Lossy Audio Coding and Subliminals

[G Locker]

Hi ! I'm considering to give your programs a try, but as I know a bit about audio coding I wondered whether the 'subliminal addition' to the masking tracks is not degraded by the lossy audio coding that is employed generating the mp3 tracks ?

To be more specific: mp3 and other 'lossy' audio coding schemes use psychoacoustic models to remove (or rather, not encode) audio information that is - according to the model - imperceptible by the average human ear. As I assume the 'subliminal message' is added to the masking audio track in such a way that it is indeed 'masked' by the masking audio track, using 'lossy' audio encoding (mp3, mp4, aac etc.) would close to remove all subliminal added sounds... It would make sense to use a full audio version like CD, in which the subliminal audio is kept intact - any reports that these are actually more effective ?

So this is not a question about the effectiveness of hearing subliminal audio messages, but on the technology used to get those messages to the listener in the first place. I couldn't find an answer when I searched the forum ...

[mtw220]

http://subliminal-talk.com/thread-2290.html

That link should have some info on this, otherwise Shannon can elaborate.

Hi ! I'm considering to give your programs a try, but as I know a bit about audio coding I wondered whether the 'subliminal addition' to the masking tracks is not degraded by the lossy audio coding that is employed generating the mp3 tracks ?

To be more specific: mp3 and other 'lossy' audio coding schemes use psychoacoustic models to remove (or rather, not encode) audio information that is - according to the model - imperceptible by the average human ear. As I assume the 'subliminal message' is added to the masking audio track in such a way that it is indeed 'masked' by the masking audio track, using 'lossy' audio encoding (mp3, mp4, aac etc.) would close to remove all subliminal added sounds... It would make sense to use a full audio version like CD, in which the subliminal audio is kept intact - any reports that these are actually more effective ?

So this is not a question about the effectiveness of hearing subliminal audio messages, but on the technology used to get those messages to the listener in the first place. I couldn't find an answer when I searched the forum ...

[G Locker]

http://subliminal-talk.com/thread-2290.html

That link should have some info on this, otherwise Shannon can elaborate.

Thanks, that was useful information!

I can understand how the ultrasonic recordings can work in mp3 with special encoding settings. However, I also read that the masked versions are made with a difference in volume settings of 20 to 80 (!) dB below the masking track. As the audio characteristics of the masking sound are wide band, the mp3 encoding will have to work with settings that maintain that wide band signal, leaving less capacity to encode extremely low level subliminal information... Even with special encoding settings, it will be difficult to maintain the full subliminal information. I understand from the link that the mp3 files are encoded with 320 kbps, which is indeed a high bitrate. But even in this case the subliminal information is likely to be compromised, due to the large level difference, I think...

This makes me wonder: any reports that the ultrasound versions are actually more effective than the masked versions, perhaps ?

[Shannon]

I expected that the ultrasonic would be more effective based on the volume difference alone, but even with the consideration of band width and the volume difference, people get just as good results with both formats. I've seen it reported time and again, and seen it for myself, and I don't understand it - but that's what's happening. Theoretically, ultrasonics should be significantly more effective for those reasons. But that is not borne out in actual use and results.

[G Locker]

OK, it may be strange, but actually your 'confession' that you agree one would expect the ultrasonic version would contain more of the subliminal information than the masked versions, and you don't understand why the masked versions do seem to work, makes me feel you're honest.

I'll give it a try - even with my doubts about
1) whether or not subliminal information is still included in the masked versions;
2) whether or not I'm able to hear ultrasonic sounds;
3) whether or not I'm able to hear subliminal information at all...

I do hope it will prove my doubts are unnecessary ;O)

[Shannon]

I look forward to seeing what results you get.