It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

UFO in Spain

page: 20
95
<< 17  18  19    21  22  23 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 01:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by FireMoon
To summarise, under normal circumstances the mics on your typical cam corder cannot, by their very nature and positioning produced a pronounced Doppler effect. However, because of the very nature of jet engines and how loud they are, plus, there are two jets in tandem, thus with the possibility of phase cancellation affects,, there is a probability, greater than zero, that the soundtrack is genuine.


Microphones immune to Doppler effect violate causality and are a logical impossibility. Such a microphone has to capture changes in sound pressure at the precise time scale that it is emitted. If the source is moving away, somehow this microphone magically knows ahead of time all the sound that gets accumulated in the air in between the source and microphone.

For each foot the source moves away, a millisecond of time is stored in the air between the source and microphone, like a delay line. Somehow, you claim camcorder microphones magically become able to see forward in time.

-rrr

[edit on 30-9-2009 by rickyrrr]




posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 01:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by fleabit
reply to post by zaiger
 


Zaiger, is there any particular reason you are so condenscing and flippant about these subjects? I mean, other than the fact you think yourself smarter than everyone else of course.

I came to this site to discuss things like this. Not have "lol fake!" comments tossed around like popcorn at a wedding. You are barely civil in your responses. Your posting of something completly non-related reeks of disinfo. Not that I'm saying you are some disinfo agent, but that's a typical ploy: to post something ridiculous, to try to make the subject matter seem in turn, ridiculous. Is there a point to this? This is after all, a UFO forum.

I "debunk" many things that I feel are ridiculous, or ideas that lack common sense, but I am never rude as some of you are. Just trying to understand why.



Mostly im rude because im a big Jerk, im not smarter than everyone just some people. Im not posting anything non related, i have posted pics of the CGI errors.And this is lol fake. Would anyone here be able to identify the two black dots as jets if it was not for the added in sound?




[edit on 30-9-2009 by zaiger]



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 01:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Tifozi
 


I'm from Spain and the first thing I noticed was the accent of the fishers. It's not spanish, thats for sure. And the expressions they use aren't from Spain too.



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 01:34 PM
link   
i don't post a lot and i don't want to sound crazy but i had a dream about seeing this exact video a few months ago.

as for the audio, i've been to airshows and depending on the aircraft you really don't hear it comin until it's above you and depending on it's speed, if the sound catches up.

the one reason i like this vid is because the footage seems real. my first question was, ok, why do they happen to have their camera out? obviously because all of these jets and craft are blasting past them in the sky. when the camera does look back at the captain (that's just what i'm gonna call him cause he's obviously in command of the ship and giving orders) is when the helicopter shows up and he hides the camera until it turns away which i'm assuming is what the captain is yelling. i'm not sure if the unidentified flying object is coming or going but after watching it again it seems less and less fake. if the video had continued any longer we might have been able to see the waves rock the boat.

my overall on it is still on the fence though. intense footage nonetheless and took me by surprise which almost never happens anymore. found it on theylive2021's youtube channel



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 01:56 PM
link   
The only objective argument saying this is a hoax imo is that the jet sounds cut off at 17 sec in. When i watched this last night they did seem to . Now today listening with my grado headphones they fade out gradually. Very strange as I havent changed any of my sound settings. I hope that the full rez video of this is released soon.



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 02:00 PM
link   


You,. who have zero knowledge about recording and acoustics are challenging my level knowledge and trying to quantify it against someone else's knowledge.


Yes, exactly, except that It doesn't matter who I am, what matter is that you don't know what the Doppler effect really is, and were accusing somebody else of the same.

Now here I am doing to you exactly the same you did to another member, with the only exception, that... I am right. That's the difference.

As far as my level of knowledge and who I can and cannot judge, I don't need to prove my knowledge to you. I don't care if you're Giles Martin, though you seem to have an ego about as big as his.

If you're mistaken, it doesn't matter who calls you out on it, even if they are outside your area of expertise.

-rrr



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 02:12 PM
link   
Microphones immune to Doppler effect violate causality and are a logical impossibility. Such a microphone has to capture changes in sound pressure at the precise time scale that it is emitted. If the source is moving away, somehow this microphone magically knows ahead of time all the sound that gets accumulated in the air in between the source and microphone.

For each foot the source moves away, a millisecond of time is stored in the air between the source and microphone, like a delay line. Somehow, you claim camcorder microphones magically become able to see forward in time.

-rrr


[edit on 30-9-2009 by rickyrrr]


You are complete misunderstanding the science of microphones and trying to be a smart alec. You also are displaying your complete ignorance of the complexities of sound and how it actually works in the real world of recording.


The Doppler effect works as it does for humans because we have ears on the side of our heads. Your typical camcorder has in effect, two ears on the front of its face.

The human ears can perceive and locate sound for 360 degrees in a alteral plane and nearly as much in a horizontal plane. Hence the doopler effect is percieved by huimans as we traditionally hear it.

Camcorder mics have a lateral filed of maybe even less than 180 degrees laterally and even smaller horizontally. That is while a human can hear almost a sphere of sound microphones on a camcorder cannot hear anything like that full a perception.

Ergo when the Doppler effect is recorded by a camcorders mics of a subject travelling far left to far right. The resultant sound imagery when listened to by human ears is far narrower a sound field than that you would expect to hear. That is where a human ear would hear the jets enter at 180 degrees right and move to 180s degrees left via the centre. Recorded through a camcorder mics, the jets should appear at about120 degrees right and vanish about 120 degrees left ..That is they cannot, because of the inherent characteristics of the mics used appear hard left or hard right.

However, where there are two jets there is the possibility of some strange phasing effects. it is feasible that, the presence of these phase anomalies could lead the mics to*artificially* enhancing the stereo effect and thus they appear hard right and travel to hard left. personally i doubt it, but it is feasible...

You however, with respect, obviously haven't a clue what you are talking about when it comes to how microphones work, or for that matter any understanding of the science of psycho acoustics and their effect on recordings



I have added these simplified images of how microphones actually hear to further clarify what i am talking about. In the real world, whatever the specs of camcorders might claim their performance is far more akin to the hypercardoid and shotgun mic. That is, their perception of the Doppler effect will be totally different to what human ears hear.and the recorded sound will not travel from far right to fat left.



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 02:15 PM
link   
reply to post by FireMoon
 


I think I know what the problem is: It's not that you don't know what the Doppler effect is, is that you are describing an entirely different effect altogether, and calling it Doppler.

That's the Haas effect.

-rrr



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 02:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by rickyrrr


You,. who have zero knowledge about recording and acoustics are challenging my level knowledge and trying to quantify it against someone else's knowledge.


Yes, exactly, except that It doesn't matter who I am, what matter is that you don't know what the Doppler effect really is, and were accusing somebody else of the same.

Now here I am doing to you exactly the same you did to another member, with the only exception, that... I am right. That's the difference.

As far as my level of knowledge and who I can and cannot judge, I don't need to prove my knowledge to you. I don't care if you're Giles Martin, though you seem to have an ego about as big as his.

If you're mistaken, it doesn't matter who calls you out on it, even if they are outside your area of expertise.

-rrr


No, you just don;t have a clue what you are talking about..



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 02:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by FireMoon
The net effect of that is that the perceived stereo image, on playback is a very narrow one and at times can appear to be, what is known as dual mono. However, with something as extreme in level as low flying jet engine there would be enough level to give more obvious stereo effect.


Help me out here. You're saying it's the level of the sound that is making the difference in stereo imaging in this video? Yet the sound of the jets passing remains clearly in the right channel until it completely gone. At one point it is far lower in level than the voice of the fisherman which is in mono yet the jet sound effect is still mostly in the right channel.



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 02:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by rickyrrr
reply to post by FireMoon
 


I think I know what the problem is: It's not that you don't know what the Doppler effect is, is that you are describing an entirely different effect altogether, and calling it Doppler.

That's the Haas effect.

-rrr


No I'm pointing out that people who quote the Doppler effect haven't a clue what they are talking about and how it relates to the real world of recording.. You are just struggling to claw back the ground you have lost by trying to be a smart alec about a subject you haven't any real world experience of...



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 02:20 PM
link   
reply to post by FireMoon
 


You do not need to clarify for me polar patterns, I know all that. You are describing the effects that vary the loudness and inter aural (or intermicrophone) delay aspects of perceiving a sound as coming from a given position...

I get all that.

Yes, you know what you are talking about when it comes to that... happy now?

That is not the Doppler effect.

Are you aware that the Doppler effect is used in police radar to measure the speed of cars?

Did you know that the Doppler effect is not exclusively an acoustic effect? it's not even related to the polar sensitivity of the transducer used (be it a microphone or an antenna)

And it does not depend on the plurality of transducers used. I know you're smart enough to look up Doppler radar once you get it through your head that you don't know what Doppler really is.

-rrr



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 02:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by FireMoon

Originally posted by rickyrrr
reply to post by FireMoon
 


I think I know what the problem is: It's not that you don't know what the Doppler effect is, is that you are describing an entirely different effect altogether, and calling it Doppler.

That's the Haas effect.

-rrr


No I'm pointing out that people who quote the Doppler effect haven't a clue what they are talking about and how it relates to the real world of recording.. You are just struggling to claw back the ground you have lost by trying to be a smart alec about a subject you haven't any real world experience of...


Because it does not have anything to do with "the world of recording" Anybody with a college degree in physics (even high school level physics) can talk freely and intelligently about the Doppler effect and how it relates to acoustics.

You know how I know, because I have both, a college degree with a minor in physics, and plenty of experience in sound recording, some of this experience involves custom building my own preamps, and granted, I don't have 30 years of experience recording, I have only about 15, but I have enough years to know that Doppler is something that almost never comes up in a recording studio because... surprise: the musicians don't move that fast!

But if you honestly believe that only sound engineers should be allowed to talk about the Doppler effect (even in such instances as when they are completely misinformed about what the Doppler effect is) then Got help us all.

-rrr



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 02:32 PM
link   
Has any posted this link yet? my apologies if it has been already, channel 6 TV,

www.youtube.com...

Maybe someone knows what the experts are saying.

[edit on 30-9-2009 by smurfy]



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 02:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by DelMarvel

Originally posted by FireMoon
The net effect of that is that the perceived stereo image, on playback is a very narrow one and at times can appear to be, what is known as dual mono. However, with something as extreme in level as low flying jet engine there would be enough level to give more obvious stereo effect.


Help me out here. You're saying it's the level of the sound that is making the difference in stereo imaging in this video? Yet the sound of the jets passing remains clearly in the right channel until it completely gone. At one point it is far lower in level than the voice of the fisherman which is in mono yet the jet sound effect is still mostly in the right channel.


Ok let me try to explain...

it is common practice to record guitars using two microphones. Now place one mic in front of a guitar cab listen to it through a mixing desk and you hear, pretty much, what you would expect to hear. However, add a second microphone and rather than twice the sound , because of phase problems the two mics can make it sound like there is no bass at al and no matter how loud you try to make it it always d sounds distant. Take one microphone out and, voila, it is unbelievably loud again.

in the studio we would get someone to move one of the microphones until the signal is in phase again and the weight of sound and overall volume sounds right because the microphones are in phase once more with each other.

In this case. because of the presence of 2 jets flying so close to each other using the same engines there is a slight, but real possibility, they are phase cancelling each other as the microphone on the camcorder hears it. That phase cancellation can also lead to hearing the stereo image sounding enhanced to the human ear. in this case i doubt it, i think it was probably added after.

As for the rest of the soundtrack. I do not believe it is mono but rather appears as a dual mono file when viewed in Wavelab as a wav form because of the inherent characteristic of the microphone being used. That is, under normal circumstances, the stereo separation of the microphone is so poor as to, in effect, sound almost like dual mono.

I would also guess I am one of a tiny percentage listening to the soundtrack on something as exotic as a pair of AKG 701 headphones via dedicated headphone amplifier. That is, I'm probably one of a tiny percentage who is hearing it anything like as accurately replayed as it should be, to be able to pass genuinely considered comments about it.



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 02:47 PM
link   


The Doppler effect is the change in frequency of a wave for an observer moving relative to the source of the waves. It is commonly heard when a vehicle sounding a siren approaches, passes and recedes from an observer. The received frequency is higher (compared to the emitted frequency) during the approach, it is identical at the instant of passing by, and it is lower during the recession.

For waves that propagate in a medium, such as sound waves, the velocity of the observer and of the source are relative to the medium in which the waves are transmitted. The total Doppler effect may therefore result from motion of the source, motion of the observer, or motion of the medium. Each of these effects is analyzed separately. For waves which do not require a medium, such as light or gravity in general relativity, only the relative difference in velocity between the observer and the source needs to be considered.

en.wikipedia.org...


There it is now stop it

 


Added 'ex' tags and the link to external material

[edit on 30/9/09 by masqua]



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 02:53 PM
link   
This vid is definitely interesting.

A lot of the debunking is quite out there. Why should this video be labeled a hoax when no definite proof of hoaxing has been discovered.

First, the helicopter seems real. I see it approaching in the video.

The jets didn't displace water. But I've seen several videos, and several have been shown on this thread, showing jets not displacing water at what appears to be similar altitudes.

It is being argued whether there was one or two sets of jets. I haven't seen any compelling evidence against either possibility.

The sound stuff is most compelling. I've seen good arguments for and against. This is what I'll look into the most.

If I had a video of a UFO, I'd blur my face before posting it. And just because you have a real video of a UFO--doesn't mean people are going to believe it, and it'll be all over the news and you'll be a millionaire. I think anyone can understand it would likely be the opposite.

BTW,
I'm tired of seeing credentials being thrown around (pilot, in the sound industry, etc.) I drive a car everyday, but I am not an expert on analyzing a car on video. Credentials mean nothing, and I believe it is a logical fallacy to believe something based on them.



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 02:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by smurfy
Has any posted this link yet? my apologies if it has been already, channel 6 TV,

www.youtube.com...

Maybe someone knows what the experts are saying.

[edit on 30-9-2009 by smurfy]


This is pretty confusing as the "experts" in this video are saying the helicopter is not real because it doesn't create the correct rippling on the water but they are saying the UFO looked real?? I think that confused me more but basic logic would say if one thing is fake then it's all fake. right?



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 03:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by rickyrrr
reply to post by FireMoon
 


You do not need to clarify for me polar patterns, I know all that. You are describing the effects that vary the loudness and inter aural (or intermicrophone) delay aspects of perceiving a sound as coming from a given position...

I get all that.

Yes, you know what you are talking about when it comes to that... happy now?

That is not the Doppler effect.

Are you aware that the Doppler effect is used in police radar to measure the speed of cars?

Did you know that the Doppler effect is not exclusively an acoustic effect? it's not even related to the polar sensitivity of the transducer used (be it a microphone or an antenna)

And it does not depend on the plurality of transducers used. I know you're smart enough to look up Doppler radar once you get it through your head that you don't know what Doppler really is.

-rrr


Do yourself a favour mate. Quit before you make a compelte idiot of yourself. The physics of psycho acoustics are so unbelievably convoluted as ot be almost impossible to qunitify on any real constant level. I know, i deal with them day in day out.

We in the recording world have been here time and time again with people like you. You tell us the science says that this is perfect, but the fact is, in the real world it isn't because there are so many variables that cannot be modeled and taken into account. many of the classic albums contain sound effects that were as a result of given set of circumstances on one day for one particular system. because of the billions of variables science has never been able to re create that effect quite the same as it appeared that one time.

Yes the science exsts, in theory to explain all curiosities that appear on recordings but the reality is this. it is , practically, impossible to model the exact circumstances a recording was made in. For one thing, you would need to recreate the exact temperature and humidity the original recording was made in.

Given that, i'd repsectfully suggest you take your physics degree and go shove it, till you actually have some real world experience of what i am talking about The truth is , if recording was anywhere near as predictable in it's outcome as you seem to think it is, I'd have made a million or two out of selling the formula for sounding, just like Jimmy Page.

Give me a band to record in a room i know using gear i know, i can do pretty much, the same job every time, with 98% of the outcome being that which i expect. Stick me with a cheap camcorder on boat in the middle of the Atlantic, not knowing what to expect, whislt i might be able to rpedict much of the outcome with some degree of certainty, but because the overall parameters are both new to me and so unbelievably complex, i doubt there is a computer programme in the world powerful enough to be able to predict every possible scenario and outcome.

Your problem, is typical of many scientists, you have all the facts and figures but are completely unable to conceptualise outside of the box, where your parameters don't have the formula to account for every possible outcome, so you just cry foul and claim it never happened. You find it's called the 8real world* a few more scientists should try it. if they did, they might not be so surprised when another product, scientifically designed, and tested in the lab and proved to be *perfect* is returned time and time again because, in the real world, it is useless..

[edit on 30-9-2009 by FireMoon]



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 03:12 PM
link   
reply to post by kronos11
 
That is a surprise alright, and if that is the case, Steven Spielberg should be sweating a bit if he sees this vid. Does anyone know who the "experts" are? maybe they are disinfo merchants for by...but why pick on the poor old helicopter. You have to laugh, after all the posts here, including mine!



new topics

top topics



 
95
<< 17  18  19    21  22  23 >>

log in

join