Originally posted by tZykaar
No, televisions don't necissarily give off a "hum". There is too much noise in the film to state that it isn't huming as it is. There is noise
throughout the video. There is no question it is taped with the onboard camera microphone. There is no boom mic. If there were it would have sounded
alot less distant and the reverb would not have been as perceivable. There are no "small waves between waves". I'm an audio engineer, you might be
able to slick that by most people, but generally broadcast television is pretty high quality when it comes to recordings. Now it's very obvious that
there is indeed a difference in the quality and intonations of the voice overheard and the mans voice. And you said "A TVs audio does not
reverberate just like an actual voice." That's exactly what I'm talking about. It does *not* sound like it is coming from a man in the room. It
*does* sound like it's coming from a television in the room, broadcasting who knows what. I am not going to speculate on that. But I am absolutely
positive that the sound source is not a living human in the same room as the other men displayed there. You are not likely to get much data from the
video that would allow you to reconstruct what was said from the television. There's far too much noise and quantization on the video to allow for
that. It is far easier to pick out vowel sounds than the constinants. So reconstructing the constinants might be more guess work than anything unless
you can determin exactly what everything else in the room is. The frequencies overlap.
I'm happy for you that your an audio engineer. That aside-my "waves between waves" comment was regarding a waveform annalysis. If someones voice
is recorded then run through a waveform it would appear in waves. If the voice was amplified through an object like a TV then recorded there is a
background humm and if you ran that through a waveform and compared it the first sample you would see "waves within waves". eg where the voice
drops out and the humm is present. In the first clip you would see the waveform drop to the 0 point whereas with the second clip it would remain at
the frequency of the electircal humm given off by the speakers. And while you may not be able to always pick up this humm due to other sounds it is
infact always there and always produced.
Regarding the use of a boom-while they probably didn't use a high quality boom you see in professional broadcast they most certainly did not use the
on camera mics. There are several facts that prove this. First of all there were two cameras used with edited material switching between both
cameras throughout the video and very frequently during the beheading phase. If they had used the on camera mics then-
1. there would be a change in loudness and quality of the sound as they switched between cameras- seeing as the cameras are at different locations in
respect to the sources of sound they would have individual characteristics-thats why major productions use one mice and several cameras.
2. The audio clip, when tested properly, would show the splicing and cuts between the two mics as well as the individual characteristics mentioned
above-this audio clip was taken from only one mic.
3. Anytime video is shot with an on cam mic you can hear the movements of the operator-everything from their hand sliding on the plastic or any sound
made close to the mic-none of this is heard and while during the speach part the camera might have been on a tripod both cameras are moved around
quite a bit during the beheading.
Now while they may not have had a boom stick they deffinitely had a seprate mic-possibly handheld.
You said "I am absolutely positive that the sound source is not a living human in the same room as the other men displayed there." yet you make no
referrence of how you are so sure of that- you only state that you believe it was from a TV. A base spectral analysis tells you that they are from a
human being in the same room as does a waveform. If it was a recording from a TV both waveform and a spectrogram would show that. Hence my "wave
between waves" statement.
You also state that the frequencies overlap. This is true during the beheading as their is a struggle and shouting and several sources of sound.
However, during the segment in question there is only the sound of the voice in question and seein as there is no humm from a TV set then there are no
frequencies to overlap with. There is no noise to interfere other than regular background noise heard on every recording ever made.
As far as reconstructing what was said it is not a problem-again the segment in question is quiet and clear, there are no other sounds than the voice
and as i said in my original post the frequency range of the segment in question falls in range with the rest of the voices on the tape again this is
not the case with sounds reproduced from a TV, stereo, megaphone etc. Which I might add was a point you dutifully ignored in your reply.
Also, if it was a TV why didn't we hear it at any of the other "quiet" points in the video? We didn't hear them turn it on. Ever record the
sound of a TV being turned on and run it through a waveform? It leaves a very distinct pattern-not from the pushing of a button but from the
electrical discharge of the power as it kicks on as well as a small high frequency "squeal" as power is sent to the speakers. Nothing was present
in the slience.