Should Software Be Used?

[monte_9501]

Found this article and thought it was interesting, what does everyone else think

http://www.paranormalnews.com/article.as...cleID=1131

Written By: Todd Bates, Haunted Voices
Posted: 6/12/2006

We have all sat back and wondered just how or why voices from the other side would want to talk with us. Is this just some kind of interference or some kind of hoax? No one knows the true answer to these questions but we do know that voices have indeed been recorded. Many researchers have captured voices and we are able to hear them just fine, but there are some spirits that for some reason cannot communicate as clear. I feel that these spirits have a right to be heard and treated just the same as others. This is where the use of sound editing software comes into play.

Now, I do agree with most of the comments made about using software to enhance or clean your recordings, but I feel some are simply missing the big picture. Editing software should only be used if necessary and not as a standard crutch. If you are serious about your research and communicating with spirits from the other side then you must treat all recordings or E.V.P. as equals. There is a classing system for these recordings with A being the best/highest and C being the worst/lowest grade and this is a great system to work with. I have captured a lot of faint voices on my recordings and feel they are just as important as the class A’s that I have received. Like it or not this is communication with the other side even though it can be faint. Using software to enhance this just makes them easier to understand, and who knows, one of these faint voices just may answer a few of our questions if we take the time and effort to listen.

There are many recordings that I have heard that are, to put it lightly, "butchered" due to over correction. It is those recordings that have given the use of enhancement software a bad name. Most of the others choose not to use it in fear of what others may say about their evidence or credibility. I for one use my own thoughts and approaches and I am not in competition with anyone. I am merely seeking answers like everyone else. With the use of software you are able to hear what the human ear normally couldn’t and this, to me, is a breakthrough for us. Unfortunately, the use of software is often abused. For those that don’t take the time to learn how to use it correctly, you are not helping the field of paranormal research, but hurting it. For those that do choose to use the software correctly, thank you for taking the time and effort to make even more communication with the other side possible.

I have been working with editing software for several years now and I can honestly say that I have never faked or altered any of my recordings. I have only cleaned and enhanced them, as this is what the software should be used for. Let’s take a couple of E.V.P. for example here and compare a few things. First, for those of you that follow the studies of reverse speech this would be for you. I have captured several E.V.P. noting that a majority of these recordings have what Dr. Jimmy Lowery has coined as "reverse vocal impressions". Could this be subconscious *? Sure it could, do I believe it is? No, I do not. Lets take for instance one particular E.V.P. that was recorded with a reversal E.V.P. from one of my investigations. The recording was heard with a forward meaning of "Please help me" and in reverse it stated "into the light". This was to say the least, an eye opener for us and would have not realized this had occurred without the use of editing software.

After realizing what we had stumbled on, we then began to try a few experiments using this theory and placed 3 recorders in one area and conducted a question/answer session. After listening to the recordings we found that on one of the recorders the E.V.P. was in forward speech and on our other recorder the same message was recorded in reverse. This was fascinating to me, while at the same time confusing. One thing it did prove to me though was the possibility that "reverse vocal impression" does occur and is an added bonus phenomenon in E.V.P. research. Second, how many of us have heard a faint voice captured on our cassettes or digital recorders but just can’t seem to make it out? There are so many researchers that will simply toss these aside or simply delete and move on because: 1. They are too lazy to make adjustments needed or, 2. They fear what others will say about them. This is a terrible problem and no one should fear what others are going to think when it comes to research because we simply don’t know, no one does. The only concern you should have is, how are we going to find out if we don’t try everything we can? The simple tool to use for hearing those faint recorders is called amplification and this is not in any way altering the E.V.P. All amplification does is push any vocals recorded to the front. For example, when you hear a good song on the radio but you are in the other room, what do you do? You want to turn that song up don’t you? In my opinion this is similar to enhancing your E.V.P., now are you altering that song when you turn it up? No. You are just making it easier to hear.

So why does everyone fear or dislike using software? I truly cannot answer this question and it brings up more questions than answers, as you can see from above. This is why you use it as a tool and not a crutch (as stated earlier). I personally just think that editing software is getting a bad name in paranormal research for the wrong reasons. I have even come up with a name for it, "Spirit Prejudice". All spirits should be treated as equals just as we like to be, no matter how faint or brief their messages is to us. To me they are all a puzzle piece and we cannot complete the puzzle without all of the pieces. Some just choose to put together an easier puzzle then others.

In closing, if all of us work together were going to accomplish so much more than we would alone. We should all be trying not to make fun of or badmouth others for their theories and ideas, but respect all of them as if they were our own. This is not a popularity contest or a mad dash for a Pulitzer Prize here, but research, and with research there are ups and downs as well as the good and bad, but lets not make it worse than it already is. There are plenty of people out there that choose to humiliate or ridicule us for what we believe in and do. Why some people make it worse by purposefully causing conflict within the field is beyond me. Are they that insecure with their own beliefs that they have to make fun of others to get the extra step up on the paranormal ladder? I surly hope not. I also hope that we can all finally start to work together as one and perhaps solve this possibly infinite investigation into the paranormal. For as I have said, and will continue to say, it is only through sharing that we will learn and get anywhere.

*Some people believe that E.V.P.’s are actually a form of the person recording sending out telekinetic messages that get recorded. This however does not explain the change in voice from male to female (and visa versa), foretelling of events to come, direct answers to questions there is no way anyone present during the recording could know, as well as several other facts that have been recorded.

[Seekerbird]

It seems that new tools and new ways of thinking always take awhile to be accepted by the community. I think that sounding editing software has the ablility to both help and harm our search. The software must be used responsibly, accurately, and most importantly truthfully. These program make it very easy to falsify and invent evidence that isn't there. This is one reason why I don't take tv shows such as Ghost Hunters and it's ilk too seriously. Being that they are on tv, they live and die by ratings, it's all to easy in the editing process to fabricate the evidence to draw ratings. In our own investigations we can be sure of our own truthfulness, but these new programs make it very difficult to believe the work of others. This software is useful, but we must be skeptical of it's use. Like I said before, this is a very powerful tool that can be used for good or bad

[monte_9501]

I think you have to be able to offer up the original at any time, and the washed audio as well. so people can see and hear for themselves

[hanji]

monte_9501 Wrote:I think you have to be able to offer up the original at any time, and the washed audio as well. so people can see and hear for themselves

I agree 100%. Keeping the source as a original evidence could add another layer of integrity to the evidence.

Not sure how this would fly, but I think documenting the process or steps on how you ended with the finished (optimized) evidence would be good too. With this it's theoretically possible for anyone to reproduce the final piece from a clean source.. and could help prevent accusations of evidence tampering.

The difficult issue with this is simply time, since this would take extra time documenting steps, etc.

Thoughts?

hanji

[aarondominic]

Hello,
I read your comment,also have a look of the link which you have provided.Well nice article,i must say.I appreciate your thought for sharing such tips and disease solution at the community.This type of information would so helpful to the patient and their relatives.Please try to share more about different disease if possible.Thank you for sharing the information..