![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Pyat amid the solid realities
Sep. 15th, 2005 11:46 amPyat’s Rule of Paranormal Recording
As recording technology (and viewer sophistication) advances, the records made of alleged spirit events become less obvious, and more open to interpretation. Perhaps not coincidentally, this makes it much harder to disprove the veracity of spirit records.
For example, 75 years ago a sound recording of a séance might capture a clear and coherent ghostly voice. “Martha, look under the mattress for my will,” or something similar. Now, we get fuzzy “EVP” recordings containing snatches of garbled sound that have to be separated from static. They are rarely distinct words, and cannot often be put into meaningful sentences. More than one spirit voice hunter has noted with wonderment that his or her $15 dollar tape dictacorder captures spirit voices (and a lot of background hiss) in rooms where expensive sound devices record only silence…
( Let’s talk about this in the context of spirit photography since 1850… )
As recording technology (and viewer sophistication) advances, the records made of alleged spirit events become less obvious, and more open to interpretation. Perhaps not coincidentally, this makes it much harder to disprove the veracity of spirit records.
For example, 75 years ago a sound recording of a séance might capture a clear and coherent ghostly voice. “Martha, look under the mattress for my will,” or something similar. Now, we get fuzzy “EVP” recordings containing snatches of garbled sound that have to be separated from static. They are rarely distinct words, and cannot often be put into meaningful sentences. More than one spirit voice hunter has noted with wonderment that his or her $15 dollar tape dictacorder captures spirit voices (and a lot of background hiss) in rooms where expensive sound devices record only silence…
( Let’s talk about this in the context of spirit photography since 1850… )
