Final Ultrasonic VS Masked

[Shannon]

I know shannon thats why I posted it, just wanted to clear it once and for all. I am sure u already use all the techniques he mentioned in the first articel also in your ultrasonic tracks.

What interests me is if it is true that a 100db loud ultrasonic track has a ten billion times stronger brain signal than the masked one it´s hard to believe for me.

I don't use backmasking (reversed speech),but aside from that I actually got the impression that that company might have gotten their ideas for what to put in and use from us...

First of all, the ultrasonic track is not 100 dB. It is as loud as you make it, but decibels are usually measured in negative numbers, representing the difference from maximum amplitude. A positive number indicates that you are over-voluming the audio, and the peaks of the amplitude are being clipped. Do that and you start losing audio information. Ours are normalized to an average of about -13 dB peak amplitude in most cases, for instance.

The terminology on the "ten billion times stronger brain signal" is very confusing and misleading. It sounds to me like what they are actually saying is that your neurons fire 10 billion times stronger. But anything that uses "billions" and isn't talking about money or astronomy, makes me strongly suspicious. I have to say I don't believe they know what they're talking about (dB stuff), coupled with what seems like a major exaggeration (billions of times stronger).

Stupid question... is the MP3 compression true? Does that incur some sort of degradation?

MP3 compression is a big gotcha in the field of subliminals. Most people are only familiar with it's use at default settings, which would be absolutely destructive to subliminal audio in both ultrasonic and masked formats because the encoding algorithm used at default settings aims to strip out "useless" information; that is, stuff you can't hear consciously. Very faint signal, and very high pitched signal. It is in these very areas that subliminal information is encoded. But if you know how to tune an MP3 encoder properly, you can achieve good compression without removing the subliminal audio. I would estimate that the settings I use only strip out about 5% of the subliminal data, leaving it about 95% intact - which is far and away plenty enough to get great results from. So claims that mp3 encoding will damage subliminals are correct, which is why we say to never re-encode them. But the first encoding, done right, is just fine.

Both masked and ultrasonc encoding work for subliminals. The question is, was it built properly, and was it scripted properly? It doesn't matter what format you use if you didn't script it right, because a bad script will fail to get results just as well as a bad build.