<p>I use Raven Pro for my sound analysis, and I wanted to measure the peak frequency of the syllables that I selected. You probably know that, the measurements are automatic, I select the measurements and I get the values in the selection table. The problem is that for the peak frequency, I have a lot of duplicated values for different birds and different syllable types. With an exemple to make it clearer maybe: I have the exact same peak frequency value for syllables A1, A2, A5, C2, C3 of bird 001 and for syllables B2, B7, B9, C3, C6, E5 of bird 008.</p>
<p>Here is an exemple of one bird with peak frequency values in the table:
<a href="https://i.sstatic.net/h6YbF.png" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/h6YbF.png" alt="enter image description here" /></a></p>
<p>Running analysis with that many duplicated values is not good, so I'm trying to find a way to fix that problem. When Raven opens a sound file, it generates the spectrogram made of many small squares like pixels, so I tried to change the size of those squares to have more precise measurements (by reducing the frequency grid spacing). It reduces a lot the number of duplicated values, but I've heard about the time-frequency uncertainty principle (or Gabor limit), and I wonder if I should restrain myself from reducing too much the frequency grid.</p>
<p>Here are the original grid settings:
<a href="https://i.sstatic.net/X4R4z.png" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/X4R4z.png" alt="enter image description here" /></a></p>
<p>Do you have any thoughts and/or advice on that? What should I do to fix my data without messing everything else up? Thanks for your help!</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-10-05T08:32:53.620Z
could you privide an example (screenshot) and give us the parameter setting?
WMXZ
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-10-08T03:08:59.597Z
Can you explain why having different syllables with the same peak frequency is a problem? It seems to accurately describe the structure of the sounds. Note that the precision of the measurement increases with higher window length values, so you might get different numbers if you increase it.
Marcelo Araya-Salas
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-10-09T08:29:24.323Z
That's exactly my question, how much can I increase the window length? Can I increase it too much? And the problem is not really to have different syllables with the same peak frequency, the problem is the number of duplicated values which is quite high and not really suitable for statistical analysis
Maëlle Lefeuvre
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-10-10T03:47:54.010Z
When you increase the window length, you will increase precision of the frequency measurements, but as a trade-off you may decrease the precision of any temporal measurements that are calculated from the spectrogram. 

I'm not familiar with the issue of duplicate values being an issue for statistical analysis as you describe. I agree with @MarceloAraya-Salas that it looks like the measurements are accurately capturing your recordings
selene
<measurement><raven><data><frequency>
How to get rid of duplicated frequency values in Raven Pro?
# How to get rid of duplicated frequency values in Raven Pro?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2023-10-05)

I use Raven Pro for my sound analysis, and I wanted to measure the peak frequency of the syllables that I selected. You probably know that, the measurements are automatic, I select the measurements and I get the values in the selection table. The problem is that for the peak frequency, I have a lot of duplicated values for different birds and different syllable types. With an exemple to make it clearer maybe: I have the exact same peak frequency value for syllables A1, A2, A5, C2, C3 of bird 001 and for syllables B2, B7, B9, C3, C6, E5 of bird 008.

Here is an exemple of one bird with peak frequency values in the table:
[![enter image description here](https://i.sstatic.net/h6YbF.png)](https://i.sstatic.net/h6YbF.png)

Running analysis with that many duplicated values is not good, so I'm trying to find a way to fix that problem. When Raven opens a sound file, it generates the spectrogram made of many small squares like pixels, so I tried to change the size of those squares to have more precise measurements (by reducing the frequency grid spacing). It reduces a lot the number of duplicated values, but I've heard about the time-frequency uncertainty principle (or Gabor limit), and I wonder if I should restrain myself from reducing too much the frequency grid.

Here are the original grid settings:
[![enter image description here](https://i.sstatic.net/X4R4z.png)](https://i.sstatic.net/X4R4z.png)

Do you have any thoughts and/or advice on that? What should I do to fix my data without messing everything else up? Thanks for your help!

**Tags:** measurement, raven, data, frequency

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: could you privide an example (screenshot) and give us the parameter setting?  
> **username_2**: Can you explain why having different syllables with the same peak frequency is a problem? It seems to accurately describe the structure of the sounds. Note that the precision of the measurement increases with higher window length values, so you might get different numbers if you increase it.  
> **username_0**: That's exactly my question, how much can I increase the window length? Can I increase it too much? And the problem is not really to have different syllables with the same peak frequency, the problem is the number of duplicated values which is quite high and not really suitable for statistical analysis  
> **username_3**: When you increase the window length, you will increase precision of the frequency measurements, but as a trade-off you may decrease the precision of any temporal measurements that are calculated from the spectrogram.   I'm not familiar with the issue of duplicate values being an issue for statistical analysis as you describe. I agree with @username_2 that it looks like the measurements are accurately capturing your recordings  

---

## 0 answers

