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.