTHER GEAR

With the camera and scope attachments worked out, I then easily figured out where to put all of the other gear.

The most difficult was the shotgun mic, which is fairly long. The Think Tank has a mesh pocket on the side. This works well for the mic unless it has a windscreen. The added bulk of the windscreen impinges on the inside of the pouch enough to make the camera a bit harder to pull out.

So I attached another, thin pouch, on the side of the Think Tank pouch.
The one I used happens to be one from a water carrying system by Platypus. Of course you could use any similar tubular pocket-like device. I put a cut-off vitamin bottle in the bottom to keep the pouch open enough to make it easy and fast to remove the mic. I also tied the bottom of the pouch down so that it wouldn’t ride up when removing the mic.

For the binocs I’m just using an ordinary, traditional binocular harness system that takes the weight from the neck and distributes it across the back
and shoulders.

For the smaller electronic gear I used the harness attachment points. I attached the iPod and recorder to the left side. This put the recorder near the mic so I could use a short cable.

The speaker is on the right side and I connect all three devices using a "Y" cable. This allows me to record a bird and then play the song back instantly, while keeping the iPod online and ready to play at all times.

You can find info on how to wire this combination in my column on field recorders and shotgun mics:
http://www.surfbirds.com/blog/tomstips/5214/Tools+for+Attracting+the+Unknown…Field+Recorders+and+Shotgun+Mics.html

I attached the GPS to the belt and the laser pointer to the binoc strap along with a clip-on lens cloth.

I can attach a water bottle and small accessory pouch to the belt fairly easily.

For the bird book, I added an ordinary book bag. This is the only part of the system that is shoulder-based. You could easily use a belt-mounted book bag as well if you had one.

 

Finally, I added the smallest backpack I could find to carry my rain gear including an umbrella, rain coat along with some camera accessories.

For the complete system the order of putting on the gear is important. First on is the book bag, so that it doesn’t interfere with the scope.
Next is the harness with all of its attachments. Then the binoculars. And finally the small backpack.

 

I’VE NOW BEEN PAIN FREE FOR 6 MONTHS…

Well there you have it. This gear will make you look like a Star-trek-show attending, Dungeons-and-Dragons-playing, card-carrying Geek.

But if you can put aside your pride and any concerns about looking normal, the system will allow you very fast access to all of your essential birding gear without the pain and suffering caused by traditional shoulder-based systems.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

One of the great joys of birding comes from walking thru the woods during a spring warbler fallout and hearing all of our “old friends” singing again. Our heightened awareness, coupled with the recognition of all of the songs we hear around us, is very rewarding. But when we travel to a new birding destination that sense of knowing what we are hearing is usually replaced by frustration and confusion. No longer do we recognize the birds that are singing. Instead we are confronted with a cacophony of sound that gives us no map of the birds around us, and no clear way to focus on which species we might want to pursue.

After experiencing this frustration years ago during a trip to Ecuador, I vowed that, before my next trip, I would try and find a way to learn as many bird songs as I could. My goal was to have that same satisfying sense of recognition I have during our spring migration. I wanted to be able to create a clear audio map of the birds singing around me. I knew that this would make the birding more satisfying, and would also help me find the key birds I wanted to see.

My own memory is nothing special. I don’t remember many birthdays, people’s names are forever escaping me, and I’ve lost plenty of keys, gloves and umbrellas. So I knew my work was cut out for me. I began with a brief study of how the memory works, researching what skills I might acquire that would help me with the memorization process. I then worked out a system specific to learning bird songs. Using this system I have been able to learn 300 or 400 songs for each of my last several trips to Africa, South America and Asia. Knowing many of the local songs made these trips much more fulfilling and exciting for me, and was definitely well worth the time and energy spent. More importantly, I discovered that it really didn’t take as long as I feared it might to learn all of those songs.

In this article I’d like to discuss what techniques I have found to be helpful in this process and to offer suggestions and encouragement to anyone who might want to add learning an area’s songs to their trip preparation list. Along the way I’ll talk about some of the myths surrounding memory, and what tricks and techniques have been proven successful for all types of memorization. I’ll also mention some of the new technologies that help make learning bird songs much easier now than it was in the “old days”.

THE BENEFITS
There are many benefits to trying to learn the songs for your next trip. First of all, the process of learning the area’s songs will enhance your field guide studies and help you achieve a “no-bird-book-needed” skill level for your trip.

Another benefit is that knowing what you are hearing can help you focus on the area’s target birds, and avoid pursuing more common birds that you have already seen.

And of course if you are on a trip with a leader, you can gain a better perspective on their familiarity with the region. The first trip I took, after embarking on my quest to learn in advance as many songs as possible, was Bolivia. I went in a group led by one of the top birding companies. The guide was quite good, but more than a bit arrogant…On one occasion I heard a certain Tinamou whose song I had learned. I mentioned it to our guide who replied that it couldn’t have been that species and that he had never seen one ever in Bolivia. The second guide and I stayed back, called in the Tinamou, and had a lifer for everyone in the group. That morning we ended up locating six more of these birds singing along the trail. Talk about satisfying…

Of course another important benefit is that the skills you develop and practice learning bird songs can be used for any type of memorization you might need in other areas of life.

THE EXCUSES
When speaking with people about learning more bird songs, I’ve heard a lot of excuses. “I’d love to, but my memory isn’t very good.” “I just couldn’t spend the hours and hours of time needed to learn so many songs.” “It would be great but it took me 10 years just to learn the warblers here in my own back yard.” “I’m too old to remember so much anymore. Maybe 20 years ago….”

Let me emphasize right now that it doesn’t take nearly as long as you might think to learn one hundred or two hundred bird songs. If you can dedicate 15 minutes a day for a month, I guarantee that you can learn at least 100 songs and probably many more (or your money back..!). That’s way less time than you probably spend watching commercials on TV. And if you commute to work, you probably have a lot more time than that available.
The key is making the commitment and then taking advantage of the techniques and technologies that make learning lots of bird songs possible. And by the way, as you’ll see from the studies sited below, you can do it no matter what your age.

THE REALITIES OF MEMORY
Let’s take a quick look at some of the myths and facts of memory and memorizing. Fortunately, there have been a lot of studies done on this topic, since memory skills are so important to many areas of life.

One of the common myths these studies have “busted” is that the ability to memorize a lot of facts or associations is an innate inherited ability that only a special few possess. This position is reinforced by public showings of “memory experts” who can reproduce the telephone number of anyone in the NYC phone book, or tell you the day of the week of any date in the last 1000 years. This reinforces the feeling held by many people that they just don’t have the ability to memorize lots of facts or names…or lots of bird songs.

In fact, in study after study, it has been shown that almost all people have the same basic capacity for memory. “The capacity of your memory is a function of the memory techniques you use more than a function of any innate differences in memory ability.”* In other words, it’s much more likely that you have bad memorizing techniques than that you have a “bad” memory.

And by the way, there is no such thing as a “photographic memory”. Several studies have focused on people who had well developed memorization skills and were able to reproduce information from magazine pages in an almost “photographic” way. However when presented with these same pages turned sideways or upside down, they were not able to recall much information at all…So much for photographic memories. They just had well developed memorization skills.

And age isn’t the handicap that it has been made out to be. Many studies have shown that, while it takes people older than 50 a bit longer to memorize things, the retention ability of old and young people seem to be about the same**.

There’s also a myth that by learning some things you are removing other things from your memory; the first in, first out myth. This is similar to the myth that there may be some detrimental (pun intended…) effect from trying to memorize too much. Both of these myths just aren’t true. Many studies have shown that people seem to have an unlimited capacity to memorize, given the motivation and proper technique**.

BASIC MEMORY THEORY
People who have studied memory have found a range of techniques and skills that aid in the memorization process. For example, research has shown that memorized connections are stronger and easier to recall if visual imagery is used. Let’s say you want to associate the words fish and bicycle (no doubt an association you have had to make at some point in your life…) Rather than just repetitively reviewing this association, or repeating the two words over and over; it’s better for stronger retention to create a visual image of these two objects you are trying to associate. In other words, visualizing a fish trying to ride a bicycle is much more effective for the recall process than just repeating “fish, bicycle; fish, bicycle”. And the more associations you make the stronger the memory will be. If you can add a second image of your neighbor riding a bicycle bringing home a fish the memory will be stronger. This discovery about the technique of visualization for stronger memorization applies particularly well to the abstract process of trying to associate a song and the name of a bird.

Another key discovery is that for effective memorization, the management of time is extremely important. Most loss of memory happens within the first few minutes of the learning process**. So an effective memorization technique must include a review of the associations and images you have created fairly soon after the first attempt to memorize them. And “testing” the memory often and soon after the first associations increases the pathways for retrieval and is an important part of learning things quickly.

This testing process is really the key to memorization success. When learning bird songs you must actively recall the name yourself. That means you must not listen to the name of the bird before hearing its song during the testing process. This is critical. And you must test yourself very soon after learning a few songs.

Learning also takes place more efficiently if you take things in small “bites”. The process of starting with just a few associations, testing them very soon after the first session, and then having frequent additional reviews, has proven itself in many studies to be very effective in learning any group of associations**. This sequence is the core process I’ve used for memorizing many bird songs.

The importance of taking things in small bits with immediate review also applies to studying bird ID using a field guide. Let’s say you have 15 minutes to study the ID plates for a new country you are going to visit. If you use those 15 minutes to go through the first 20 pages of the book, looking carefully at the species on each page, you will probably remember some of the birds the next day. But you’ll probably find that a few days later, when you look back over those first pages, most of the bird species are a pretty fuzzy.

Your species retention will be much stronger if you concentrate on only the first 3 or 4 pages, going over the birds several times, and then reviewing each page two or three times while testing yourself on the names. Using this method you can learn all or most of the birds on those few pages in that first session, with only minimal subsequent review required. This is a much more efficient way to learn the birds for a trip than going over the first 20 pages once each session, over the course of several sessions separated by a couple of days or more.

By the way, what word do you associate with the word “fish”?

THE GOAL
So here’s a summary of our mission.

• We want to learn a lot of bird songs for our next trip.
• We need to find a way to associate the name of the bird with its song.
• We must break the task into groups of just a few songs and make strong visual associations between each song and the bird’s name
• We must review these associations soon after we first make them and almost immediately test ourselves to strengthen the connections
• We must then briefly test ourselves on the learned songs regularly over the next few days while learning other new songs.

Sounds easy, right! So let’s get started.

THE TOOLS
Here’s what you’ll need to begin the song-learning process.

GET A LIST OF THE BIRDS IN THE TARGET REGION
First, gather a complete list of all of the birds you are likely to see in the area you are visiting. Usually this is available from the birding tour company if you’re using one. If you’re not using a group you will have to put one together yourself by reviewing range maps in the field guides for the area or checking the internet for available lists.
Of course you would need this list to learn the birds visually as well. The goal is to learn all of the birds you might encounter, but you definitely don’t want to spend time learning songs you don’t need!

FIND THE SONGS FOR YOUR TARGET BIRDS
This is really the hardest part of the job. Fortunately, in the past few years, there have been a lot of tapes and CDs published with bird songs from many parts of the world. There are now fairly complete collections of songs for Europe and Southern Africa, and more and more are coming all the time for South and Central America and Asia. Cornell Laboratory of Ornithology, for example, has published a collection of all of the Antbirds of the Americas and is planning more releases for South America in the future. There are also collections of New World Owls, Nightjars, Cuckoos, Thrushes, Wrens and other families.

It’s a bit of work to collect the songs you’ll need, but of course each subsequent trip will be easier.

LOAD THE SONGS ONTO SOME KIND OF RANDOM ACCESS PLAYBACK DEVICE
Next you need to get all of these songs on your computer or some kind of random-access playback device.
I want to make the strong statement that you can forget about learning a lot of songs quickly if you’re using a cassette player. It’s just not possible! A CD player is much better than a cassette, and can be great for reviewing songs, but is still not the best for learning, as the song order is fixed and the original CDs will most likely contain birds you don’t need to learn.

FOR A STREAMLINED LEARNING PROCESS, USE ITUNES
For this article I’ll discuss using Apple’s free program iTunes for the learning process. This program is very good, works with iPods and some other MP3 players, and can be used to burn CDs for the testing process if you want to listen in your car.

You can actually do all of your learning right in iTunes if you can schedule to be near your computer for a few minutes a day. (And I’ll bet that most of us are trying to find ways to schedule how to be less near our computer every day…so the opportunity is right in front of us most of the time!)

I’m not going to give a complete tutorial on how to use iTunes in this article. If you haven’t used it before, just download it and give it a try. It’s a very simple, easy-to-use program. And there are a lot of answers to FAQs on its operation available on the internet.

Here’s where to download iTunes if you don’t have it already.
And no, you don’t have to own an iPod to use it!
http://www.apple.com/itunes/download/

 

SOME iTUNES FEATURES
PLAYLISTS
iTunes has one “master” library list containing all of the songs loaded into the program. Using songs from this list you can then create many “playlists” or smaller collections of the songs you want to study. One song can be in several different playlists.

You’ll need to make many playlists, of 5-10 bird songs each, when you get started. Later you can create more custom playlists for testing yourself. The initial playlists should contain bird songs from the same family or maybe from the same page in your field guide. Once you have learned a number of songs you can create custom lists that include only songs that are high pitched, or only songs that descend in pitch. This kind of testing really helps you learn the songs well. More on this later.

 

.

.

 

SHUFFLE
iTunes (and iPods) have one feature that is very important for the testing process: Song Shuffle. When you begin testing yourself on the songs in a playlist, you need to “shuffle” the order each time you listen to the playlist. Otherwise you will just learn the order of the list!
To “shuffle” the order of a playlist, highlight it in iTunes and select SHUFFLE under the CONTROLS menu at the top of your screen. Then every time you select that playlist the playback order of the songs will be randomly changed.

 

.

REMOVING THE NAMES
When you are testing yourself on the songs you are learning it is absolutely essential that you not hear the name of the song until you have provided it yourself. If you try and learn songs that are preceded by the bird’s name it will take you a lot longer!

Unfortunately, many CDs and tapes of bird songs have a voice proclaiming the name of the bird in advance of its song. During the memorization process you must either edit this out or mute this voice during the testing process. Before loading the songs into iTunes I usually edit them using an audio editor like Cakewalk’s Sonar. This step isn’t absolutely necessary, but it does make the learning process a bit easier and definitely helps with playback in the field.

Not hearing the name during the testing process is absolutely essential!! Using the computer’s mute button when playing songs back in iTunes provides a fairly easy way to remove the spoken name of the bird when you are testing yourself. Here’s a typical process for testing yourself on playlist of songs:

• Mute the computer
• Hit the Space Bar to play the song
• Wait a second and then unmute the audio
• Listen to the song and guess the name
• Hit your computer’s Left Arrow to instantly rewind to the start of the song and check the spoken name of the bird, or look at the name in the playlist.
• Don’t cheat!

If you want to learn songs or test yourself when you’re away from the computer you can easily use an iPod or a CD player. One thousand 30 second to 2 minute bird songs in iTune’s AAC format take up well less than 1 gig of memory. So a 4-gig iPod mini or any other iPod will work fine. Other MP3 players can work as well. You may have to convert the files to MP3 format to load them into another MP3 player, but this is very easy using iTunes. You can also burn CDs of different playlists for review and testing in a car or when you are away from your computer.

SUMMARY: RANDOM ACCESS IS KEY
Using a random access program like iTunes is essential for learning a lot of songs quickly. You can easily shuffle the order of the songs each time you test yourself. You can also quickly reference another bird song if you mistakenly attribute one bird to another’s song. And making special groupings or playlists of similar songs for further study and testing is easy and very effective.

As mentioned above, don’t even attempt to learn a lot of songs if you’re using a cassette tape, unless, of course, you have a huge amount of time on your hands…

By the way, if I say “fish” what word comes to mind?

THE LEARNING PROCESS
FIRST LOAD ALL OF YOUR SONGS INTO iTUNES
After setting up iTunes on your computer, load all of the songs you can find for your target region into the program. I like to load them into a master playlist titled “Target Country Master Song List”. From this master list you’ll create the very small playlists for the song-learning process.

Loading CDs into iTunes is very easy. It was designed for this process. If you are connected to the internet when you put the CD into your computer, iTunes will search out the CD’s unique ID number and automatically load the name of all of the songs on the disc. Very convenient!

In a subsequent column I’ll talk about how to transfer cassettes to iTunes, which requires a couple of additional steps and an audio interface and simple audio editing program.

GET STARTED BY MAKING PLAYLISTS OF 5-10 SONGS EACH
After you’ve loaded as many target songs as possible into a master playlist in iTunes, the next step is to group 5-10 similar songs together using iTunes playlists. Don’t try and group too many together in one list. Learning goes much faster if you take the process in small steps!
If you press the + button in the bottom LH corner of the iTunes window a new playlist will be created. You just drag songs from your master country playlist or the “music” library file that includes everything you’ve loaded into iTunes, right into one of the playlists. Double click the playlist’s name to rename it.

One way to help reinforce the songs and the visual image of the bird is to put together playlists based on one or two pages of the main field guide you will be using for the trip. But be sure not to include any birds that don’t occur in the areas you will be visiting. No need to make the job tougher!

This all may sound like a big task, but in reality you can assemble all of the playlists you’ll need for your trip easily in an hour or two once you have the source materials.

.

SCHEDULE YOUR TIME
Now that you’ve got all of your songs in iTunes arranged in many small playlists the real memory work begins.
For best results, you need to focus completely on this task, so at least at first you need to dedicate time to learning the songs. As you learn more songs and get more familiar with the process you can begin to use your time commuting to work or other less focused time. But it’s definitely best to start with small bits of dedicated time. I’d recommend the following schedule:

• 4-5 minutes for the first run through
• Short break
• Second, faster run through
  Don’t play the whole song, just a phrase or two
• Very short break of a minute or two
• Your first testing session.
  Play back the songs without the names and remember the image you created and the bird’s name.
  Check the name.
• Shuffle the playlist
• Take an additional 2 minutes a couple more times during the day to retest the first playlist’s songs played back in a random order.

Total listening time: 15-20 minutes tops.
Using this process you can easily learn a playlist of songs every day or two.

CREATING A STRONG CONNECTION BETWEEN THE SONG AND THE NAME
To effectively memorize bird songs you have to establish a strong association between the name of the bird and the bird’s song. It’s not enough, for example, to know that you have learned a bird song that sounds like “Wichity wichity wich”. You have to find a way to associate that song with the bird’s name: Common Yellowthroat. You must find a way to make a strong visual or other association between the song and the NAME of the bird. And of course it also helps to add to this associative process an image of the bird itself.

This is how you will be able to recall the bird when you hear the song in the field. This association is essential for learning a lot of birds in a short period of time.

PLAIN OLD REPETITION DOESN’T WORK
It’s possible, of course, to just hear a bird song over and over, and eventually learn to associate that song with a particular bird. You may make some kind of unconscious association with the song and a trip you took, or with a certain location where you first saw the bird. With raw repetition you’ll eventually create the song-bird name association.

In fact, you could just play the songs for your trip over and over and over again in your car, and most likely you’ll eventually learn to recognize some of them. But this is an extremely inefficient way to try and learn anything, let alone the very abstract association of a bird’s song with its name.

To learn a lot of bird songs in a short period of time you need a focused approach that creates strong associations between the song and the name of the bird. That’s the core technique that provides the key to learning a lot of songs quickly.

The imagery that connects the song with the bird’s name by necessity needs to be personal, something that quickly comes to your mind when you hear the song. As you test yourself, you’ll see how effective your first choice of image has been, and you may need to adjust the image after the first test or so.

Over time you will develop many different ways to create these “images” that connect a bird’s name to its song. And of course the more you do this the faster and easier it becomes to make these images and their associations.

Sometimes the image may come just from the shape of the sound, such as a rising or falling song. Maybe the song will suggest a word-based phrase like the Chestnut-sided Warbler’s “please, please, please to meet you.”
You must “see” that image whenever you hear the song. This is really one of the key points in forming a visual image for a song and then associating that image with the bird’s name: this image must come to you quickly whenever you hear that song.

If you can create an image that comes to your mind whenever you hear the song, you can learn that song effectively and very quickly. The testing process makes sure that the image you’ve chosen is one that will come to mind when you hear the song in the field, and that the association you’ve created between that image and the song’s name gets learned. If, during the initial testing process, the image doesn’t come to mind, then look for another image until you find one that really fits the song. Sometimes this takes a couple of sessions with that song. Fortunately it’s usually a fast process.

By the way, if I say “fish” what do you think of??

SOME EXAMPLES OF CREATING IMAGES FOR A SONG
Let’s look at a couple of examples of how these associations can be made and learned. The Thrush-like Woodcreeper’s (Dendrocincla turdina) song sounds like an accelerating train. To make the connection between the song and the bird, you could picture a bunch of woodcreepers going to work on an accelerating train in “rush” hour. This would connect the name Thrush (rush)-like with the song.

The Large-billed Antwren (Herpsilochmus longiristrus) has a song that starts out accelerating and rising, but at the top it quickly decelerates and goes back down in pitch. You could imagine the bird running up a hill, but its large bill is too heavy to continue and causes the bird to slow down and slide back down the hill.

The Stripe-backed Antbird (Myrmorchilus strigilatus) sings “Good for you”. To learn this song you could visualize a General with stripes giving out commendations.

Closer to home, the Chestnut-sided Warbler sings “Please, please, please to meet you.” You could create an image of a partygoer dressed in a chestnut vest and a golden cap greeting everyone at the door.

SUMMARY OUTLINE OF THE SONG LEARNING PROCESS
Here’s a timeline of the learning process

• Break the master list of all of the trip bird songs into very small groups or playlists of 5-10 songs
• Start with one group only
• Play the songs one at a time and find an image that naturally occurs to you when you hear that song
• Find a way to associate that image with the name of the bird
• Test yourself within 10 minutes by playing back the songs in random order
• Repeat this process a couple of times, if necessary
• Once you can name all of the songs accurately, take a break or start on a new list
• Review each learned list briefly at least twice a day. The faster you are at recalling the image/bird song name, the faster this process becomes.
• If there are songs you misidentify often, put them in a “problem song” playlist.
• Once you have learned 5 or 10 playlists, create new playlists that group similar-sounding birds together.
• Test yourself on these playlists along with the original lists and update them with additional birds as you learn more.
  These lists can be much longer than the original “first learning” playlists, as they are songs you already know.
• Review learned playlists two or three times a week

A FEW MORE SUGGESTIONS
For your initial playlists, start with 6 or 7 songs from a family whose songs are fairly simple and repetitive. I’d suggest maybe the antbirds, owls or nightjars, because, although some species may have a couple of songs, most have one standard song that is simple and easy to define. As long as the bird’s song is repetitive, it’s fairly easy to create an image for that song you can associate with the name. If the bird’s song is extremely varied (mimics, some thrushes, etc) then they can be harder to learn.

When you first start with a playlist, take a few minutes and play through all of the songs in that group. After each song, stop and try and create an association or image connecting the name and the shape or quality of the song. What does that song remind you of? Is there an image that leaps to mind that you can work with to create a song/name link?
Once you have an image for one song go on to the next. If an image doesn’t present itself fairly quickly go to the next song.

Go through the list a couple of times, creating images for songs that need one and recalling the ones you have already created. As soon as you can recall the image, stop playing the song and go to the next one. Don’t play the song over and over. The key is to find the image/association, test it and then move on.

Be sure to reinforce the name/song association each time you hear the song by clearly repeating it to yourself. It can also help to actually say the bird’s name out loud along with the associated image.

After 5 minutes or so with a new playlist you should have images for most of the songs. Once you do, concentrate on the couple you don’t have images for. If you can’t think of anything for one or two don’t worry and don’t spend too much time trying to get one. You can leave them in that song list or move them to a “difficult song” list for later work.
For tougher songs, I’ve found that an image may not appear for a few sessions, and then all of a sudden you’ll find one that works.

After going over the playlist a few times and forming associations, take a short break of 3-5 minutes and then play back the songs but without looking at or listening to the names. As mentioned above, for this testing to be effective you must not hear the name of the bird, but rather you must actively have to come up with it yourself. If the name of the bird is presented at the beginning of its song by the person who recorded it, then turn the volume down or use the computer’s mute button for a second when you start each selection.

After a couple of repetitions you should use iTune’s “Shuffle” command as mentioned above for each playlist before starting the testing process. Once you have selected Shuffle for a playlist it will create a random order each time you come back to that list. This is essential for learning the songs quickly. It’s sometimes easier to learn the order of the list than it is to learn the song/name association!

Believe it or not, you will remember most of the songs from your first list within a couple of repetitions and a test or two. It’s actually surprising how fast songs are to learn if you come up with an effective image. Some you may not remember. If that’s the case, then play only those tougher songs once or twice, without the name, and see if you get any associations or images from just the song. If so, then look at the name and make a connection between the image the song presents and the name. If not, leave them.

Take a short break and then review one more time.

If possible, take three or four minutes later that day and test yourself again. Play the songs in a shuffled order, without the names, and see if you remember them. You most likely will. Each time you identify the bird, repeat to yourself the image association and the name of the bird, preferably out loud.
Review any mistakes.

Probably the most important part of this learning process is to test yourself very soon after learning the songs. It doesn’t have to take very long, maybe 1 or 2 minutes. But this immediate testing is critical to the learning process. As mentioned above, you lose most of your learned associations within the first couple of hours unless you reinforce them.

If you have the opportunity, take your bird book and find the pictures of the birds you just studied. Look at the picture in the book and remember your image and its association with the bird’s name. Try and visualize the song, and sing it if you can.

The next day, quickly review the songs you learned from the day before. Again, be sure to review by playing the song without the name and in a random order, and then check to see if you’ve correctly identified the song.

Now create a new list with 5-10 more songs and start the process again.

Continue this process with a day’s break here and there, until you’ve done 10 sessions, for 60-100 birds. I’ll bet this won’t take nearly as long, or be as remotely as difficult as you might have thought!

REFINING AND ADDING TO YOUR LISTS
After a week or two you’ll know at least 60 or 70 songs well and have some clunkers that are tough to nail down. To help learn the harder songs, create a new list of the songs that are tough and include also any other songs that need more review. Keep this list as the active review list and put the rest away to be reviewed two or three times a week.

The lists of well-learned songs are great to test yourself on as you go to work. You can burn a CD of a couple of the lists or use your iPod for testing yourself away from the computer.
If you use a CD, here’s a process to “randomize” your playback. Start with the first song, turn down the volume for a second to miss the spoken name of the bird, then listen to the song and guess. Hit REW once to get to the top of the track to check the name. Then the FF button briefly 3 times. This will put you at the 4^th song. Test yourself, check, hit the FF button 3 times again and continue. Once you get to the end of the CD, start with the second song and continue the process again. This will generate a sequence of song 2, song 5, song 8, etc. At the end of the CD start again with song 3 for a sequence of song 3, 6, 9, etc.
The next time you use that CD, hit the FF button 2 times or 4 times each sequence. That ensures that you’re learning the songs and not the order of the songs! It also ensures that you’ll test yourself on all of the songs.

When reviewing, remember to never play the name with the song. Play just the song and force yourself to actively come up with the name of the bird. This is the key to learning the songs.
You can also look through the species lists for the families you have been learning and again speak the image you are using for the song connection and try and visualize or sing the song.

By the way, as a more real life corollary for this “speaking-out-loud” technique, try saying out loud “I’m putting my car keys on the kitchen table” the next time you put your keys down. By creating this auditory connection, there is a much greater likelihood that you’ll remember where they are the next time you need them…*

If I say “fish” what word should you say??

MAKE GROUPINGS OF SIMILAR SOUNDING SONGS
Once you have learned 50-100 songs you should begin to compile new groupings of your learned songs. This is fairly important. It may be easy, for example, to identify a particular antbird when you know your choices are all taken from a playlist of antbirds. But out in the field you won’t know what grouping a song is in. And there may be similar sounding birds from widely different families or playlists.
These new groups should contain like-sounding songs, for example, groups of songs that rise only, songs that rise and fall, or songs that descend. This will help you test yourself with songs that could be confusing in the field.

 

.

If you make a mistake when testing yourself with these lists, immediately review the song for the species you mistook for the original (isn’t random access great!). You can then see why you made the mistake and what the difference is between the songs. Put the song you thought was the answer in the same playlist with the original for future testing.

After learning a number of songs you may need to “tweak” your image a bit to differentiate between two similar songs. For example, Rusty-Margined Flycatcher (Miozetetes cayanensis) and Dusky-capped Flycatchers (Myiarchus tuberculifer) both have whistles that rise and fall. So your initial image for these birds would probably have related to the rising and falling of the songs. For example the Dusky-capped Flycatcher might be the image of a flycatcher tossing its cap up into the air and watching it rise and fall. For the Rusty-margined Flycatcher it could have been a buffer polishing the rust from the margin of a wall going up then down (I told you these images are personal…!).

Both of these songs rise and fall. They may have been easy to identify in one playlist as they were the only rising and falling song for that list. However in the field you could be hearing either bird. So you may need to adjust the images to add another parameter to differentiate the rising and falling song of the RM from the DC. Otherwise you won’t know which bird to associate with a rising or falling song.
The Rusty-margined’s song is thinner than the Dusky-capped. So you can add to the R-M Flycatcher’s song image a second image of a rust thinning out as it is “buffed” to help differentiate its thinner song from the heavier song and heavier “cap” of the D-K Flycatcher.
If those two songs aren’t in your “similar species” playlist, add them.

You can also compile lists of songs for one area, or just dump all of the songs randomly into one big list. That, of course, is the ultimate test.

THE GREAT NEWS, THE BAD NEWS AND THE GOOD NEWS
When you go on your trip, the great news is that you will feel immediately at home in your new environment. You will recognize songs and be able to begin targeting birds you want to see. In some cases, it may take a repetition or two to “tune” your ear to the natural song versus the taped song you have been listening to on your computer. But this adjustment is usually fairly fast. I guarantee that it will be very exciting when you ID your first singing antbird or any other target species you have been studying!

The bad news is that some species will have alternate songs or variations that you didn’t have on your source material, so you will still be stuck with some unidentified songs. [Check out my last column on how to attract these birds and identify them.]

But the good news again is that the song-learning techniques you have been developing will help you quickly learn these new songs, making your birding experience much more fulfilling and fun!

Once you get home, with your trip list expanded by all of the birds you heard and identified from your studies, you’ll be really excited to start the process again for your next trip.

And of course the skills you have acquired learning these songs will be available for any other memory tasks you might have at hand.

By the way, if I say “fish”….

References
* Your Memory: How it Works and How to Improve it by Kenneth L Higbee
** cf studies listed in Your Memory by Kenneth Higbee, The Memory Book by H Lorayne and J Lucas, How the Brain Learns by Sousa

 

SEND ME YOUR IDEAS AND SUGGESTIONS

 

This is a column, not a forum, and unfortunately I’m not going to be able to directly answer most emails. However, if you have specific questions about something that was covered in a column, please do send me a note. If something that I covered needs further explanation, I’ll try and provide that in a future column.

I will also welcome and consider any suggestions for topics that might be of interest to the general birding community, especially areas of technology that you might like to explore, but feel you may need more information or some “how-tos” to get started.

I’ll do my best to cover as many of these topics as possible.

Send your comments, suggestions and (kind) thoughts to

 

TomsTips@Surfbirder.com

 

© 2007 Tom Stephenson

 

 

TOOLS FOR ATTRACTING THE UNKNOWN:
FIELD RECORDERS AND SHOTGUN MICS

.

RECORDING IN THE FIELD: WHY BOTHER?

It seems that more and more people are taking birding trips on their own these days. Trip reports are making it easier to navigate foreign countries. And as more of us retire and the price of guided tours increases, we are heading off without the aid of a major tour company to track down as many birds as we can in unknown regions. And of course for many of us, it’s more fun to go alone or in a small group and have the fun of discovering our target species ourselves.

Unfortunately, there still aren’t commercially available recordings for many foreign regions’ species. And even if you could get a CD with every species found in the area you’re visiting, it often turns out that many birds have alternate and surprisingly common songs and calls that somehow don’t make it onto the tapes and CDs.

Of course if you’re going with a large birding company, they will (or should…) have guides who know the bird songs and have the necessary playback and recording gear to maximize the species seen.

Or do they…..

For me one of the pleasures of traveling for birds is the preparation. Even if I’m going with a birding tour company, I try and learn as many songs as I can. And I bring the songs I can collect along with me.

Although I don’t usually travel with a large bird tour company, I have taken this more expensive path a couple of times, with mixed results. Once I took a trip to Bolivia with a company (…whose name rhymes with “test”….) and the guide made regular mistakes when calling out singing birds. I would suggest that maybe it could be this other species, then play the song from my collection, bringing in the bird. I was glad I had done some advance preparation…

But I digress….(and most other companies I’ve traveled with have been excellent…)

FIELD RECORDERS AND SHOTGUN MICS

If you’re traveling alone or with an unguided group, you almost certainly must have recording and playback gear to attract and identify many of the birds you will hear in the forest. Without these tools, you’re guaranteed to have many more frustrations with singing forest and grassland birds.

In this article I’m going to review a selection of field recorders and shotgun microphones; the tools you would need to attract singing birds. I’m doing this from the bias of a traveling, fairly budget-minded birder, so my criteria include these characteristics for my ideal recorder:

• As small a size as possible
• Easy to use interface operable preferably with one hand
• Fast to get recording, and then locate and play back the songs
• No moving parts
• Replaceable battery
• Good enough sound quality to attract birds

 

.

Shotgun mics all look the same….

Most of my emphasis is on recorders adequate for attracting birds in the field. I’ll make some mention of what you might want to look at if you goal is to make pristine recordings for CD distribution, but that’s not my main objective.

One caveat up front: I work for Roland Corporation, owner of Edirol, the manufacturer of several field recorders. That being said, I’ve tried to be as even handed as possible in my evaluations below.

 

 

SOME BASICS

RECORDING MEDIUM

You can buy recorders that use a wide variety of recording medium. Here’s an overview with some comments.

Cassette tape
Avoid it!

Many field recordists have used cassette recorders in years past, and some still do. In my opinion that’s kind of like using a typewriter when you could be using a word processor.

They’re hissy, and very clumsy. Flipping tapes and fast forwarding to find a song can take precious minutes or longer. And I’ve seen birds, (and birders..), scared out of their wits by the high volume sound of a rewinding bird song.

The rugged Sony TCD5 was the real field standard for a long time and is still in use by many guides. Of course in its day it was the best and really only portable way to record in the field. But we’ve come a long way since then…

 

.

DAT Tape
No good 

Digital Audio Tape offers much higher recording quality than cassettes, along with more precise searching mechanisms. But so what….

They are also very clumsy to manage, requiring frequent changing of tapes with limited recording time. They also have moving parts that offer many opportunities for failure.

More importantly, the tape/head interface in DAT recorders does not do well in humid environments, leading to digital noise or no sound at all.

MD or Hi-MD
Still No

First let me say that I have no problem with the “compression” found in MD, Hi-MD or even MP3 formats for calling in birds. I did an article for Birding magazine on use of the MD in the field (many years ago…) and at the time it was the best portable solution for random access playback and adequate for some types of recording. I’ve used them in many environments and they work fine. Birds are very sensitive to their own songs, and no compression I’ve ever seen has stopped them from being interested.

However, today there is no reason to use a moving-parts, removable disc-based recording device. It suffers from many of the same issues mentioned above, including discs with limited storage that will often need to be swapped out as you go through your archives; and, of course, moving parts offer opportunities for mechanical failure in the field.

Hard Drives
Maybe

HD recorders provide lots of recording time. A couple of years ago they were the only way to get a lot of random access recording time for the nature recordist.

However today, with CF and SD cards providing storage at about $10 per gigabyte in up to 8 gig packages, the need for hard drives has fallen.

The formula to remember for recording capacity is 5 megs per mono minute of 44.1kHz, 16-bit linear recording. So a 2 gig SD card can hold 3 hours of linear recording time. Having multiple cards also gives you a measure of security in case there is a failure.

HD recorders also tend to be larger and heavier. However they also usually have lots of features.

Compact Flash and SD Memory Cards
Yes

Using the same memory cards that are found in digital cameras, a new generation of very compact, high quality recorders have hit the market. These recorders offer a small size along with lossless digital recording, fast random access, easy transfer to a computer for archiving and editing, and sometimes even onboard editing.

This is the way to go for today’s field recordist, whether you are gathering recordings on a movie set, making the latest bird song CD, or just trying to attract singing birds.

IMPORTANT FEATURE AND TERMS

Here are a few considerations for your quest for the right field recorder.

Size and weight:
Remember you have to carry the recorder with you for it to be useful… (along with everything else you’ll be hauling)

..

Recorders come in some very different sizes…

 

Boot up speed:
How fast can you get recording once you hear a bird you want to attract?

Markers and Fast Forward/Rewinding Features:
How easy is it to find the song you want in a long recording mostly full of silence?

Song playback repeat:
When you’re playing a song, looking for one species, you don’t want the recorder to move automatically on to the next file. To prevent this, the recorder needs a song repeat function.

A/B section repeat:
Once you have found the section of a file you want to play, do you have to constantly refind it to play it again?

Record Monitor Off:
Can you keep your speaker plugged into the recorder, ready to play back, without having feedback while recording?

Onboard editing or trimming of files:
Can you get rid of unwanted sections of recordings?

File naming:
For identifying recordings later

Speed of accessing recorded files:
How easy is the menu structure to navigate?

Are there folders or other organizational structures?

Quality of mic preamps:
Will the recordings be too noisy to use to attract birds?

Phantom Power:
All high quality shotgun microphones require 48 volts of power that is sent down the mic cable to power the microphone’s diaphragm.

Only the Sennheiser ME series has a capsule that can provide its own phantom power, and hence these are very common in the field.

So if your recorder can’t supply Phantom Power, you will need to use the Sennheiser mics or use an external preamp that can provide phantom power.

Fortunately they are good microphones!

Every recorder listed below with XLR inputs can provide Phantom Power.
No recorder without XLR inputs provides Phantom Power.

“Plug in power” provided by some small recorders is of no value for the shotgun mics needed for recording birds.

Batteries:
Are they removable so you can have a backup handy in case you do a lot of recording?

Pre-Record
Putting a recording into the “pre-record” mode causes it to constantly record to a small buffer, usually 2-5 seconds long.

If you hear something singing and hit the REC button within the set buffer time, the subsequent recording to the CF will include the 2-5 sec time prior to when you hit record.

This is a great way to capture birds that only sing occasionally or have long periods between calls without using up all of your media’s recording memory.

The downside is that it eats up battery life.

Limiter
A limiter can be set to “limit” to a safe level the loudest possible volume arriving at your recorder’s capture mechanism (A/D converter) As long as the limiter is in the analog stage, before the signal is converted to digital, it will protect your recordings against overloading (distorting) in case you encounter an unexpectedly loud sound.

AGC
Automatic gain control can add value when you’re doing an interview and you are really only interested in the recorded words, not the sound.

But for birding, don’t use it. The algorithm that tries to keep the gain fairly constant can cause serious “breathing” in a nature recording. And it’s not a limiter so it won’t prevent your recording from distorting if the source gets too loud.

Low Frequency Roll Off Switches
Wind blowing across a microphone and the noise you make handling a mic can easily mask your target source with loud, low frequency audio. Many microphones and some recorders can attenuate, at least somewhat, these frequencies that are lower than most bird calls.

Wind screens or Zeppelins
From foam sleeves to more elaborate coverings that look like a long-haired llama, wind screens are unfortunate necessities in many recording environments. You can make your own; or buy (fairly expensive) commercially available wind protection for your mic.

If you’re recording and the wind kicks in, you won’t be able to hear the bird at all without these.

For long birding trips, most guides seem to use just the light weight, more portable foam sleeves. They work OK.

It is possible to bring a long-threaded fabric cover that is light weight and will add a bit more protection without adding the weight of a commercial “zeppelin”

.

Foam Windscreen

.

More robust Windscreen

Humidity

These microphones don’t do very well in high humidity. The humidity interrupts the action of the diaphragm, causing intermittent pops, or more frequent noise.

The good news is that they return to normal operation once dried out.

So be sure to protect your mics from moisture and carry some of the silica drying packs used by photographers.

The exception to the rule above is the Sennheiser MKH70, which has a reputation for being very robust even in humid environments, as it uses a different element.

.

TIP FOR VIRTUAL PRE RECORD WITH R-09

Here’s one way to achieve some of the benefit of having a Pre Record with a small recorder that can split files during recording. (Splitting a file means that, without interrupting the recording process, a new file is created when you press a button. This is possible on several of the larger recorders and on the R-09.)

• Create a new folder
  (The R-09 and most recorders have folders so that you can group recordings together)
• Start recording
  (Maybe you heard a single call note, or know that this is an area that a target bird sings occasionally)
• Press the A/B Repeat button every 10 seconds, which on the R-09 creates a new file while you are recording, .
• You are now never more than 10 seconds away from the song when the bird finally sings
• You can then easily delete the blank files in that folder that precede the one with the song (assuming the darn bird ever sings….)
• This eats up battery time
  (as does the Pre Record function on other recorders)
• It also uses up memory, which the Pre Record feature does not do.
  However since memory is cheap, and since you are splitting the files so you can easily delete them later, it’s a workable compromise to achieve this function, that can be useful in some cases

.

SOME GENERALITIES

Every CF recorder has a built-in high speed USB or Fire Wire (FW) port for high speed transfer of recorded audio to a computer.

Every recorder listed here can record immediately without any danger of overwriting a prior file. Just press record and you’re recording a new file.

Just like cassettes……..NOT!

.

THE OFFERINGS

Here are the most popular recorders on the market today.

Hard Disk-based Recorders with lots of recording time.

Korg MR-1

.

Edirol R-4

.

Compact Flash Recorders that are fairly large and heavy, but have lots of features

Sound Devices 702

.

Fostex FR-2LE

.

Marantz PMD660

.

Tascam HD-P2

.

Very Light Weight

Edirol R-09

.

Zoom H4

.

Sony PCM-D1

.

M-Audio Micro Track 24/96

.

Blanket endorsement: Any one of these recorders is capable of producing very good sounding recordings that would serve to attract birds in the field.

DETAILS AND COMMENTS

I was able to work with most of these units, several at length.
Here are some thoughts and comments that hopefully will be helpful when you make a buying decision.

First a chart of some specs and prices

.

MORE DETAILS

EDIROL R-4

• Very versatile and with just about every feature on the market
• Fairly large and heavy
• 40 gig hard drive provides a lot of recording time (58 hours at CD quality)
• CF slot for backing up without computer
• Preamps good, although not quite as quiet as Sound Devices or Fostex
• 1, 2 or 4 track simultaneous recording, so if you were going to do ambient recording this could be a good choice
• Limiter that is pre A/D converter to protect against overloads
• Seven-speed playback for quickly locating point in track
• Onboard editing
• Markers
• Pre-record
• Built in effects including compression, gating to remove noise and EQ
• Built-in speakers
• Easy to use controls

Bottom line:
Well designed and full featured, heavy.

SOUND DEVICES 702
This is probably the industry standard for field recording and film lot sound capture

• Very good mic preamps; best on the market.
• Very rugged
• Records to CF but can also record to FW external hard drive
• Rechargeable battery, but removable so you can carry a spare
• Analog stage limiter
• Pre-record function
• Markers
• No remote control but can use with PC keyboard for naming and control (not so practical for birders)

Bottom Line
Heavy and expensive, but great choice for making high quality CDs

Fostex FR-2LE
This is a newly released field recorder from a company that has a solid reputation for higher end field recorders.
I only had a limited time with a beta version of this recorder, but I was impressed

• It’s inexpensive
• Lof features
• It’s still pretty large for long term travel and hiking
• High quality mic preamps
• 2 second Pre-Record
• Wired Remote
• Markers
• Built-in speaker

Bottom line:
Worth serious consideration if you aren’t carrying a lot of other gear long distances

Marantz PMD660
This fairly small recorder seems like it could be a great choice for the field.

This model and its predecessors have been around for a while, seem to hold up well and have been used a lot by news reporters and interviewers as well as some nature recordists.

The original productions have a reputation for problems with their mic preamps.

They are reputed to overload very easily, causing distortion. And at lower levels they are noisy. Some users have had the preamps modified by the Oade Brothers, who have a great reputation (http://www.oade.com/), but that increases the price by a hundred bucks.

However, according to several sources, including Marantz, models made after 2006 have newly designed pads and preamp circuitry that fixes the preamp noise/overload issue.

I have only used this recorder briefly, and therefore I relied on conversations with users and a number of dealers to verify this issue that I’ve read about on recording forums. I may have a chance to evaluate this unit and if so I’ll update the review.

• It does have the good features in a fairly compact format
• Optional remote control
• Built-in speaker
• 2 second Pre record
• Markers
• A/B playback
• File sectional copy (copy section of recording to new file)

Bottom Line
Could be a very good choice as it’s the smallest size with higher end features

Tascam HD-P2

The UI on this is a bit odd, with lots of hardware switches for settings that you would normally never change, once set. This offers a chance in the field, anyway, for some switches to be inadvertently changed.

Also a bit limited on functions, and mostly seems designed for time code film lot recording

• Markers
• 5 to 10 sec pre-record
• File trimming

Bottom line
Probably not designed for birders

.

VERY LIGHT WEIGHT RECORDERS

Some Generalities

Weight
These are all very light weight and convenient for traveling and field work when you are also carrying a scope, binocs, cameras, water, food, books while helping strangers cross a stream. Adding a field recorder that eventually feels like you’re carrying a cement block on your back doesn’t add to the fun.

These compact recorders add negligible weight to your rig.

Only the H4 has XLR inputs, and thus the only one that can supply Phantom Power.
The other recorders would need to be used with the Sennheiser ME66 or ME67 + K6 preamp module (see below for more on these very good mics.)

Record Monitor OFF function
None of these small recorders have a built-in speaker. They’re just too small.

So in the field you will connect them to your normal playback speaker, so you can immediately play back a song once it has been recorded as outlined below.

Some of these recorders have a Record Monitor Off function that turns the speaker output off during recording. This eliminates the feedback that would result if you have a live mic and a live speaker during your recording.

This feature is important for fast playback, so you don’t have to remember to turn off the speaker when you’re recording and then turn it back on again when you play back.
Look for this feature in any recorder you buy.

Jacks, cabling and reliability

All but the Zoom have 1/8^th inch or ¼ inch input jacks which have a reputation for reliability problems. And without care, this is somewhat justified.

These small connectors use a “TRS” or Tip Ring Sleeve connection technology.

.

Either connection point, but especially the tip, is vulnerable to bending if enough stress is placed on the connector. And the lever arm action of a straight cable plugged directly into one of these connectors, over time, can bend the tip enough so that the connection becomes intermittent, resulting in noise in the recordings.

The solution is to eliminate, as much as possible, the movement of the connector within the internal jack.

.

Wrong way to attach a mic to an 1/8th inch connector

Using right angle connectors along with some padding can eliminate most if not all of this movement and provide a secure and reliable mic connection.

I know that the Edirol has sold literally 10’s of thousands of the R-09 recorders. There was a redesign of the connector assembly after the first 3 months, and from then on there have been very few service issues with the input jack (or any other function of the unit.) And lots of these recorders are used to record concerts and interviews, so they do get tossed around a lot.

Care taken with a right angle connector for any of these models with 1/8^th inch mic inputs should result in reliable operation.  Remember, iPods use these same connectors for their headphone outputs.

.

.

Here are some suggestions for how to rig an 1/8^th inch mic input jack and also the 1/8^th inch output.

Right angle cables:
XVM-101 or 105 microphone to right angle 1/8^th inch connectors.

.

For Sennheiser ME series use this cable:
http://www.hosatech.com/hosa/products/XVM-100.html

Adapters

The Hosa GMP-272 is a right angle adapter
http://www.hosatech.com/hosa/products/GMP-272.html

.

 

.

Radio Shack also carries this kind of right angle 1/8^th inch adapter.

http://www.radioshack.com/product/index.jsp?productId=2103788&cp=&sr=1&origkw=audio+adapters&kw=audio+adapters&parentPage=search

Use this adapter for your line or headphone output to your speaker, as you’ll need to play back the recordings after you’ve made them.

If you want to, you can also use these recorders as your library playback device. The interface on iPods is probably a bit faster, but worst case your field recorder can work as a backup to your iPod.

Connecting your recorder and your iPod (or other PB device) to one speaker

If you want to connect both your primary playback device and your recorder to your speaker at the same time, use this or a similar adapter:

http://www.radioshack.com/product/index.jsp?productId=2102527&cp=&pg=3&sr=1&origkw=audio+adapters&kw=audio+adapters&parentPage=search

Use an extender cable to go from your recorder to this adapter, secured in a bag somewhere.

http://www.radioshack.com/product/index.jsp?productId=2102965&cp=2032058.2032228.2032256&parentPage=family

Then plug 1/8^th inch outputs from both the iPod and the speaker into the other jacks on this adapter.

.

.

CABLE SUMMARY FOR COMBINATION IPOD, FIELD RECORDER AND SPEAKER

Here’s the complete signal flow for using a mic with a field recorder, speaker and iPod:

Connect the mic, using either an XLR connector, a right angle mic cable or an XLR to 1/8^th inch standard connector along with a right angle adapter, to your recorder’s Mic input.

Connect the line or headphone output of the recorder to an 1/8^th inch extender cable.

Plug the Y adapter into the extender cable

An 1/8^th inch cable from the speaker is plugged into one of the adapter inputs

An 1/8^th inch cable from iPod is plugged into the other adapter input.

Don’t plug the adapter into any of the devices directly, as it acts as too large a lever arm and could lead to damage to the connector on the device.

Use a standard 1/8^th inch male to 1/8^th inch male cable for the output of the iPod and the Speaker’s input.

Batteries

I feel strongly that any recorder needs to have removable batteries. Otherwise you have no way to have back up power when you’re “off the grid”, which is almost all of the time in the field.

Easy to find battery formats are probably the best, but a rechargeable is OK as long as you can bring enough backup batteries to carry you from charge to charge. And you’ll definitely need at least one spare!

Two of these compact recorders have permanently built-in rechargeable batteries and therefore I believe would be dangerous to use in the field, especially in third world countries where access to power can be intermittent.

Signal to noise ratio: how good are the mic preamps?

This becomes an issue with the smaller recorders. All of the larger format recorders have good to very good mic preamps that are quiet and won’t impact your recording at all.
(Be sure not to buy a used Marantz PMD660 that has the old preamps…..)

There are three sources of noise in any recording system:

Noise of the Preamp;

All preamps have some noise. And this noise increases as you increase the gain when amplifying soft sources. If this noise is too loud, it can mask the sound you are trying to record.

“Self” noise of the microphone;

The inherent hiss or background noise of the mic itself.

All of the mics I’ve reviewed have minimal self noise, so they won’t contribute significantly to any problems for your recording.
However some inexpensive shotgun mics can be very noisy.

Environmental noise

Wind, cars, leaves rustling and other non-target birds and animals can be very noisy and seriously mask the song you are trying to record.

In reality, this is the noise you will be fighting with the most when recording. The more directional the mic and the louder it’s output, the better.

This noise usually makes self noise and preamp noise fairly irrelevant.

In the studio or film lot, the first two noise sources are the critical ones, as the studio is very quiet and there is almost no ambient noise.

In the field, however, the environmental noise is much, much louder than any noise added by a preamp or by the mic itself.

That being said, for these small recorders, it is helpful to use as “hot” or loud a mic as possible.

Fortunately, birds are very sensitive to their own song, even if it is embedded in a cacophony of other sounds.

Below are a number of sample recordings from different mics and different recorders. You can use them to get a sense of how the background noise compares with the preamp and mic self noise components.

.

THE COMPACT RECORDERS

Edirol R-09

• Very compact and with an intuitive and fast interface
• Easy to use with one hand.
• Fast boot up time of 5 seconds
• Instant recording and playback
• Preamps a bit noisy
• Fast file divide function during recording. Not as good as markers but can serve that function in some cases.
• Unfortunately can’t divide the file after it has been recorded.
• OK method for navigating recorded files to find a sound in the middle of silences
• A/B file playback loop for isolating a part of the file for playback. Unfortunately this doesn’t stay with the file
• Folders for organizing recordings in the field
• Widely adjustable preamp input gain
• Mic preamps OK but maybe a bit noisy for making “pristine” recordings.
• Should work fine in normal ambient environments especially with strong mic input.
• This is probably not the recorder to use if you are going to be recording for CD production.
• Record Monitor Off works well with external speaker.
• You must use either external speaker or headphones or a splitter, as there is only one output.
  For dedicated recordists, it is critical to monitor the recording with headphones to make sure everything is working properly.
  For field recording for bird finding, however, it is unusual for anyone to use headphones, as they add more bulk and isolate you from the birding experience.

Bottom Line:
This is a very attractive, extremely light weight recorder. It’s missing some features that would be nice to have.
However in the light weight category, it’s probably the best choice.

 

Zoom H4
I found the interface to be a bit touchy, with two different interfacing mechanisms, a “floating” joystick on the front and a push dial on the side. This made its operation much easier with two hands and hard to do with one, not the greatest for recording in the field.

• Only compact recorder with XLR inputs and phantom power
• Only three mic gain settings, and I found the input levels to be quite low even on the highest setting. (See examples below)
• A/B playback loop, but not stored with file.
• Monitor Off function didn’t seem to prevent feedback from either the headphone out or the line output.
• Battery life seemed very short to me when using phantom power. I had trouble getting even one hour of use.

Bottom Line:
I didn’t like working with this recorder as much as I had hoped. It has a solid XLR connector and phantom built in, so it offers more choices in microphones. But the input gain structure doesn’t have the choices or offer the amplification I’d like to see.
It also ate up batteries very quickly when used with the Phantom Power on.
Hard to use with one hand, so seemed slow.

Sony PCM-D1

• Very expensive
• 4 gig internal memory plus non-standard memory stick
• Seems designed mostly for ENG or news reporters
• High quality recording formats

M-Audio Micro Track 24/96

• Preamps a bit noisy
• Built in, non replaceable battery

Korg MR-1

• Uses internal 20 gig hard drive for long recording time
• HD with moving parts maybe not best for long field trips
• Internal rechargeable battery not removable
• Markers
• High quality 1-bit recording format along with standard linear PCM recording

.

SHOTGUN MICROPHONES

Shotgun mics are designed to be very directional, and are the standard for field recording.

The directionality provided by the shotgun mic’s design helps to focus the sound captured in the direction you point, and avoids at least some of the cacophony of the forest when recording one bird singing in the midst of a lot of other sounds.

Shotgun mics require phantom power, and most must get this from the recorder or an external mic preamp. As far as I know, the only high end shotgun mic series that provides it’s own phantom power is the Sennheiser ME series that uses the K6 Phantom Power module.

I evaluated several of the top shotgun mics and, as with the recorders, they fundamentally all work very well. I was particularly impressed with the Audio Technica AT4073a. It’s very compact but provides the hottest output of any of the mics I tested. It seemed to have pretty good rejection of off-axis sounds as well.

Of course the Sennheiser line is well know and respected. Almost every guide I’ve seen in the field has had a Sennheiser ME66 with the K6 phantom power module!

.

EXTERNAL PREAMPS

One way to increase the performance of the compact recorders would be to add a preamp or preamp with phantom power.

Sound devices makes a great external mic preamp, the MP-1. It provides phantom power and very clean mic inputs. However it is fairly expensive and weights 1.24 lbs. So it doesn’t make too much sense to add one of these to a small recorder. Rather just buy a larger recorder with better mic preamps.

Sound Professionals makes a small mic preamp, without phantom power, that has very good S/N characteristics. I haven’t had a chance to preview one yet, but may shortly and will update this once I have tried one. They are used a lot by “tapers” who record live concerts using small recorders like the R-09.

Other choices include Sonosax SX-M2, Beachtek

All of these weigh around 1 lb….so the benefits of the smaller recorder really disappear when using using these larger mic pres and you might as well buy a larger recorder like the Fostex or the Marantz.

.

PARABOLIC RECORDING SETUPS

Parabolic mic rigs use a sound amplifying parabolic reflector with an omni directional mic at the parabola’s focal point. They are very directional and actually amplify the sounds they are pointed at, so are effective for getting distant birds and also blocking out unwanted songs or sounds.

In many cases this is the best rig to have for getting the best possible, most isolated recordings.

But they are bulky, fairly heavy, and can easily get caught on vines and other debris as you walk through the forest.

The parabola needs to be large enough so its diameter is equal to the lowest frequency you need to record. For most birds 20 inches is probably OK, but you might need a larger parabola for grouse or owls.

Telinga parabolas are popular with nature recordists and weigh about 2 lbs plus the mic. After disassembly they roll up to about a 6” diameter.

They are somewhat expensive, and bulky to carry in the field, as they need to be assembled and ready to go at all times.

But for getting the quietest recordings of distant or soft birds, parabolas are the way to go.

.

.

BOTTOM LINE

So, what system to buy……??

Obviously there is a trade off between features and portability.

As I highlighted in my review of tripods, the older we get, the heavier a pound becomes….but your application will help determine how much weight you need to carry.

One question needs to be asked: For attracting birds, will all of these choices work?
I believe the answer to this is yes.

Check out the sample files and you’ll hear that all of the songs recorded using the mics and recorders are prominent enough to attract the species in question.

One good thing: birds are very sensitive to their own songs. I believe strongly in playing back songs in the field very softly. I have seen many guides blast away at a forest at high volumes, and sometimes it produces good results; but often birds are cranked up and frantic, or just get intimidated and don’t come out in the open.

Very soft playback has worked very well for me, often causing birds to become curious rather than act like they’re under attack. I’ve had luck pulling out birds that local guides have said really never come out. I believe the secret is soft playback.

So what I’m trying to say is that even if the recording is soft and includes a fair amount of background ambience, it can still be effective for attracting birds.

Anyway, here are some suggestions:

.

Most portable rig
Edirol R-09 plus Sennheiser ME66/K6

.

Slightly heavier but with more features
Marantz PMD660 with Doug Oade mod or second generation built-in preamps and one of the AT or Sennheiser mics

Fostex LE-2LE with the AT4073a

.

Highest quality, no concerns about the weight or budget
Sound Devices 702 along with with the Sennheiser MKH70 or with a Telinga Parabola and one of their recommended mics.

Probably best way to go if your goal is to make CDs for sale

 

.

 

SOME AUDIO FILES

Here are some sample files from a few of the recorders and mics listed above.
As you can see, some of the differences are fairly subtle.
And ambient environmental noise really is the loudest obstacle to getting a clean recording of one bird singing.

MICROPHONE TEST SAMPLE FILES

All of these files were recorded using the Edirol R-4 recorder with the same gain setting. The difference between these mics is fairly subtle.

Long Senn (ME67/K6)

<a

href="http://www.surfbirds.com/community-blogs/wp-content/uploads/bghst/t/tomstips/5825.mp3" target=_blank">Long Senn</a

 .

 

Short Sennheiser (Me66/K6)

<a

href="http://www.surfbirds.com/community-blogs/wp-content/uploads/bghst/t/tomstips/5830.mp3" target=_blank">Short Senn</a

 .

Long Audio Technica (AT4073a)

<a

href="http://www.surfbirds.com/community-blogs/wp-content/uploads/bghst/t/tomstips/5822.mp3" target=_blank">Long AT</a

 .

 

Short Audio Technica (AT4071a)

<a

href="http://www.surfbirds.com/community-blogs/wp-content/uploads/bghst/t/tomstips/5855.mp3" target=_blank">Short AT</a

 .

 INSIDE RECORDER AND MIC FILES

Here are some samples of the same songs recorded inside. There is quite a bit of low level ambient sound, but not nearly as much as you’ll find in the field.
You can compare the R9 and the H4 as well as the same mics recorded above by the same recorder.

H4 Short Sennheiser

<a

href="http://www.surfbirds.com/community-blogs/wp-content/uploads/bghst/t/tomstips/5820.mp3" target=_blank">H4 Short Senn Inside</a

 .

H4 Long Sennheiser

<a

href="http://www.surfbirds.com/community-blogs/wp-content/uploads/bghst/t/tomstips/5818.mp3" target=_blank">H4 Long Senn Inside</a

 .

 

H4 Short AT

<a

href="http://www.surfbirds.com/community-blogs/wp-content/uploads/bghst/t/tomstips/5819.mp3" target=_blank">H4 Short AT Inside</a

 .

 

H4 Long AT

<a

href="http://www.surfbirds.com/community-blogs/wp-content/uploads/bghst/t/tomstips/5817.mp3" target=_blank">H4 Long AT Inside</a

 .

 

R9 Short Sennheiser

<a

href="http://www.surfbirds.com/community-blogs/wp-content/uploads/bghst/t/tomstips/5828.mp3" target=_blank">R9 Short Senn Inside</a

 .

 

R9 Long Sennheiser

<a

href="http://www.surfbirds.com/community-blogs/wp-content/uploads/bghst/t/tomstips/5826.mp3" target=_blank">R9 Long Senn Inside</a

 .

FIELD RECORDINGS

Here are some samples of the small recorders in the field. Of course the ambient level is now very high.

 

H4 Short AT Field

<a

href="http://www.surfbirds.com/community-blogs/wp-content/uploads/bghst/t/tomstips/5821.mp3" target=_blank">H4 Short AT Field</a

 .

R9 Long Senn Field

<a

href="http://www.surfbirds.com/community-blogs/wp-content/uploads/bghst/t/tomstips/5827.mp3" target=_blank">R9 Long Senn Field</a

 .

 

R9 Short Senn Field

<a

href="http://www.surfbirds.com/community-blogs/wp-content/uploads/bghst/t/tomstips/5829.mp3" target=_blank">R9 Short Senn Field</a

 .

OFF AXIS REJECTION FILES

Here are samples of a short shotgun mic and long shotgun, comparing how much off axis sound they reject. The mics were pointed 90 degrees away from the source.

 

R9 Long Senn Off Axis

<a

href="http://www.surfbirds.com/community-blogs/wp-content/uploads/bghst/t/tomstips/5823.mp3" target=_blank">R9 Long Senn Off Axis</a

 .

 

R9 Short Senn Off Axis

<a

href="http://www.surfbirds.com/community-blogs/wp-content/uploads/bghst/t/tomstips/5831.mp3" target=_blank">R9 Short Senn Off Axis</a

 .

 STUDIO RECORDING WITH R-09

 For reference, here’s a well done studio recording using the R-09, some external mics and a guitar from a review of the R9 on the internet.