View Single Post
 
Old 03-13-2015, 04:34 AM
Aaron's Avatar
Aaron Aaron is offline
Co-Founder & Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Washington State
Posts: 11,026
WR3 Receiver

Quote:
Originally Posted by dR-Green View Post
e useless in this case. You probably don't need 8000 samples per second but you should be able to input a custom sample rate in Cool Edit Pro to get the file size down and still record a good amount of data.
That all makes sense - Cool Edit can do as low as 6000 sample rate, mono at 8 bit resolution. I think I was recalling recording some conference calls way back on it with a much higher sample rate and the chip water cooler fan was wailing like a banshee. Never used the real low sample rate before but maybe perfect for something like this.

I know Eric likes the analog chart recorders, but something like this I'm sure could do the job of recording the signals. I'd imagine that over time, ever a 1 sample per second would show a picture of what is going on.

Maybe it wouldn't take up that much space or memory. Just looking at the audio wave form is all I'd be looking for anyway and that would be simpler than doing any conversion. We don't have earthquakes in this area - at least very rarely, but would be interesting to see if something builds up before a rainstorm, lightning storm, etc...

This is the exact receiver I purchased from Stephen McGreevy: 2014-2015 WR-3 Model VLF Whistler-Receiver Order-Form Page (Rev. December 2014)

This thing is so sensitive that if you have headphones on with the antenna out all the way - someone can be about 20 yards away and if they walk down some concrete steps and take their fingernail and scratch the top of the metal hand rail just barely, you can hear it in the headphones as if they're scratching the plastic case on the headphones themselves. Really trippy.
__________________
Sincerely,
Aaron Murakami

Reply With Quote