Post by SunKing on Sept 12, 2004 15:45:04 GMT
X wrote us:
Hello.
I have read your page in great detail.
I wasn't born in an English speaking country but the story about the "Dead and Replaced Beatle" was running along the streets for years.
Your page was the first one I come across to show the differences in pictures by using the 60IF method.
I think that I can collaborate a little in regards of the "sound" difference (also in your page).
By using Cool96, I changed the format of your .aif file to a .wav file. It was done in order to be used by another program called Spectrogram (version 11) that produces better Frequency Scroll Analysis than Cool96. Please see the picture below.
On it can be seen what it is called "the formants" of a voice, which are the distributed energy bands that characterize any particular voice. These energy bands are located in different frequencies in "Paul's go" than "Faul's go".
Not only that, as the vertical axis corresponds to the frequency, it can be seen in the imaginary square formed by 2 kHz, 4 kHz, 0.50 sec and about 0.75 sec (half point between 0.50 sec and 1.00 sec) that Paul produces Frequency Modulations on his voice (those sinusoidal waves that indicate frequency up and down) that are not present in "Faul's" voice.
Also the comparison of energy distribution between Paul and Faul are very different, having the first a more distance between the frequency of his voice components that Faul. It suggests that Faul's has a more low pitch than Paul's and by forcing it up to match Paul's record, it loses the ability to vibrato modulate his vocal cords.
Plenty of those "vibrato" modulation can be seen in "Paul's" voice but NONE in "Faul's" voice.
To me, they belong to two different individuals.
All that is referred to:
digilander.libero.it/p_truth/audio.html
Hello.
I have read your page in great detail.
I wasn't born in an English speaking country but the story about the "Dead and Replaced Beatle" was running along the streets for years.
Your page was the first one I come across to show the differences in pictures by using the 60IF method.
I think that I can collaborate a little in regards of the "sound" difference (also in your page).
By using Cool96, I changed the format of your .aif file to a .wav file. It was done in order to be used by another program called Spectrogram (version 11) that produces better Frequency Scroll Analysis than Cool96. Please see the picture below.
On it can be seen what it is called "the formants" of a voice, which are the distributed energy bands that characterize any particular voice. These energy bands are located in different frequencies in "Paul's go" than "Faul's go".
Not only that, as the vertical axis corresponds to the frequency, it can be seen in the imaginary square formed by 2 kHz, 4 kHz, 0.50 sec and about 0.75 sec (half point between 0.50 sec and 1.00 sec) that Paul produces Frequency Modulations on his voice (those sinusoidal waves that indicate frequency up and down) that are not present in "Faul's" voice.
Also the comparison of energy distribution between Paul and Faul are very different, having the first a more distance between the frequency of his voice components that Faul. It suggests that Faul's has a more low pitch than Paul's and by forcing it up to match Paul's record, it loses the ability to vibrato modulate his vocal cords.
Plenty of those "vibrato" modulation can be seen in "Paul's" voice but NONE in "Faul's" voice.
To me, they belong to two different individuals.
All that is referred to:
digilander.libero.it/p_truth/audio.html