|
|
How do you know when you have “over
processed” a sound file?
Answer: The short answer is that you may not be
able to know. It is best to follow a few rules so that
you might avoid the problem in the first place.
Over the years, more and more sophisticated
programs for managing audio files have become available.
Audacity, for instance, is an excellent, free
program that has a growing number of important features
helpful for analyzing a sound file for EVP. The only
problem is that it has become too tempting to use as
many of these new editing tools as possible to try and
make an indistinguishable bit of audio into a Class A
EVP.
As an
engineer, I have tried my share of tricks to improve the
quality of a sound file, and I am guilty of the
occasional over processing. It is just too tempting.
However, our policy is to do as little as possible to a
sound file. We reason that the communicating entities
can do better, so it is part of our experimental
procedure to ask them to repeat what we think might be
important but unintelligible statements. They do not
always comply, but it seems reasonable to put the burden
for communication on both ends of the circuit.
In
voice formed by our physical body, the fundamental
frequency (F0) produces harmonic frequencies (formants
known as F1, F2 and so on) on the way out of the mouth.
It is the intensity of these frequency groups, and how
our mouth modulates them that form our voice. The
formants are in predictable groups, and a voice print
will show this relative order as clusters of frequency
that have more intensity.
Research has shown that the voices in EVP are formed out
of available audio frequency energy. See
http://aaevp.com/articles/articles_about_evp10.htm.
This means that, in some cases, the voice will be formed
of odd groupings of sound, rather than the orderly array
of biologically initiated formants. When a physically
formed voice is filtered, we can expect it to respond in
predictable ways, but when an EVP is filtered, it is
possible to unknowingly delete frequencies vital for the
meaning of the word. As an example, the word “love” has
a strong beginning sound that, in an EVP, might be
formed by a noise burst initiated in the amplifier by
the entity, rather than a biologically formed “L.” If
the EVP were passed through a noise filter that reduced
the intensity of that noise burst, the word could be
changed to sound like “of.” A meaningful but poorly
heard EVP would be changed to well-heard nonsense.
A
second hazard of over processing sound files is that it
is possible to amplify a sound file many, many times
with a press of the mouse button. Hand-held audio
recorders have a “floating ground” which does not very
effectively exclude external electrical signals such as
a nearby radio station. When they are being handled, the
experimenter can function as an antenna to further
exasperate the problem. Finally, the connection between
a computer and the recorder makes the recorder even more
of an antenna. The zero-signal or quiet state of the
recorder while in the record mode will, in normal
circumstances show as no sound being recorder, or at
worst, a small background sound. But if this zero level
signal is amplified a great deal, all sorts of
modulation can be discovered, and it often sounds a
little like EVP. In fact, it is probably a composite of
all of the local radio broadcasts in town.
There
are other hazards, most too exotic to be concerned with,
but the bottom line is that it is possible to change the
meaning of a phenomenal utterance by using too much
filtering, sound reduction and/or amplification. This is
especially evident when many tools are used, such as
noise reduction, filter, normalize and amplify. Even
changing the sequence of how these tools are applied can
change the outcome.
As
policy in the AA-EVP, it is recommended that no more
than ten or twenty decibels of amplification and only
passive filtering of frequencies above about 3,000 Hz be
used if the EVP is to be shared with others or used in
research. An alternative policy is to provide the
original EVP as a raw file, followed by about a
half-second of silence, and then the same example as it
has been modified. In this case, there is probably no
reason to limit the processing, except it is a
consideration to tell the listener what processing has
been applied.
If the
recording is only for personal use, then of course there
are no limits, but be sure to understand the hazards of
self-deception by making the utterance something it may
not be.
One
point to consider here is that we recommend converting
the example to mp3 for posting on the Internet or
emailing, but we do not recommend processing an mp3
sound file in any way. Well, perhaps a little
amplification. So, save, process and store your files as
Windows PCM (*.wav) files or whatever is
equivalent for your operating system, and convert a copy
to mp3 for distribution. Also, we have had some
difficulty with *.wav to mp3 conversion at very low
sample rates, say 8,000, so listen to the resulting file
before distribution.
As a final note, other than as a demonstration that it
is possible, we feel that EVP found on the reverse of a
sound file may be more problematic than useful. There
are too many sound combinations in normal speech that,
when played backswords, make other normal words. As a
rule of thumb, we feel that unless the utterance is a
Class B+ or Class A that is clearly an appropriate
response to a question or comment about the
circumstance, it is best to disregard reversed examples.
As always in trans-etheric phenomena, the content of the
message should be a guide as to whether the message is
... well, is trans-etheric.
I was wondering how the ITC/EVP arena views
apophenia or
pareildolia as a science or if in ITC research
allowances are made for these psychological
observations. Can ITC research and apophenia and its
subsets coexist? Do your researchers take pareildoia
into consideration when determining an ITC event? If
not, why? If yes, how do you separate the two by
definition?
Answer: There can be no doubt that some reported EVP are
mundane sounds mistaken as a paranormal voice.
Pareidolia is a real enough phenomena that we
naturally must deal with at all times, just as
we deal with apophenia which is the visual form.
Part of the dogma of those terms is that human
brains are hardwired to recognize voices or
faces in noise; so much so that we find these
things even when they are not there. In deer
hunting, they call that "buck
fever." However, later research shows that this
assumption has been greatly overstated. As it
turns out, the mind has a pattern recognition
center that is trained to recognize faces from
cultural upbringing, just as we are trained to
find understandable words in sounds that would
be gibberish for someone from a different
culture. Those same centers can be trained to
recognize any pattern, showing us that we should
as easily find a favorite song in random audio
noise or maybe a favorite movie star in visual
noise.
In fact, we do find this in situations where
people are relaxed, and there is a relatively
steady-state noise in the environment, such as a
refrigerator fan or heater fan. Many people
report "almost" hearing a distant conversation
or radio station. They even report almost
hearing music. We think that EVP are formed by a
physical process known as stochastic resonance.
In that process, a weak signal will act as
a seed signal to be amplified in a field of
broad-spectrum noise. The weak signal emerges as
a pattern energetically stronger than the field
of energy and recognizably the same signal.
Thus, a weak telekinetic signal might be
amplified by the noise we use in audio phenomena
and visual phenomena. Our thought is that the
neuro-electric field in the brain might act on
the broad-spectrum energy from the fan to allow
familiar or expected hearing or seeing. We do
not consider such faces in clouds or voices in
fans to be ITC and such reports fall way outside
of the usual characteristics of EVP or visual
ITC. (I have attached a document that has a list
of characteristics.)
There is also a very real problem with stray
radio signals producing "unexpected voices in
recording media." Since we use mostly digital
recorders, and the majority of RF these days is
digital, RF contamination is less of a problem
than it was a few years back. On the other hand,
hand-held digital voice recorders are excellent
antennas and there is not much of an effort to
eliminate the antenna effect in their design.
EVP has been successfully recorded in mil-spec
screen rooms. Armatures can do the same
experiment by nesting metal containers with
their digital recorder isolated in the center.
See
http://aaevp.com/articles/articles_bill_weisensale_experiment.htm A common problem is the recording of unnoticed
people talking in the area. This is especially a
problem in field recording when a ghost hunting
crew is at work. The very first Best Practice we
proposed was the use of a control recorder of
higher quality, such as a video camera. EVP
seldom forms in higher quality recording
circuits. Also, we have no record of the
identical EVP showing up at the exact same time
in more than one recording process. These two
characteristics enable us to say that it is
reasonable to discard an utterance that is found
in more than one recording unless there are
extenuating circumstances. See
http://etheric-studies.aaevp.com/best_practices_development/index.php?title=Using_a_second_audio_recorder_as_a_control So yes, we are aware of these things. They are
real and techniques must be designed to account
for them. A problem though is that anyone can
attempt to collect examples of these phenomena,
yet few are well-trained in the subject. For
instance, orbs found in photographs are almost
always particulates illuminated by the camera
flash or light reflecting from a bright surface.
Yet, people persist in thinking that orbs are
etheric entities, such as the local ghost. The
difficulty is that there is some evidence
indicating that some orbs are phenomenal, and
unless the orb is clearly in motion, there is
no current technique for distinguishing
reflected light from a self-luminous orb. One of
the reasons for the Best Practices part of the
Etheric Studies initiative is to enlist
experienced researchers to establish techniques
that will guide people with lessons learned. See
http://etheric-studies.aaevp.com/ Research can be designed to expand our
understanding. For instance, we have conducted
double-blind experiments to determine whether or
not a person can use EVP to collect information
that is unknown to the experimenter. See
http://aaevp.com/articles/articles_about_4cell_experiment.htm.
The 4Cell results were in the range of 60%
correct responses. We have conducted two online EVP listening
trials that showed "average" people can
correctly understand about 34% of the words in
EVP. A very experienced person would have heard
more like 100%, and the difference between the
website visitors and an AA-EVP member is about
40% word recognition. (there is an apples and
oranges problem with the way this figure was
arrived at, but it agrees with observations.) We
are still seeking "peer review" of the article,
but the report at
http://etheric-studies.aaevp.com/best_practices_development/index.php?title=EVP_online_listening_trials shows
that EVP contain real words but that the words
are formed in a novel way that requires training
to be understood--much like learning a new
language. So, I would say that we are developing a good
foundation of research that will enable us to
properly study these phenomena. When speaking to
a participant in the Big Circle (see the video
by clicking on the image below), we do not ask
for scientific proof, but when we are talking to
just about everyone else, we require good reason
to accept the example of phenomena. You will see
that there are a lot of people who make claims
that cannot be supported with good research, but
I must say that it is the responsibility of the
listener to recognize the difference between a
person trained in the field and an amateur
before concluding that all of
these phenomena are imaginary. This is also true
of what scientists say about EVP. Are they
qualified?
What should I do to begin recording EVP
To begin, you may find it helpful to read
the free download of Sarah Estep's book,
Voices of Eternity. The Butler's book,
There is No Death and There are No Dead, was
written as a textbook for EVP and should be of
help for your effort to record the voices.
How do I
make a ghost go away? Many people train for years to learn how to be
sensitive to the presence of discarnate people.
In some cases, we have found that the
"intrusive" entity was a loved one. So it is all
a matter of perspective.
One of the problems is that they are pretty much
always around, so ignoring them is a matter of
ignoring your senses. That usually takes
training as well. You might look around for a
Spiritualist church. (http://NSAC.0rg)
Spiritualists train to be in charge of their world
and their contacts with the other side. That means
they do not put up with misbehaving people, and they
do that by explaining to them that they need to
behave or go away. They do this with strong
intention, not anger. For instance, if you are going
to chop a block of wood, you would not just lay the
ax on the wood and hope gravity does the rest. You
would swing the ax with the intention of cutting the
wood, without anger and with the expectation that it
will be cut.
Ignoring subtle influences is a lot like not
thinking of a pink elephant. The better approach
is to express intention and then behave
accordingly, as if your intention has been met.
Keep in mind that beseeching the
unseen to go away, "clearing" the house or any of
those New Age tricks intended to make ghosts go
away, tend to give them the energy they need to
cause etheric-to-physical influences. This is true
because your fear or strong concern brings just the
kind of energy needed to cause the influence in the
first place--the pink elephant problem. Our minds
tend to make our fears real, but in more specific
terms, our minds tend to enable our expectation.
Expect what you want and not what you fear. |
|
