[HN Gopher] Bird song sonographs show distinct drawing patterns
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Bird song sonographs show distinct drawing patterns
        
       Author : algui91
       Score  : 178 points
       Date   : 2021-05-07 09:13 UTC (13 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (soundshader.github.io)
 (TXT) w3m dump (soundshader.github.io)
        
       | OmarShehata wrote:
       | This is amazing. The GitHub repo has more information too, about
       | how the common explanation of how our ears work (isolating sounds
       | in an FFT-like-process) may be incorrect:
       | 
       | > Contrary to what you might think, our ears don't seem to rely
       | on an FFT-like process to extract isolated frequencies. Instead,
       | our ears detect periodic parts in the signal, although in most
       | cases those periodic parts closely match the FFT frequencies.
       | There is a simple experiment that proves this point:
       | 
       | https://github.com/soundshader/soundshader.github.io#why-acf...
        
         | jcims wrote:
         | This is my laymans test for the FFT theory.
         | 
         | Put in earbuds or a headset and (quietly) play sounds that are
         | slightly different in frequency (1-10hz).
         | 
         | You will still hear a sort of ethereal beat tone between them
         | that's different than the beat you would hear if you were
         | listening to the same through speakers. I don't see how this
         | would occur frequency-domain perception and it's too present
         | (at least in my experiment) to be attributed to bone conduction
         | across the skull.
        
           | morelisp wrote:
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beat_(acoustics)#Binaural_beat.
           | ..
        
             | jcims wrote:
             | Whoa! At least that gives me some comfort I wasn't
             | imagining it.
             | 
             | I wish I understood some of the neurological explanation of
             | how the beats are perceived because it doesn't seem to
             | match with my understanding of the explanation of how our
             | ears work. If everything is pushed into the frequency
             | domain based on the stimulation of different parts of the
             | cochlea, where does the time domain beat emerge?
        
               | filoeleven wrote:
               | Part of why we evolved two ears is to be able to locate
               | sounds within our perceptive field. I think the best
               | example is to listen to some recordings made with two
               | head-mounted microphones. I like these here; one was the
               | closest I've come to believing I was standing in a pond
               | while in my own house. It requires headphones to get the
               | effect: https://quietamerican.org/field_vietnam.html
               | 
               | There's another component at play too: beat frequencies.
               | This happens anytime you have different frequencies
               | playing simultaneously. This is a result of simple
               | waveform interference. Lots of examples, but I'll never
               | pass up a chance to link to Julius Sumner Miller[0]:
               | https://youtu.be/7dxkW5bsUgs
               | 
               | So the brain is doing lots of work to integrate the
               | stereo "image," in much the same way we can wear 3D
               | glasses and perceive depth[1]. Binaural beats reduce
               | things down to a more fundamental level: you're playing
               | with how your mind integrates the stereo field in a weird
               | way, and it produces a beat frequency that does not exist
               | in the pulsed air. This may be learned behavior.
               | 
               | [0] I'm eagerly waiting for some music producer to sample
               | this video: "all the music fell out", "we should have
               | this mechanism called beats", "beats: wonderful!", etc.
               | 
               | [1] I wonder what the effect of rapidly switching the
               | left/right components of a stereo image would be.
               | Probably nausea.
        
               | jcims wrote:
               | The part that doesn't make sense to me is that the
               | binaural beat frequency corresponds with the physical
               | beat frequency of the sound. So if you got 432Hz in one
               | ear and 428Hz in the other, you're going to hear a 4Hz
               | beat frequency between the two.
               | 
               | If the cochlea is effectively taste buds for sound, the
               | only thing the brain is going to get is which part of the
               | cochlea is being tickled. There's no time domain
               | information there, just some ambiguous 'pitch'.
               | 
               | If that's the case though, how does the brain know to
               | synthesize the 4Hz differential between these two
               | frequencies. The 432Hz and the 428Hz aren't making it to
               | the brain, just the fact both ears are getting tickled in
               | very close but different places.
               | 
               | (Also my dad absolutely LOVED watching JSM and would
               | always call us into the room any time he was doing one of
               | his crazy experiments on TV. I agree his stuff is very
               | 'sampleable'
               | 
               | Edit: Just watched the video, it's actually a gold mine
               | for hip hop lol. Just play this in the background and
               | scrub around his videos -
               | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JVISRjhXzzM
               | 
               | good thing it's friday (may need to fix volume) -
               | http://www.youtubemultiplier.com/6095af3ba32b6-jsm-on-
               | beats-...)
        
               | filoeleven wrote:
               | Oh that simultaneous site is neat! Doesn't work for me on
               | iOS but what a great idea. I've been using two separate
               | devices for that kind of thing (mostly confirming mashups
               | that I will likely never follow through with, but it's
               | still fun to do).
               | 
               | Looks like you know more than me about how our brains
               | process audio. I was running on the assumption that some
               | kind of frequency analysis made it to our higher
               | processing centers, is that not the case? Given that what
               | we hear all the time is incredibly chaotic (multiple
               | pitches that we hear as chords, lyrics vs the rest of the
               | music, focusing on one person speaking, etc) I thought we
               | must at least be running some kind of internal spectrum
               | analyzer and continuously comparing new input to previous
               | averages or something.
               | 
               | There almost has to be a clock-like reference construct
               | somewhere, right? The ability of some people to perceive
               | perfect pitch points to it IMO.
        
       | humaniania wrote:
       | Are there AI projects working on mapping bird song into possible
       | meanings to figure out a language?
        
       | grawprog wrote:
       | Those are intersting. They remind me of the sonographs we
       | collected of bat echolocation calls when we were doing bat
       | surveys with anabat detectors. Just by the shape of the calls you
       | could narrow the bat down to a likely species and determine
       | whether it was just flying around, actively hunting or about to
       | eat a hapless insect.
       | 
       | It was a pretty awesome device.
        
       | klyrs wrote:
       | > I don't know if it's a feature or a defect of the instrument.
       | 
       | It's a feature
       | 
       | https://monoskop.org/images/a/af/Gough_C_2007_The_violin_Chl...
        
       | birdbrain wrote:
       | I don't want to detract from the images, or the work that went
       | into this, but, er, there are a _lot_ of types of birds. Just
       | among passerines (songbirds), we 're talking over 6,000 species.
       | 
       | So any sweeping statement like "birds don't seem to bother to
       | create a complex multi-layered harmonics pattern" is practically
       | guaranteed to be wrong. And so it is. Lots and lots of birds sing
       | incredibly harmonically complex songs. Browse any of these
       | (https://www.remoteenvironmentalassessmentlaboratory.com/expl...)
       | if you're interested - it's a tiny sample of birds, and many,
       | many of them do in fact have harmonically complex songs.
        
       | throwamon wrote:
       | For a moment I thought they would hypothesize that the patterns
       | might be an actual "rendering" of what the birds were looking at,
       | especially when I saw the 7th image which looks remarkably
       | similar to a rodent.
       | 
       | Apparently I'm pretty far off, but just this idea of animals
       | communicating images with sound waves was something I'd otherwise
       | never have.
        
         | kurthr wrote:
         | What if groups/species of birds had "collective synesthesia"?
         | 
         | Some people see colors or feel tastes... and it doesn't seem
         | that unlikely that there would be selection pressure for parts
         | of the bird brain to connect their spatial awareness to their
         | auditory system and then songs. There could be a nice feedback
         | loop that their own songs would strike similar experiences for
         | themselves (if they hear themselves similar to others).
         | 
         | Of course we know that bats have this type of neural connection
         | in echolocation and dolphins/whales may even using it to
         | communicate in similar ways with their songs.
        
           | mattkrause wrote:
           | They kinda do!
           | 
           | If you place migratory birds in a big round cage, they show
           | 'Zugunruhe[0]', or migratory restlessness: they jump and
           | flutter in the direction that they would be otherwise be
           | migrating if they were out in the wild. Rotating the magnetic
           | field (e.g., by putting magnets around the aviary) also
           | rotates the direction of their Zugunruhe.
           | 
           | No one totally understands how this works, but the magnetic
           | information is thought to be 'overlaid' on other sensory
           | information. One candidate pathway involves a light-dependent
           | pathway in the retina. When a cryptochrome absorbs light, it
           | generates radical pairs that affect how visual information is
           | perceived[1]. This could give the birds something like HUD
           | which displays magnetic field lines on top of the visual
           | scene. Consistent with this idea, birds can only orient to
           | magnetic fields under certain colors of light, with the color
           | varying a bit from bird to bird[2]. It's almost as if the
           | colored light washes out the HUD.
           | 
           | There's another parallel pathway involving bits of magnetite
           | in the beak[3,4]. These signals flow through the trigeminal
           | nerve, which carries a lot of different signals; it would not
           | be impossible for this to manifest as "pressure", as it
           | carries touch/somatosensory information in many animals.
           | 
           | [0] Ethologists love German and this word captures my
           | lockdown feeling so very well. [1] https://www.sciencedirect.
           | com/science/article/pii/S000634950... [2]
           | https://www.nature.com/articles/364525a0 [3] https://www.scie
           | ncedirect.com/science/article/pii/S000634950... [4] https://r
           | oyalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rspb.2009.005...
        
           | akomtu wrote:
           | I remember that "cymascope" experiment that used a dolphin's
           | sound as input. Turned out the water surface had an image
           | (after lots of noise deblurring) of a human the dolphin just
           | seen. This means the organ that decodes sound is a simple
           | membrane with water. How dolphins encode images into sound is
           | a separate question.
        
             | plutonorm wrote:
             | I don't remember this but would extremely interested to see
             | it. Any link?
        
               | akomtu wrote:
               | It was one of John Stuart Reid presentations.
        
             | EamonnMR wrote:
             | Since dolphins also 'see' with sonar, using the sonar
             | response inflection of an object to refer to that object is
             | sort of like an onomatopoeia.
        
         | plutonorm wrote:
         | I heard a crazy theory that this is how dolphins communicate.
         | As they perceive using sound and are able to produce sound,
         | perhaps they project the sound of the thing they want to talk
         | about. It would be the same as a human being able to shine any
         | image we like onto a wall to communicate. Can they recreate the
         | echo of a fish with high enough fidelity that it's recognisable
         | to another dolphin?
        
         | jerrre wrote:
         | Interesting train of thought.
         | 
         | Perhaps it's good to know that the x axis (from left to right)
         | is temporal. So for someone/something to translate this to an
         | image with some special sense would also necessitate some
         | memory part.
         | 
         | With a big fantasy you could continue your hypothesis by
         | comparing it to describing an object you see with words by
         | telling the height of the outline from left to right.
        
       | gbh444g wrote:
       | I wanted to add that the nature of those thin horizontal layers
       | and the patterns they form is similar to diffraction. A laser
       | beam passing thru a thin slit forms a pattern with the sinc-wave
       | distribution of intensity, and so is FFT of a rectangular window
       | used in these spectrograms makes a sinc-wave shape that
       | "diffracts" the "true" sound frequency.
        
       | topspin wrote:
       | It makes sense to me that bird song would have few harmonics.
       | Although we may appreciate the beauty of bird song they don't
       | sing for aesthetics. They are signaling. Concentrating energy
       | into a narrow band delivers greater range for the same energy
       | than harmonically rich signals. We do likewise with
       | electromagnetic communication.
        
         | crazygringo wrote:
         | I think the explanation is even simpler.
         | 
         | For a loud, high-pitched sound produced from a tiny object like
         | a bird, is it even physically possible to have the loud
         | resonances needed for overtones and timbre? I think it's just
         | physics.
         | 
         | Whales are "signaling" over huge distances too but have plenty
         | of overtones, since that's what low frequencies in huge
         | cavities produce.
         | 
         | I'm not sure the dichotomy between "aesthetics" and "signaling"
         | you suggest actually exists. A peacock's plumage is certainly
         | aesthetics but also certainly signaling. And what is a
         | birdsong's _melody_ if not aesthetics?
        
         | periheli0n wrote:
         | When a bird sings to attract a mating partner, competing
         | against other birds, does it not sing for aesthetics?
         | 
         | Also, couldn't harmonics be used to improve decoding in noisy
         | environments? Spreading the signal over a wide band is not
         | unheard of in man-made electromagnetic communication either.
        
           | karmakaze wrote:
           | When using spread-spectrum transmission it would be
           | counterproductive to utilize harmonics. Non-sinusoidal noise
           | at frequency F would pollute frequencies k*F. Also the
           | transmission band is likely less than an octave.
        
           | darig wrote:
           | Signal strength is the aesthetic.
           | 
           | If you were a bird, you'd spend so much time trying to change
           | what you were that you'd forget to eat your worms and die.
        
         | enchiridion wrote:
         | I just had two thought considering this:
         | 
         | 1. Do we appreciate bird songs because they indicate a resource
         | rich/hospitable environment?
         | 
         | 2. Do birds hear the entire range of the song, or just pick up
         | specific bands?
        
       | DoingIsLearning wrote:
       | Dupe: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27030171
        
         | algui91 wrote:
         | Ups, I though if some dup is detected I would be warned before
         | submitting. Will remove it.
         | 
         | Thanks!
         | 
         | Edit: Seems I can not remove it by myself :-(
        
           | neogodless wrote:
           | No worries - the previous entry is not front page, and I
           | missed it. Glad I caught it the second time around.
        
       | luxuryballs wrote:
       | Snek! https://soundshader.github.io/hss/gallery/bird/3.png
        
       | kazinator wrote:
       | > _However it would be a mistake to to call flute sound simple:
       | as you see, every level has its own regular pattern that can't be
       | recreated with a simple mix of sinusoidal tones._
       | 
       | The resonance of the flute's air chamber is driven by the noise
       | of forced air stream, which is why it contains high frequencies
       | at all. Of course you can't recreate the flute sound just with
       | some periodic sinusoidals, because the noise component has to be
       | present. The noise is complex and is itself filtered by the
       | flute's chamber, in a different way depending on which valves are
       | closed. You can play a recognizeable scale on a flute without
       | getting a tone out of it, just using air noise, the same way you
       | can produce a musical tune using chhhh sounds out your mouth.
       | Those notes, or something like them, are still there in the
       | background when a tone is being produced. There is no flute tone
       | without them.
        
       | debbiedowner wrote:
       | HSV color scheme looks beautiful, but since it doesn't seem to
       | have perceptually uniform color change we won't see it used in
       | papers much :(
       | 
       | I think the rule for audio papers is linear change in color
       | according to energy?
       | 
       | So this rep may lead us to hallucinate our conclusions?
        
       | slver wrote:
       | I choose to imagine they're API endpoints communicating lists of
       | entities with similar data causing the patterns.
        
       | wombatmobile wrote:
       | Um, I'd like to be able to parse this article. but I don't know
       | what it is saying. Can anyone explain the gist of it to me in
       | simple terms?
       | 
       | What does this mean?
       | 
       | "These sonograms are remarkably different from other sounds, as
       | if birds "draw" with sound something that's flying backwards in
       | time."
        
         | usrbin wrote:
         | Audio person here. I found the post fascinating, but I wish
         | they did more to explain what they were talking about to a
         | layperson.
         | 
         | Basically, all sounds that you hear are composed of many
         | layered sine waves of different frequencies and intensities.
         | The graphs in the post are spectrograms, which graph those
         | frequencies over time. The Y axis represents pitch, the X axis
         | represents time, and the brightness at any given point
         | represents how loud that particular frequency was at that
         | particular time.
         | 
         | Most sounds, even seemingly simple ones, look very complex on a
         | sonogram, like a smudged pen stroke. The images of different
         | instruments below demonstrate this; these are all very complex
         | sounds, even though we only hear it as a single note being
         | played. The voice one is one of my favorites, because it shows
         | just how weird and complicated everyday sounds can get.
         | 
         | But bird songs are different; on a sonogram, they appear as a
         | single line. The complexity of the bird songs here comes from
         | the fact that they're taking a single sine wave and changing
         | the pitch over time. Where most sounds look like a complex mix
         | of smudged paint strokes, bird songs look like a single,
         | precise, bouncing stroke.
        
           | klyrs wrote:
           | That's really interesting... I wonder if it has something to
           | do with birds have such small resonating chambers, so I
           | looked for bigger birds. Apparently, emus make several calls
           | that have interesting harmonics.
           | 
           | https://www.xeno-canto.org/species/Dromaius-
           | novaehollandiae?...
        
           | J253 wrote:
           | > on a sonogram, they appear as a single line.
           | 
           | Which is akin to dragging a single finger across different
           | piano keys. Only a single frequency, or note, played at a
           | time. This is common among songbirds.
           | 
           | Contrast that with the sound of a crow. The sonogram is much
           | more broadband in signature. This is akin to mashing a bunch
           | of keys on a piano all at the same time. Many frequencies
           | present at simultaneously.
        
             | wombatmobile wrote:
             | I'd like to see fMRI of the listening birds' brains.
             | 
             | Crows, in the morning, seem to be broadcasting work gang
             | related information, organising their crew to go and
             | harvest certain regions, then report back on the yield.
             | 
             | If songbirds are courting, and hence broadcasting different
             | information, for different purposes, I wonder if some
             | generalisable differences might be apparent in the
             | receiving birds brains.
        
             | bradford wrote:
             | > Which is akin to dragging a single finger across
             | different piano keys. Only a single frequency, or note,
             | played at a time.
             | 
             | I think there's a key difference.
             | 
             | Assuming this is the spectrogram of single note being
             | played on the Piano
             | (https://soundshader.github.io/hss/gallery/piano/2.jpg)
             | (which I can't be certain of, since the audio sample wasn't
             | provided). Seems like a single piano note fires on multiple
             | frequencies, and our ear 'aggregates' them so we hear it as
             | a single note.
             | 
             | Songbird belts out a single frequency at each point in
             | time. We still hear a single note but there's nothing to
             | aggregate.
             | 
             | At least that's my interpretation of the parent comments.
             | Again, can't be sure.
        
           | wombatmobile wrote:
           | I wonder what information properties can be inferred from the
           | characteristics of the avian audio signal.
           | 
           | Are birds sending specific data packets eg weather, food
           | prospecting geocoordinates? Or are they entertainers like
           | Frank Sinatra or Dolly Parton?
           | 
           | And could we decipher the language by studying data in
           | context eg food hunts, mating rituals, predator warnings?
           | 
           | What might Claude Shannon make of these spectrograms?
        
           | Xophmeister wrote:
           | So this would be a good example of a pure(ish) sine wave
           | produced naturally, albeit modulating pitch over time? That's
           | pretty rare, I believe.
        
         | noxToken wrote:
         | Andrew Huang does a good job of explaining harmonics and
         | overtones[0]. You only need to watch until about the 4 minute
         | mark (from the timestamp) to get an explanation of harmonics
         | and what the sonograms represent.
         | 
         | The short of it is that most natural sounds product a root tone
         | plus a varying amount of related tones above it. Our ears hear
         | the root tone, and the other tones above it are what give the
         | sound its uniqueness. That's why a guitar, a clarinet and 3
         | singers can produce the same note while sounding distinct.
         | 
         | Birds seem to produce a natural sound without a lot of the
         | related tones above it. Their sound is, relatively speaking,
         | much purer than most other natural sounds. That's very unique.
         | 
         | [0]: https://youtu.be/Wx_kugSemfY?t=95
        
       | temporalparts wrote:
       | Slight related tangent: For all those interested in birding, I
       | highly recommend the BirdNet app available on Android and iOS!
       | You can record and send audio data, and it will try to classify
       | the bird for you based on the recording.
       | 
       | In the process of recording, it will show you the bird's
       | spectrograms, which is really cool!
        
         | algui91 wrote:
         | That's really cool! trying it out now. thanks for the
         | recommendation.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-05-07 23:00 UTC)