Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
lone wolf2

what is the history of evp's

20 posts in this topic

Im wondering when the first evp's were recorded and on what kind of equipment

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems Friedrich Jurgenson was the first to do this kind of thing. But his work inspired Dr. Konstantine Raudive, who popularized the idea a bit more by writing his own book, after reading Jurgenson's. Raudive read Jurgenson's book 'Voices From Space' in 1964, so I'd say it's safe to assume that Jurgenson started the whole EVP/ITC ball rolling in the early '60's.

A bit of history:

http://itcvoices.org/konstantin-raudive-and-his-itc-evp-breakthrough/

I found Raudive being a psychologist himself, Training under Jung at one point, fascinating in itself, for all who believe EVP's are only psychological creations by the listener.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks that gives me a starting point for research

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One interesting. Thing i found. Is that in the early 1960's the development of the rf condenser stile microphone was pattened and used widely do to its clarity and small size. And is still used in 90% of electronics today

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great info on the history of Evps.thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Other interesting tidbits, Raudive's experiments were re-produced under proper scientific control settings, and guess what, they didn't have anything close to the results Raudive achieved in an improperly controled setting.... :whistle:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Were these scientific control setting experiments published for all to see and compare for ourselves?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Were these scientific control setting experiments published for all to see and compare for ourselves?

Thank you! I was going to ask the same thing :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Raudive and his research:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Konstantin_Raudive

Raudive started researching such alleged voices on his own and spent much of the last ten years of his life exploring EVP. With the help of various electronics experts he recorded over 100,000 audiotapes, most of which were made under what he described as "strict laboratory conditions." He collaborated at times with Bender. Over 400 people were involved in his research, and all apparently heard the voices. This culminated in the 1968 publication of Unhörbares wird hörbar (“What is inaudible becomes audible”) [2](published in English in 1971 as Breakthrough).

The only info I could find on (quote from CakeOrDeath) "Raudive's experiments were re-produced under proper scientific control settings":

http://skepdic.com/raudive.html

In 1997, psychologist Imants Barušs conducted a series of experiments attempting to replicate Raudive's work. His results were published in 2001 in the Journal of Scientific Exploration. He did over 80 recordings of radio static. He, too, came up with a few snippets that either were sounds from a radio station or other noises that might be interpreted as intelligible sounds, but "none of the phenomena found...was clearly anomalous, let alone attributable to discarnate beings."* In short, the only significant attempt to replicate Raudive's work failed to replicate it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder how many fields of science would accept the replication of an experiment at such a low number. 100,000 is a far cry from a mere 80.

And why is one psychologist's "strict laboratory conditions" not acceptable, yet another's is?

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a good take on the topic of EVPs:

http://www.skepdic.com/evp.html

I like that they talked to an actual sound engineer:

"it is safe to say that unless the EVP believer is highly bankrolled, I use much higher standard recording equipment, built to much higher tolerances. That being said, I've never heard from the dead, and I have been listening to tape and hard disk recordings for years. It may be the low quality of their equipment that is cause for mistaken ghosts, but it sure isn't lack of willed ignorance!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a good take on the topic of EVPs:

http://www.skepdic.com/evp.html

I like that they talked to an actual sound engineer:

"it is safe to say that unless the EVP believer is highly bankrolled, I use much higher standard recording equipment, built to much higher tolerances. That being said, I've never heard from the dead, and I have been listening to tape and hard disk recordings for years. It may be the low quality of their equipment that is cause for mistaken ghosts, but it sure isn't lack of willed ignorance!"

The writer of that article gives a few shoddy rationalizations for EVP's (baby monitor cross talk/hoaxing) and one decent one (pareidolia), and then has the balls to call anyone who has a different take on it other than his guesses 'willfully ignorant'. At what point did his hypotheses turn to conclusions?

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How did this turn into a debate on whether there real or not

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How did this turn into a debate on whether there real or not

.

you're on an unexplained mysteries website dude, EVERY question you ask ultimately boils down to 'is it real or not?'

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

but in answer to your post, i've been a musician all my life, and during the late 70's/early 80's, we were using old sh!t like condenser mike's to record ourselves, and we picked up a lot of stuff that just wasn't there.

EVP STILL freaks me out to be honest, and there's loads of websites that have them on tape if you look for them, but it's not hollywood, and most of it is pretty frightening sh!t.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

but in answer to your post, i've been a musician all my life, and during the late 70's/early 80's, we were using old sh!t like condenser mike's to record ourselves, and we picked up a lot of stuff that just wasn't there.

EVP STILL freaks me out to be honest, and there's loads of websites that have them on tape if you look for them, but it's not hollywood, and most of it is pretty frightening sh!t.....

Edited by shrooma

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The writer of that article gives a few shoddy rationalizations for EVP's (baby monitor cross talk/hoaxing) and one decent one (pareidolia), and then has the balls to call anyone who has a different take on it other than his guesses 'willfully ignorant'. At what point did his hypotheses turn to conclusions?

Actually that was the sound engineer, not the author of the entry.

Frankly, I'll listen to the sound engineers on this. Ask yourself this, why is it that it's always the ghost hunters with their handheld recorders always catching EVPs and not the sound engineers with their boom mics and hard core recording gear?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ask yourself this, why is it that it's always the ghost hunters with their handheld recorders always catching EVPs and not the sound engineers with their boom mics and hard core recording gear?

You mean the sound engineer. One person. You've created an imaginary horde of faceless engineers vs. horde of armchair enthusiasts, out of one man's opinion and/or experience on the subject, because he hasn't heard anything for himself.

But imagine that this one man's opinion is the most based in fact, and what that horde of ghost hunters are hearing is just coming from their mind. That doesn't necessarily make it any less real than if it was an actual voice out loud. Who is to say a voice translated in the mind from some random stimulus is any different than that seemingly random inner voice you get in your head that didn't come from you consciously. Was it a ghost? A demon? An angel? Who knows; those are just titles. All you know is that it came from your mind. It's up to you to decide whether you believe that makes it not real or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You mean the sound engineer. One person. You've created an imaginary horde of faceless engineers vs. horde of armchair enthusiasts, out of one man's opinion and/or experience on the subject, because he hasn't heard anything for himself.

But imagine that this one man's opinion is the most based in fact, and what that horde of ghost hunters are hearing is just coming from their mind. That doesn't necessarily make it any less real than if it was an actual voice out loud. Who is to say a voice translated in the mind from some random stimulus is any different than that seemingly random inner voice you get in your head that didn't come from you consciously. Was it a ghost? A demon? An angel? Who knows; those are just titles. All you know is that it came from your mind. It's up to you to decide whether you believe that makes it not real or not.

So moving the goal posts now? Got it.

No evidence of EVPs being anything more than random noise, but we're still going to build a case that post hoc creations of hardcore believers actually mean something?

Reminds me a lot of the Bigfoot hunters who, when faced with zero real evidence, fall back on him being a mystical beast with the ability to shape shift, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

So moving the goal posts now? Got it.

No evidence of EVPs being anything more than random noise, but we're still going to build a case that post hoc creations of hardcore believers actually mean something?

And for many, no evidence for it. The unknown is just that.

I don't want to sway anyone into my opinion, which is no more than a what if, only caused after things I've heard myself, just below. It is when I see some attempt to teach others what it isn't, because they feel some lack of evidence is a positive affirmation of their stance.

[media=]

[/media]

Could those have been misunderstood? random noise? The first one sure could have been. The second is much harder to simply write off as random ambient noise, though. So then that one could be some kind of transmission from some kind of words spoken from a device like a radio or phone.. if someone on the radio or phone happened to be whispering. Okay, that could be possible, though not totally normal. Then somewhere there must be a mass of people whispering phrases on their phones/radios/baby monitors/etc, as most of what people call EVP's are whispers. But then there's always the possibility that I hoaxed this. See, sometimes none of the explanations fully fit in situations. Those are the unexplained, which some try to discount because other things can be likely explained with often mundane things.

But I'll stop here, as I'm not wanting to build any cases, and you don't want to hear any. Believe, or disbelieve what you like. I'm not going to argue any more. It gets old around here, every thread started for a different reason, becoming an us vs. them.

I'm going to walk away from my mind comment being passed off as an attempt to be used as some mystical explanation, to win some kind of debate, as it's a subject I hold dear. It is a topic in itself, not fit for here, I guess.

Edited by _Only

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.