ParaNexus is an association of paranormal researchers and paranormal investigators who conduct paranormal research and paranormal investigations involving ghosts, spirits, alien abductions, UFOs, unknown creatures, unexplained phenomena, psychic phenomena, and other mysterious events. Visitors can report a UFO sighting, hauntings, and other paranormal events via our 24 Hour Helpline. ParaNexus also offers paranormal investigator certification, paranormal certification, training, paranormal classes, and paranormal courses.

Ingrid's Blog
Issues, Thoughts and Concepts relating to EVP Research
Print
"Noise Independent Vs Noise Dependent" in EVP Recording
Share on MySpace!
Share on Digg This!
Written by Ingrid Irwin on April 18, 2010, 04:25:59 AM

As many might know, I am a not a fan of "Noise Dependent'’ recording techniques for EVP research. Methods that use ‘noise’ for EVP recording have been used for decades, with the line of thought that noise is needed for voice formation. This requires that any sort of random or chaotic noise is employed in recording sessions. The "Noise Dependent" methods raises the percentage of misidentication to a very high degree. 

The method of ‘Noise Independent’ recording techniques means NO external noise is added to a recording session. The quiet room or controlled environment recording is difficult, time consuming, and arduous, so may be a deciding factor in why people steer away from it in the field. ‘Noise Independent’ recording techniques means guarding against any external noise contamination. This requires patience, planning and endless endurance to listen to hours of nothing.  In controlled recording conditions, we do not record voices chattering away, long conversations, no great mysteries solved, no lotto numbers, or any advise from the ‘other side.’

What we do record in quiet controlled environments is rare, spasmodic, and intermittent. However on a rare occasion the hours of tedious recording and listening will yield a recorded voice that defies common logic or science. We do not record noise but we do record anomalous speech of a rare quality. This within itself speaks volumes as it means that all the ‘noise theories’ are a poor method of recording EVP. Noise is not required for these voices to form or speak, and when they do speak on those rare occasions it is NOT through acoustic sound as we know it.

EVP’s time and time again have displayed there are not of an acoustic nature meaning they do not form through the basic nature of physical sound. There is no air particle displacement and no correct articulation of human speech. These alone displays that adding acoustic noise achieves very little in researching EVP recording.

I feel it is most important to allow the evidence to speak for itself and not run with assumption based theories. I am more concerned that research examines the nature and existence of non physical communication within a physical environment. This may also be extended to the thought or theoies that ‘reality to reality’ or ‘near reality’ communication may exist, that we on occasion record this in a way we are yet to understand.

If we are to advance research then we must systematically rule out normal acoustic sounds, random noise, broadcast contamination, human speech etc.. as causes of anomalous speech in EVP recording.  This means we are not intentionally or unintentionally recording living voice, living people in the vicinity, possible whispers, stray broadcast, voice like noise or any noise based recording methods as a cause of these communications.

We must establish that these ‘voices’ do not have any known physical source, whether that be living physicl people, electronic interference or manufactured 'voice like noise.' This is where the practice of adding noise becomes a concern, as we cannot substantiate anomalous speech when it is made up of human speech components.  

Fundamentally, the ‘voices’ we record should not be present in the recording environment, and they defy existence by physical standards. When we encounter this kind of evidence we cannot help but re-consider, re-examine and evaluate the possibility that anomalous phenomena is occurring, randomly and infrequently but nevertheless, we are currently encountering something as yet we are to understand.

There are many reasons people give for the adding of noise to EVP sessions but the practice leads to many people recording ‘voice like noise’ and not actual anomalous speech. This has become a common practice and the result of recording distorted noise in a large quantity means this becomes the field’s benchmark and standards for all EVP captures.

If you record with noise than that is exactly what you get, noise ! The 'rubbish in, rubbish out' scenario.

The practice of adding background sounds is merely recording noise and interpreting voices within it. The real challenge comes when we just let the recorder work like a ‘sensing or perceiving device’ that hears a kind of energy that our physical hearing system cannot. It is at this point that we begin to do genuine research and work at trying to understand this phenomenon. 

Even though these voices are intermittent, but they are indeed voices of some description that appear on occasion aware of us yet we are clearly was NOT aware of them. If we record a quiet audio session, and we capture "something," then we have something coming out of nothing, and that is truly an amazing discovery.

 



Print
Comments

Hi Ingrid, 

I have been with investigators that use white noise, radios that scan radio channels, singing, talking, laughing and/or making noise in some way in order to capture EVP's.  I have gotten some of this equipment myself and have used the methods they suggest in order to experiment, because its in my nature to try everything. It really is amazing at what happens at times but my questions are always...is this coincidence, PK, or a human being in the room?  

Your last statement in this blog has helped me determine how I will continue to do EVP sessions when investigating with my own team. "If we record a quiet audio session, and we capture "something", then we have something coming out of nothing, and that is truly and amazing discovery."  

Thank you! 

Sherry



by Sherry McDonald on April 25, 2010, 03:16:15 PM

Hi Sherry,

I too, over many years, have tried just about every recording method and technique out there in order to 'try it and evaluate it' myself instead of going on 'hear say.' It's great you have done the same and tried all methods possible to also evaluate and form a conclusion based on experience.

I tend to think of this as 'Knowledge in Action' as we evaluate everything through experience no matter the authority.

Thank You for taking the time to read my Blog and for your positive words and approach, it is appreciated.

Ingrid.    



by Ingrid Irwin on April 25, 2010, 07:03:44 PM

Hi Ingrid,

I very much enjoyed this blog posting. I have been experimenting with EVP for a number of years, and reading about the different methods people have devised to capture EVP evidence. In my opinion, because we actually know so little about how a true EVP occurs or is produced, it is very difficult to detremine the best way to capture them.

But I have to agree with you that noise dependent style of gathering data is going to be less desirable then straight up recording in silence. Garbling prerecorded conversations, and then playing it back while recording seems to me to be one of the better ways to produce false positives.

But white noise, pure static, used to help capture true EVP data samples would seem to be useful. Especially in a lab, or control environment. Impractical and nearly impossible in the field thou. For field work, you are always going to have some background noise, some chatted somewhere. Cars on the street, people walking and talking, whatever. In the field, you must devolope the ability to source your recordings. Like so many things, the ideal condisions and the real world ones are far different.

Anyways, enjoyed the post, hope you'll write some more.

Chuck

 



by on August 04, 2010, 10:28:16 AM

Hi Chuck,

Thanks for your comments and viewpoints, always enjoy hearing all perspectives on the subject as I feel there are "There are many rays that lead to one sun."

There is plenty of speculation, but to date we certainly don't know how true EVP's form so we can only be vigilant, keep employing tight controls and be as discerning as possible. 

Ingrid

 

 



by Ingrid Irwin on August 04, 2010, 06:01:56 PM
Menu
Blog Directory
Ingrid's Blog Home
FAQs / Help
RSS Feed/Subscribe
Blog Description
Issues, Thoughts and Concepts relating to EVP Research
About Author
Ingrid Irwin (View Profile)
Last 10 Articles
"Noise Independent Vs Noise Dependent" in EVP Recording
Keyword Search
2010 21 grams aflockalypse aliens allan pease art bell astrology atocha audio belief benjamin radford bhangarh bigfoot black magic body language book bryan sykes call callblast card test catamount cattle mutilation causation cell block cern certification chupacabra cold spots communication control convention correlation cougar courses cover up cryptid cryptozoology data deer devil digital recorder disclosure do no harm documentation doug macdougall dr. jeff meldrum e4 method emf endangered energy esp evil evp exorcism expedition experiment experts extraterrestrial fact farnam manor flir florida folklore fox sisters full moon g.r.i.p. g.r.i.p. paranormal investigation gaurav tiwari ghost research & investigators of paranormal ghosts ghosts in india ghosts of india goat grip grip grip team grounded haunting heaven hell hit hunt hypnosis hypothesis ideomotor effect imprint india indian paranormal society infra red instrument interview inverse square law investigation investigator j.b. rhine jb rhine john sabol kenneth batchelor keystone state park kii kinesics knowledge large hadron collider law of thermodynamics lens flare library light streak lights out loch ness monster logic lork kelvin loyd auerbach luisa rhine lunacy magnetometer mansfield reformatory medium mel-8704 melba ketchum metaphysics microcassette mirroring miss mountain lion mtv girls night out myth nasa neutrino news nonverbal communication obe objective ohio paranormal convention ouija panther paranexus paranormal paranormal india paranormal investigation paranormal investigator paranormal questions paranormal research paranormal research in india parapsychology pareidolia patrick burns paul eckman perception personal growth philip photography pk proof pseudoscience psi psychic publish puma pygmy raynham hall real time reinvent anomalous research repeatability research researcher residual responsible rhine resarch center rng run russell crowe sasquatch science scientfic scientific scott temperman seance sensitive sheep sherlock holmes skeptic skeptical inquirer soul weight spirits spiritual science research foundation spiritualism spiritualist spiritualist movement spirituality spr statistics stephen hawking subjective survival target team management technology telekinesis tidal forces training treasure tv shows ufo ufology validation video vigil werewolf white noise william mumler william thomson woodknock yeren zener zoom h2
Archive
2010
April"Noise Independent Vs Noise Dependent" in EVP Recording
5 Most Commented Articles
"Noise Independent Vs Noise Dependent" in EVP Recording
Recently Commented Articles
"Noise Independent Vs Noise Dependent" in EVP Recording
Statistics
Blog Created: Apr 7, 2010
Articles: 1
Comments: 4
Blog Views: 2887