How they are transmitted and or recorded is something I'm going to research full bore. I've spent the last 20+ years working as a touring audio engineer and this is right up my alley. Now that I'm more or less retired from that line of work, I'll have the time to devote to it.

At this point I have a lot more questions than theories. But I think the place to start is to actually look at a/the visual representation of the wave form.

Human speech and hearing are limited to a specific range of frequencies(with slight variations). In addition, any transducer or piece of recording equipment has its own characteristics including bias, signal to noise ratios and the noise floor of the amps and other components. In digital recording you have to add the noise and characteristics of the d to a (digital to analog) and a to d converters as well as the rest. So if something is recorded that falls outside of the known performance parameters of the equipment or has characteristics not generally associated with human speech, then how was it generated or imprinted on the medium?

Like I said, a lot of questions and a lot of variables.

If anyone has other ideas, or has evp's they're willing to donate to the research, feel free to message me.

Yes, I believe you are correct also. What I was getting at is that all physical noise will show up by the large bands. Whereas what you see on the TV shows (the flat line) is nothing more than static or whatever and being interpreted as a voice.

Below is what I see on TV when people talk and they always seem to hear and isolate the EVP on the flat parts. Ideally, I guess what you want is a voice that shows up as physical (large bands) and wasn't there when you made the recording. That is why I think many people talk during EVP sessions, so they can compare voices vs. EVP's during an analysis.

On that graph, the higher the band, the louder the noise -- the flat parts are silence........

You are right, most 'EVPs' are in the flat area --- just over amplified noise given to the brains interpretation......

Digital voice recorders are made to record the human voice, at a given distance -- they are filtered to those vocal frequencies, anything higher or lower gets cut out -- making some natural noises sound odd.....

They also have amplifiers which are designed to keep the recording and playback levels as even as possible, making it difficult to judge the noises distance from the mic......

There are other things like sample rates and compression ratios in the recording device, the audio file, and the audio software that will distort the sound......

A voice would show up as fluctuating wave bands --- but so would any other noise.... Right?

Like the rustling of a nylon jacket, not noticed at the time of recording, but when played back it could be interpreted as a 'ghostly' EVP.......

Yes, I believe you are correct also. What I was getting at is that all physical noise will show up by the large bands. Whereas what you see on the TV shows (the flat line) is nothing more than static or whatever and being interpreted as a voice.

Below is what I see on TV when people talk and they always seem to hear and isolate the EVP on the flat parts. Ideally, I guess what you want is a voice that shows up as physical (large bands) and wasn't there when you made the recording. That is why I think many people talk during EVP sessions, so they can compare voices vs. EVP's during an analysis.

I disagree. In my opinion, some, not all, EVP's are the voices of the deceased. Yes, sometimes there is a logical explanation, zippers, foot scuffs, fabric rustling, etc. It is the audible voices I have heard that make me think there is more to it though. I have gotten a very audible, "Help me." on my digital audio recorder while investigating a private residence with my group, ETPRS, in Tennessee. It was not audible at the time it was recorded and it was no one in the house saying that phrase. The reason I say this is because it was a whisper and no one was whispering at the time, as we are taught not to whisper while on an investigation.

That's pretty close to the class A that my group caught a couple of months ago. Group is taught not to whisper and voice out any noise that they made but we got a very clear "What is that?" heard during the EMF sweep of the house.

In my opinion you are correct and it is easy to check. If people take their "EVP's" and load them onto an audio program they will be able to see if they are making it up in their minds or actually hearing a voice.

If it is a voice then the audio program will show that by the fluctuating wave bands. If they are flat and you still think you hear a voice then it is basically auditory pareidolia.

In my opinion, EVP is exactly what it stands for and not Ghost Voices. It's a phenomena that is interpreted to be a voice.

I disagree. In my opinion, some, not all, EVP's are the voices of the deceased. Yes, sometimes there is a logical explanation, zippers, foot scuffs, fabric rustling, etc. It is the audible voices I have heard that make me think there is more to it though. I have gotten a very audible, "Help me." on my digital audio recorder while investigating a private residence with my group, ETPRS, in Tennessee. It was not audible at the time it was recorded and it was no one in the house saying that phrase. The reason I say this is because it was a whisper and no one was whispering at the time, as we are taught not to whisper while on an investigation.

In my opinion you are correct and it is easy to check. If people take their "EVP's" and load them onto an audio program they will be able to see if they are making it up in their minds or actually hearing a voice.

If it is a voice then the audio program will show that by the fluctuating wave bands. If they are flat and you still think you hear a voice then it is basically auditory pareidolia.

In my opinion, EVP is exactly what it stands for and not Ghost Voices. It's a phenomena that is interpreted to be a voice.

A voice would show up as fluctuating wave bands --- but so would any other noise.... Right?

Like the rustling of a nylon jacket, not noticed at the time of recording, but when played back it could be interpreted as a 'ghostly' EVP.......

It is my opinion that EVP's are nothing more than auditory matrixing.........

Mundane sounds being 'filtered' by the brain to something that makes sense.......

Like being in the shower and hearing your phone ring -- the brain picks up a few random frequencies out of the 'white noise' and fills in the rest to make you 'hear' the phone.......

In my opinion you are correct and it is easy to check. If people take their "EVP's" and load them onto an audio program they will be able to see if they are making it up in their minds or actually hearing a voice.

If it is a voice then the audio program will show that by the fluctuating wave bands. If they are flat and you still think you hear a voice then it is basically auditory pareidolia.

In my opinion, EVP is exactly what it stands for and not Ghost Voices. It's a phenomena that is interpreted to be a voice.

Mundane sounds being 'filtered' by the brain to something that makes sense.......

Like being in the shower and hearing your phone ring -- the brain picks up a few random frequencies out of the 'white noise' and fills in the rest to make you 'hear' the phone.......

So a quick question I just thought of. Can a person with a hearing aid hear an EVP as it is happening?

My 80-year old mom wears two hearing aids. When she comes with me to the battlefield, she is usually the one with the digital recorder while I take pictures. She can't hear them with her aids. But, they sure love her. She gets the very best EVPs!

Carolyn

I posted something similar to what I have here under experiments but thought it was also appropriate here. This is in answer to the above highlighted statement in red. In my opinion, if the popular belief is that spirits are just humans in different form and that they possess the same life force but in different form then they may give off electronic impulses. Spirit energy impulses (rather than physical sound) may be what is getting picked up directly by the mic-less recorder and the recorder is amplifying it in the heads and imprinting it on the tape. Not being imprinted directly to the tape.

Basically, spirit electronic impulses are bypassing the mic and picked up directly by the recorder not the tape. (Just like the recorder picks up the sound from the mic and transforms it into electronic impulses) So, simply put, it could be the electronic impulses put out by the spirit that is being picked up by the recorder and transforming it into magnetic impulses in the heads, then imprinting it on the tape. Which is also why sometimes you get sounds and sometimes words, etc. Sorry if this seems redundant and not clear. Sometimes I know what I am saying in my head but doesn’t come out in print the same way. lol

For the statement in green. As I said in my post under experiments. I mentioned pretty much the same thing when I talked about what a spirit was. I believe that everything we catch is by accident. That even if there is a consious intent on the side of the spirit to communicate. I don't see anything that even suggests that either of us are getting anything deliberately.

Basically for now I guess, everything is a crap shoot until we can repeatedly glean results from a controlled experiment.

I think you, and others here, are on the right track by questioning. How can we discern what is true of the paranormal if we don't ask questions?

Questions help us zone in.

There have been experiments that have recorded evp's in bell vacuum jars, and others without microphones, and yet others in faraday cages. I think that after getting successful evp in the above mentioned conditions, we can effectively rule out evp as being a soundwave phenomenon. Soundwaves cannot traverse a vacuum, nor can they affect a recording device without a microphone.

So here is an interesting one. Sometimes, evp's are audible to the person recording at the time of the recording. Does that mean that they aren't soundwave based only part of the time, and are at others? Or does it mean that the "audible" message was merely psychically imprinted in the percipient's mind during the event in the same way that Auerbach suggests that it is done on the recorder? Or, is it an electromagnetic event altering both the microphone coil of the recorder (electret hybrid or condenser hybrid) and our brainwaves simultaneously? It is enough of a leap to suppose that spirits have the ability to know the necessary mechanics to imprint this energy on a device, but is there also a working understanding that they must possess to do the same on brainwaves? That supposes a whole lot of prior knowledge on the communicating entity's part, but it might be as simple as our own mental process that we don't fully understand yet.

my brain hurts, lol

Andy

I posted something similar to what I have here under experiments but thought it was also appropriate here. This is in answer to the above highlighted statement in red. In my opinion, if the popular belief is that spirits are just humans in different form and that they possess the same life force but in different form then they may give off electronic impulses. Spirit energy impulses (rather than physical sound) may be what is getting picked up directly by the mic-less recorder and the recorder is amplifying it in the heads and imprinting it on the tape. Not being imprinted directly to the tape.

Basically, spirit electronic impulses are bypassing the mic and picked up directly by the recorder not the tape. (Just like the recorder picks up the sound from the mic and transforms it into electronic impulses) So, simply put, it could be the electronic impulses put out by the spirit that is being picked up by the recorder and transforming it into magnetic impulses in the heads, then imprinting it on the tape. Which is also why sometimes you get sounds and sometimes words, etc. Sorry if this seems redundant and not clear. Sometimes I know what I am saying in my head but doesn’t come out in print the same way. lol

For the statement in green. As I said in my post under experiments. I mentioned pretty much the same thing when I talked about what a spirit was. I believe that everything we catch is by accident. That even if there is a consious intent on the side of the spirit to communicate. I don't see anything that even suggests that either of us are getting anything deliberately.

Basically for now I guess, everything is a crap shoot until we can repeatedly glean results from a controlled experiment.

Sometimes, evp's are audible to the person recording at the time of the recording. Does that mean that they aren't soundwave based only part of the time, and are at others? Or does it mean that the "audible" message was merely psychically imprinted in the percipient's mind during the event in the same way that Auerbach suggests that it is done on the recorder?

I think that the most likely scenario in this case is that the "voice" either spans more than one spectrum, possibly being in or near the threshold or crossover. I'm not aware of a spectrum that imprints electronic or magnetic media, especially near accoustics, but if these entities exists in a higher vibration as some suggest, then if sometimes we can catch a wide spectrum of their existance, such as visual, IR, etc. then I would suspect the same goes for their "voices".

So here is an interesting one. Sometimes, evp's are audible to the person recording at the time of the recording. Does that mean that they aren't soundwave based only part of the time, and are at others? Or does it mean that the "audible" message was merely psychically imprinted in the percipient's mind during the event in the same way that Auerbach suggests that it is done on the recorder? Or, is it an electromagnetic event altering both the microphone coil of the recorder (electret hybrid or condenser hybrid) and our brainwaves simultaneously? It is enough of a leap to suppose that spirits have the ability to know the necessary mechanics to imprint this energy on a device, but is there also a working understanding that they must possess to do the same on brainwaves? That supposes a whole lot of prior knowledge on the communicating entity's part, but it might be as simple as our own mental process that we don't fully understand yet.

my brain hurts, lol

Andy