-Jef,
I resend this too to the Biosonic forum.... But I address another of your
questions, about sound delivery. I have created many ways of delivering sound
to the person, also have done Phi Spirals of many nutrients and my opinion is
that using only -4 octave puts the person to sleep and the brain gets used to it
and does not listen or react any more. We need to get them involved in what they
are listening, and it is best to use the octave that is in their voice, it
should not get them specially nervous, octaves above their main octave will be a
little too much.
Also, it is completely inadequate to use other tools to measure the results,
pulseoximeters etc.... if you look at the person you know if they are getting
relaxed and if you feel the cranial pulse it will tell you exactly if it is
setting right for them. Also, if we diagnose with the voice, why not see the
results with the voice. I have used EEG, EKG and many other tools to actually
trust more the information from the voice. With most soundcards we can record
the voice at the same time we deliver a frequency via headphones, and record
again after a few minutes and after a full session. The voice becomes a little
better maybe, but almost never the exact same frequency that you deliver rises
in the voice. I believe that it takes about 20 minutes or so to settle the voice
into some change, or temporary incoherence still. I have discovered that the
voice gets disorganized and more incoherent when it has been influenced by sound
itself, so I have valued the amount of incoherencies and also temporary
incoherence is normally what you get when you have given sound therapy. This
seems to be new for most practitioners, even if it is not new for these forums,
I have said it several times during the years. The values of incoherences are
only in the pro manual for my internet students.
Many subjects have been revised in my research and discarded. But I have been
preaching in a lonely island so far, where most sound practitioner are,,, the
US. I have no problems in all other countries in the world.
Ok, here following is the other answer I sent to the truthsound forum.
love,
Marysol

--------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Marysol Gonzalez Sterling <bioresonancia@...>
Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2008 10:20:20 +0200
Subject: Re: [TRUTHsound] Re: [biosonic] Software Capabilities
To: TRUTHsound@yahoogroups.com

Hello Jef,
try the Biosonic for yourself, for someone like you it will be easy
with all the video tutorials, even though I have realized that unless
one studies with me you do not take advantages of all the programmed
diagnostic functions it can do. But the main difference that should be
valued is that I go 50% with the programmers and I do not enforce them
what I want, I have to demonstrate it to them so that they put any
effort in programming. And I can tell you there are many, many
functions that I would like to see that have not been programmed,
because they did not consider it important.
It is the only software that gives you with at a of click of a mouse a
diagnosis to help you decide, as well as looking at the flexibility of
the voice as to how often it says one frequency in a note and
immediately after its inverse. Gives you values of coherence and that
study is uniquely mine.
Also you have interpretation texts that you can change if you wish, as
well as the calibration tables can be changed by the practitioner.
The programmers are really honest persons and they will not do
anything not truthful or do any trick, because at the long run that
only brings discredit. I take a long time to demonstrate things to
them. If more persons would be involved with me with these
programmers, we will all for sure benefit. They are two, Eduard and
Roger, one a voice recognition specialist and electronics engineer and
another an engineer well versed in FFT.
Look at my old emails on NEW WAYS TO LOOK AT VOICE ANALYSIS.
Till soon, love
Marysol


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