Having problems with message search?
welcome to a very good question and that at last someone has taken the time to check all of this, as I have done many, many years ago.
To tell you the truth I have been shocked by so many persons that blindfolded have followed Sharry Edwards without questioning the credibility of all that she socalled invented. And also buying into SA and Dan Kunkle without being able to compare his results with other software, due that he makes sure that you cannot do that by not being able to open any wavs in different softwares. I have been trying to guide this inmature sound community in the US, but if they do not take the time to look at the Biosonic Software that has all kind of tuition videos to help and they do not seem to put an hour of their time to look at some things different than what they got used to with all of Sharry´s distorsions, i actually got tired of sharing. They had plenty of opportunities, i gave the software out with 30 days free before, but not now, it ruined us, and they did not even use those 30 days to see things quite different from what they were used to before.SA has many ways of display, some where my idea taken by Dan Kunkle which I do not cate at least they are out there, but it does not help with the analysis. The Biosonic will have functions of analysis that helps the practitioner decide better not see it this way or that way. I actually would like a round display or better spiral display of the octaves, but my programmers unless i convince them of the absolute necessity of it, they will not take the time to implement it in the software.
THen I have told numerous times that the decimals are not real, if they were on a list they will repeat themselves continuous, the software can calculate to 10 decimals and we can leave there as many as we want, but that is not a reality of accuracy it is a complete joke. We have the accuracy we can get according to the resolution of our soundcards, 44khz 16 bit will gibe half a hertz error in the fundamental frequencies and up to 1 hertz in higher frequencies up in th khz range. And to solution that we need to go to 96khz and 24 bit or more resolution cards that now start to be available for the public.
Look at the 4 emails around last year with the name NEW WAYS TO LOOK AT VOICE ANAYSIS in this forum and I do talk about some new features that the biosonic has that no other software has or that we do have to consider.
I now can say that the release of BiosonicFFT is going to happen in the next month and that you will be able to open wavs with any other of your software and compare the results.... Generate a wav with a few frequencies and see how it is shown in the BiosonicFFT. I am just shocked that practitioners have not done that to know how secure and how much you can trust a software that they are using.
Then the interesting thing on the BiosonicFFT is that you have two types of readings one of the chromatic, that it is done with an algorythm unique to it for the chromatic and it is not the amplitude or volume of the frequency of FFT diagnosis, but simply like the old korgs did count the amount of times you say a specific frequency and that number is shown in a peak. And to be able to compare this information about the amount of fundamental frequencies of the voice with what the FFT gives us ,which is a different type of analysis. FFT is pointing the high peaks of the frequencies as amplitude or volume. THe chromatic way of analysis in the Biosonic is something that no other software has ever done and we need to see the value of one analysis or the other, it is the closest to old Korg analysis with much more input.
The Biotuner of Dan Kukle is a Chromatic that will give different results than the Chromatic of the Biosonic for one simple reason it picks up the frequencies from an FFT reading and it is by amplitude. I did have the chance to compare it at the beginning when by my insistance to get proper tools for research Dan KunKle left it to open wavs. As the readings with the same wav would change in the same computer each time you process it and I told it to everyone in the first emails of the Truthsound forum, he quickily went and changed the Biotuner not to open wavs anymore... Actually that was a simple issue to fix, that happened to us too at first, it was due that each time you ran the same wav it might catch the beginning in a slightly different place. You need to generate a wav with a signal or frequency ran it through the software and see that it is giving you that same signal... simple issue that only Biosoinc allows and shows truthfully its capacity. Anyway, Biotuner is done with FFT base analysis and Biosonic Chromatic is a different way of picking up the fundamentals, based on the old korg and not needing FFT algorythm. I have been able to force the SA to open wavs and I know how poorly it shows the frequency or signal that was in the wav. So I have looked into what you say really fully and I do not trust the software that is our there for this simple reason. Why are practitioners not hurting more their patients?, for another simple reason, because sound and vibration moves things inside the body. The little cilia hairs that move liquid, mucous and stuff inside our body respond to any frequency given, so it is always good and sometimes nothing happens, that is all. SO it is safe that we do not dammage a persons, but still we are far away to have this technology in its full capacity.
Then BiosonicFFT is taking into account an algorythm that best fits the random input of the voice, it values not only amplitude of a frequency that is good for signals and noises, it also reads depth and potency of a frequency which fits best for voice and all its random frequencies, as well as being able to see how a harmonic of a fundamental rises or falls. and this is most interesting. We will be able to see with a click of the mouse all the harmonics places and where they fit in the entire full FFTwave and compare harmonics of one fundamental with harmonics of other fundamentals....It is more exact than most software for voice analysis and it does many different things that we need to study to decide things in this infant technology of voice analysis.
Because everyone was obsessed that exactness was in FFT and not in Chromatic Korg devices they have never even looked at the results the Biosonic Chromatic does. Now we will have a BiosonicFFT for the public and be able to value to see the forests before the trees, with the Chromatic main octaves, notes and fundamental frequencies of the voice before we look at the individual trees as frequencies and their altitude or amplitude with the FFT. And we will have an FFT that goes to 11khz so we can see the Harmonic SIgnature of the voice, which is the most important aspect of an individual voice and has many less changes. Or changes are really significant. You can check a lot of this in the blog that is in english and spanish http://ONDAdelaFORMAdelaVOZ.blogspot.com
Jef, you have appeared at a time that I got tired of sharing more to seemingly blind practitioners, but in a synchronistic time that BiosoincFFT is coming out so that the issues if Chromatic analysis or FFT can be solved and we can pick up what we can trust or use in one type of analysis or other, seeing the same wav displayed in the different versions chromatic, colorgram with frequencies and FFTwave.
Please ask me any questions, I am ready to answer them all.
love
Marysol
Marysol Gonzalez Sterling, artista e investigadora de Luz y Sonido, http://BIORESONANCIA.blogspot.com y http://EsculturasMETAFISICAS.blogspot.com Casa Ahabah, Camino de Cueva Negra s/n, Mojacar, Almeria 04638, Apartado Postal 1406, 34-950168735 y 34-699987118
elaine.thompson@... escribió:
Hmmm,
Yes, there are some crucial differences out there, especially with the math and
the pitch of scale when it comes to delivery. Which programs are you comparing?
Let us know and perhaps I can give you some input.
Elaine Thompson
www.elaine-thompson-soundtherapy. com
>
> Jeff,
> My two yen's worth on biosonic, The lady in Spain (sorry forget her
> name) who created Biosonic was a student of Sharrys. (from what I
> understand) Her stuff seems to be pretty good and a lot based on Sharrys
> research. Starts out the same with taking vocal prints but a little
> different (same but different) then Sharrys work and expands out in
> different areas using, color, tuninh forks and other ideas. I am sure it has
> a good effect. Sharrys research seems to focus in one direction and gets
> deeper and deeper. Always something new, something better. You should
> research both and decide what is best for you and your practitioners. If you
> got the money and time, (and brain power) I would do both, use best of both
> worlds.
> Toby
>
>
>
>
> I am interested in sleuthing out the most effective software for my
> practitioners. Can anyone speak to why Biosonic may be any more effective
> than the other software out there? Is there a difference in how calculations
> are made or the method of constructing the delivery energy?Jef
>
>
>
>
>
> _____________________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _
> Explore the seven wonders of the world
> http://search.msn.com/results. aspx?q=7+ wonders+world& mkt=en-US& form=QBRE
0
--------------------- --------- --------- -------
This mail sent through http://www.ukonline.net
Send Email
