Posts: 32914
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Will Schultz - 1/15/2016 2:02 PM
sworrall - 1/15/2016 2:05 PM They don't sound anything like the recordings (run it through analysis), and in hundreds of hours of recording underwater, we've never had a single fish make any noise. Not once, and we have very, very good equipment. You can occasionally 'hear' a large school of crappies or gills go by if they are brushing together. We've never recorded shad. If you're saying that racket is 'natural', well...I'd strongly argue it isn't even close. And that's exactly why the lures catch fish. it's not a bad thing some days for a bait to be obnoxiously loud and bright, not a bad thing at all.
Point was, you said "fish don't rattle" but they do. Fish make sounds you just haven't recorded any. Not only the fish themselves but when they're feeding, crashing through minnows, feeding on the surface, crushing crayfish, etc.
Natural sounds? I would suggest there are very few sounds that have not occurred in their "natural" setting so yes a crankbait sounds natural. You can't make me believe that little brain is capable of identifying a biologically produced sound or one that's mechanical. If we want to talk about eliciting a response because it is feeling something it's never felt before I can go along with that. Heck, change the pitch on a trolling motor blade so it doesn't feel like the ones they normally feel and it will probably get attention.
Metal on metal doesn't happen. Wood on metal doesn't happen. Sketching metal blades on aluminum rivets doesn't happen. Plastic on metal doesn't happen. Keep it in perspective, we are talking about what muskies eat, so prey species making those ridiculous noises? Not a chance. Fish do NOT 'rattle'. As I suggested, run the sounds through analysis. No way rattles in a plastic crankbait are sounds any other prey species makes. The racket the Echo Tail makes is off the charts, and they catch muskies.
You actually hit exactly on the point I am leading up to!
There IS no 'natural', so muskies will 'strike' darned near anything that moves. Somehow 'eat' has become interchangeable with 'strike', and there's a big difference. Either will get you a hookup if it is a committed action. I think people use 'eat' because it sounds cooler.
It's all stimulus/response to vibration and what passes as what we understand to be 'sound', exposure, and the added dimension of contrast and movement within the stereoscopic field of the muskie's vision.
Whatever hits the water the fish must react to. They are not capable or inclined to reason out any differences, but display a number of ingrained response levels to stimuli from 10,000 + years of evolving.
So Doug's 'If it moves, it's food' applies beautifully and simply. The varying degrees of the response are subject to thousands of variables both within and beyond the anglers control or influence, knowing as much about that as is possible will put more muskies in the net for anyone.
Pretending any lure imitates anything is nature is incorrect, but not consequential at all at the end of the day. Figure out what footprint creates the best opportunity strike response on any given day, and...game on. That's been a 45 year process for me, not an event, and I'm not even close to what I think is any clear understanding of the entire process yet even though I spend a lot of time with cameras, microphones, and more dangling underneath my boat in the way and with my nose in books.
Crazy? Yes, I probably am. |
Location: Grand Rapids, MI | sworrall - What I was intending with "I would suggest there are very few sounds that have not occurred in their "natural" setting" is they've heard/felt these sounds their entire life, crankbaits, blades, rattles, transducers pinging, etc. I was in no way suggesting that a shad actually sounds exactly like a rattle trap. Shad and other fish are capable of making bones click (rattle), while there are also fish have ways to use their swim bladder to make a drumming sound.
|
