Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Analysis of Hum Simulation Audio Files

Expand Messages
  • Chip Johnson
    Hello to all- I have recently added a Word document to the Hum Simulation files folder in the Files area of the Hum Forum. The chief goal of this project was
    Message 1 of 7 , Dec 1, 2008
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      Hello to all-

      I have recently added a Word document to the Hum Simulation files
      folder in the Files area of the Hum Forum. The chief goal of this
      project was to identify and assign pitches for the various Hum
      simulations for purposes of comparison. While performing this task, I
      also noted other obvious characteristics when present and included
      sound wave files of each audio file.

      I invite all critical comments and questions that you may have.

      Thanks,

      Chip
      WI/MN USA
    • Tom Becker
      ... Study simulations, Chip? I question what useful data is in an uncontrolled simulation. I am aware of three recordings of Hum-like candidates: Moir in
      Message 2 of 7 , Dec 1, 2008
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        > ... Hum Simulation files...

        Study simulations, Chip? I question what useful data is in an
        uncontrolled simulation.

        I am aware of three recordings of Hum-like candidates: Moir in Auckland,
        Matt (Surrey) and mine (Cape Coral). These are the only recordings of
        pertinent physical phenomena, I believe, and are not contrivances
        (although I doubt that Moir's recording is more than vehicular traffic
        noises - and he will not describe his methods and seems disinclined to
        be helpful. See
        http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/humforum/message/10365 ). The
        recordings are compiled as stereo comparisons here:
        http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/humforum/message/10362 .

        I do not claim that mine is a recording of The Hum, but it is a
        recording of ground vibration (my term is "aggregate rumble"), greatly
        amplified (70dB, as I recall, from a piezo detector). It is close to
        what I hear but not identical.


        Tom
      • zaday
        Hi Tom, I disagree with you on the Moir Recording. This is what my wife and I hear while in the country (Inside the Soundproof House, where one can t hear the
        Message 3 of 7 , Dec 1, 2008
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          Hi Tom,

          I disagree with you on the Moir Recording. This is what my wife and I
          hear while in the country (Inside the Soundproof House, where one can't
          hear the high winds blowing outside, and hear it outside as well). If we
          wish to simplify this as to being "merely" traffic, it's odd that
          younger people I ask about it (while accompanying them) are unable to
          hear it.

          Also, in geographically dissimilar locations (by more than 60 miles in
          one direction, and 10 or so miles in two other directions), the sound is
          exactly alike. One would expect with such a relatively diverse
          geographical range, that alterations in the presentation of the sound
          should be expected.

          Anyway, my thoughts.

          Be well.


          --- In humforum@yahoogroups.com, Tom Becker <gtbecker@...> wrote:
          >
          > > ... Hum Simulation files...
          >
          > Study simulations, Chip? I question what useful data is in an
          > uncontrolled simulation.
          >
          > I am aware of three recordings of Hum-like candidates: Moir in
          Auckland,
          > Matt (Surrey) and mine (Cape Coral). These are the only recordings of
          > pertinent physical phenomena, I believe, and are not contrivances
          > (although I doubt that Moir's recording is more than vehicular traffic
          > noises - and he will not describe his methods and seems disinclined to
          > be helpful.
        • Tom Becker
          ... Of course, and others agree with you and, thus, his MP3 is the defacto standard model, apparently. I can t tell you that it doesn t sound like yours; you
          Message 4 of 7 , Dec 1, 2008
          View Source
          • 0 Attachment
            > ... on the Moir Recording.

            Of course, and others agree with you and, thus, his MP3 is the defacto
            standard model, apparently. I can't tell you that it doesn't sound like
            yours; you can be the only judge of that. I just don't believe it is
            The Hum; and Moir himself discounts his results.

            From TJMoir's web site (http://www.massey.ac.nz/~tjmoir/hum.html), this
            is the defacto Moir "recording" :
            http://www.massey.ac.nz/~tjmoir/realhum.wav of 15Nov(2006?) at
            Glenfield/Auckland. Also from that site is a longer recording said to
            be from the same location: http://www.massey.ac.nz/~tjmoir/meur.mp3 .
            They are quite different. To choose one sound and propose it is The
            Hum, and not the other, seems arbitrary, I think, lacking an explanation
            of the methods. There exist no field notes of the events, no photos, no
            prepared paper, and TJMoir isn't talking. This is poor quality data.


            Tom
          • zaday
            Hi Tom, The lovely thing about life is its diversity. If you ve read in a previous post of mine, please find and read Dr. Oliver Sacks works, such as the book
            Message 5 of 7 , Dec 1, 2008
            View Source
            • 0 Attachment
              Hi Tom,

              The lovely thing about life is its diversity. If you've read in a
              previous post of mine, please find and read Dr. Oliver Sacks works, such
              as the book on migraines. He has also written extensively about other
              Neurological Phenomena, such as people that smell colors.

              I have been a long time sufferer of Visual Migraines, quite an unusual
              presentation as they usually occur in the Occipital Lobe of the Brain,
              so the symptoms can vary. Mine was a presentation of scotoma followed by
              Scintillation and a classic Fortification Structures. Other see their
              vision broken up into a series of Mosiac Tiles, others suffer a
              Lilliputian Effect.

              In your effort to comprehend the HUM, you must remember that this
              phenomenon, more so that most other aspects of life experienced by
              scientist, may be the product of subjective interpretation of the event.
              People are not Lab Instruments, and as previously stated concerning the
              Migraine Variants, anything that results in an abnormal stimulation of a
              neurological process may indeed be experienced by the percipient in a
              very subjective way. Thus to believe that any specific rendition of the
              HUM, such as those supplied in the form of Simulation Files, by others
              on this forum, should adhere to a specific profile, is indeed folly, as
              it attempts to remove the Human Element. I would not rule out any of the
              HUM Simulations provided by Forum Members, and especially enjoyed
              reading about the possibility that the perception of the HUM is altered
              by the Heart Beat or Breathing. This may tell is more about the HUM
              than electronic instruments may ever be able to. (Just because the
              perception of the HUM may be altered by physiological factors does not
              mean that the HUM has a physiological cause).

              As with the HUM, we need to listen to the Hearers to understand what
              influences their perception, it will likely vary from person to person.
              One should not expect otherwise.

              Deep Regards.


              --- In humforum@yahoogroups.com, Tom Becker <gtbecker@...> wrote:
              >
              > > ... on the Moir Recording.
              >
              > Of course, and others agree with you and, thus, his MP3 is the defacto
              > standard model, apparently. I can't tell you that it doesn't sound
              like
              > yours; you can be the only judge of that. I just don't believe it is
              > The Hum; and Moir himself discounts his results.
              >
              > From TJMoir's web site (http://www.massey.ac.nz/~tjmoir/hum.html),
              this
              > is the defacto Moir "recording" :
              > http://www.massey.ac.nz/~tjmoir/realhum.wav of 15Nov(2006?) at
              > Glenfield/Auckland. Also from that site is a longer recording said to
              > be from the same location: http://www.massey.ac.nz/~tjmoir/meur.mp3 .
              > They are quite different. To choose one sound and propose it is The
              > Hum, and not the other, seems arbitrary, I think, lacking an
              explanation
              > of the methods. There exist no field notes of the events, no photos,
              no
              > prepared paper, and TJMoir isn't talking. This is poor quality data.
              >
              >
              > Tom
              >
            • Chip Johnson
              Is there any useful data in the Hum simulation files? I think there is (though I admit, I should have stopped at the assignment of pitch--the rest of the
              Message 6 of 7 , Dec 2, 2008
              View Source
              • 0 Attachment
                Is there any useful data in the Hum simulation files?  I think there is (though I admit, I should have stopped at the assignment of pitch--the rest of the information with sound wave files is rather irrelevant to anyone but the creators, so I have deleted that information). I wanted to perform a thorough analysis of the simulation files to show the similarities and differences between the files, especially with respect to pitch.  With the large amount of variability, one might ask if we are all hearing the same thing; it appears that we are not. The assumption is that the creators successfully simulated a sound that is true to their personal experience with the Hum. 

                The question may be raised, why would anyone want to try to recreate what they hear. For me, I wanted validation that others hear what I do.  Perhaps another reason would be to allow non-hearers a chance to hear what Hearers hear (though I have not wanted to draw any attention to the Hum with my friends who are hosting me for the winter).   From this point, two questions may be asked: 1) If two or more people listen to the Hum in the same room and their perceptions differ in pitch, one might conclude that something about their personal hearing processes is different (anatomical, physiological, etc), or 2) If people are accurately simulating what they hear, the fact that so many of the sounds differ in pitch may indicate that there are different sources of the Hum.

                I am not trying to find out anything about a possible source of the Hum by studying the simulation files and for me, the audio files that I have listened to that claim to have captured a recording of the Hum do not sound like that Hum that I perceive.  From my own attempts at recording the Hum and reading the reports from the archives of professionals that have attempted and failed to record it, I do not believe that it is possible to record it--I have serious doubts that it is an acoustical phenomenon.

                Chip
                WI/MN USA



                From: Tom Becker <gtbecker@...>
                To: humforum@yahoogroups.com
                Sent: Monday, December 1, 2008 11:02:21 AM
                Subject: Re: HUM_FORUM: Analysis of Hum Simulation Audio Files

                > ... Hum Simulation files...

                Study simulations, Chip? I question what useful data is in an
                uncontrolled simulation.

                I am aware of three recordings of Hum-like candidates: Moir in Auckland,
                Matt (Surrey) and mine (Cape Coral). These are the only recordings of
                pertinent physical phenomena, I believe, and are not contrivances
                (although I doubt that Moir's recording is more than vehicular traffic
                noises - and he will not describe his methods and seems disinclined to
                be helpful. See
                http://tech. groups.yahoo. com/group/ humforum/ message/10365 ). The
                recordings are compiled as stereo comparisons here:
                http://tech. groups.yahoo. com/group/ humforum/ message/10362 .

                I do not claim that mine is a recording of The Hum, but it is a
                recording of ground vibration (my term is "aggregate rumble"), greatly
                amplified (70dB, as I recall, from a piezo detector). It is close to
                what I hear but not identical.

                Tom
              • cooperman_98
                100% in agreement with that Chip. Cooperman. ... is (though I admit, I should have stopped at the assignment of pitch--the rest of the information with sound
                Message 7 of 7 , Dec 3, 2008
                View Source
                • 0 Attachment
                  100% in agreement with that Chip.

                  Cooperman.


                  -------------------------------------------------------------------------

                  --- In humforum@yahoogroups.com, Chip Johnson <chip@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > Is there any useful data in the Hum simulation files? I think there
                  is (though I admit, I should have stopped at the assignment of
                  pitch--the rest of the information with sound wave files is rather
                  irrelevant to anyone but the creators, so I have deleted that
                  information). I wanted to perform a thorough analysis of the
                  simulation files to show the similarities and differences between the
                  files, especially with respect to pitch. With the large amount of
                  variability, one might ask if we are all hearing the same thing; it
                  appears that we are not. The assumption is that the creators
                  successfully simulated a sound that is true to their personal
                  experience with the Hum.
                  >
                  > The question may be raised, why would anyone want to try to recreate
                  what they hear. For me, I wanted validation that others hear what I
                  do. Perhaps another reason would be to allow non-hearers a chance to
                  hear what Hearers hear (though I have not wanted to draw any attention
                  to the Hum with my friends who are hosting me for the winter). From
                  this point, two questions may be asked: 1) If two or more people
                  listen to the Hum in the same room and their perceptions differ in
                  pitch, one might conclude that something about their personal hearing
                  processes is different (anatomical, physiological, etc), or 2) If
                  people are accurately simulating what they hear, the fact that so many
                  of the sounds differ in pitch may indicate that there are different
                  sources of the Hum.
                  >
                  > I am not trying to find out anything about a possible source of the
                  Hum by studying the simulation files and for me, the audio files that
                  I have listened to that claim to have captured a recording of the Hum
                  do not sound like that Hum that I perceive. From my own attempts at
                  recording the Hum and reading the reports from the archives of
                  professionals that have attempted and failed to record it, I do not
                  believe that it is possible to record it--I have serious doubts that
                  it is an acoustical phenomenon.
                  >
                  > Chip
                  > WI/MN USA
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.