+- Subliminal Talk (https://subliminal-talk.com)
+-- Forum: Men's Journals (18+ NSFW) (https://subliminal-talk.com/Forum-Men-s-Journals-18-NSFW)
+--- Forum: Men's Journals (https://subliminal-talk.com/Forum-Men-s-Journals)
+--- Thread: Shannon's Journal Discussion Volume 3 (/Thread-Shannon-s-Journal-Discussion-Volume-3)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion Volume 3 - san_hal - 10-17-2018
@Shannon add it in faq . Wasted my loops
RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion Volume 3 - Have at ye - 10-18-2018
(10-17-2018, 08:21 PM)Mr. Anderson Wrote:(10-17-2018, 06:54 PM)Benjamin Wrote:(10-17-2018, 04:03 PM)X88B88 Wrote:(10-17-2018, 03:54 PM)Benjamin Wrote: FLAC in general is a little higher effectiveness, not sure why that would change with bluetooth speakers.
I don't know if bluetooth speakers lose any quality or frequency, but others have reported they use them and it's been fine. You can also try the speaker test on them.
I've tried the speaker test and no problem.. I was more enquiring as to whether anyone knew whether the subliminal element would be affected through Bluetooth.. don't really know enough about the exact technical details as to bit transfer / loss etc.
Well, i'm not sure, I don't know enough about that either unfortunately.
Not every company implemented support for lossless audio transfer. The only way to know it if not exactly mentioned in the product description is to ask the company about maximum bitrate and the way the audio is transferred.
From what I learned on the Internetz, the Bluetooth protocol will re-encode data that is not supported by it - this would include FLAC, unfortunately. It can do MP3 no problem, though. As to bitrate, it's a good idea to check. From Blutetooth 4.0 onward it should be able to handle at least 1mbp/s, but this might depend on the how the particular device is programmed.
When in doubt, find a pro audio store with a good nerd at the counter and ask him. They usually know their stuff.
RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion Volume 3 - Darwinn - 10-18-2018
Shannon,
I've been on USLM 2 for a couple of days. Just a couple of thoughts.
The rate of 'lucky' and somewhat petty incidents have dropped off a lot. However, I've been thinking of getting a new job for a while and a job which fits the criteria of exactly what I was looking for has just come up - it's a very niche job which would help me transition to another sector. I'll go for it without expectation of getting it (because I've noticed that when these things crop up now it's not like i'll just get them and they're destined to happen, I still have to walk through the door myself), the important thing is that this sort of job barely exists in the world so me getting an email suggesting I apply is highly improbable. The implication for me is that luck is coming forward in more complex and less petty ways.
USLM1 seemed to have an immediate impact on me. I would automatically start cleaning, recognise the myriad things I'd done well etc. USLM2 isn't having the same impact, yet I'm getting a strange sensation that it's working at a much deeper level - similar to what I was experiencing with SE 5.5g, there is something more grounded about this experience; so it's not like I feel like I'm stone walling - which is quite distinct.
Finally I'm getting flashes of what I think is 'ego death'. these last up to about 10 minutes. All my personality, desires and dreams are gone, and there's just me - an awareness in a sack of meat, it's liberating to say the least - however something creeps into that space saying 'ooh I have to hang on to this, this could make my life great', and then the state disappears.
Ah and just generally I have to use sleep phones now at night so as not to impact my partner. it's tough doing 8 hrs but I'm managing it so far.
RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion Volume 3 - RTBoss - 10-18-2018
(10-17-2018, 11:07 PM)san_hal Wrote: @Shannon add it in faq . Wasted my loops
If you're affected, and getting results, how is it wasted?
This bluetooth thing is being blown out of proportion. So it's lossy, you're just not getting the full effect of the FLAC file, then. Does that mean you're losing script input? Doubtful. Honestly, I'm one of those people who can barely tell the difference listening to FLAC through wired headphones or MP3/FLAC through bluetooth headphones. Point is, I still hear the music.
For those of us that are concerned, listen to FLAC through your phone speaker, wired speakers, or wired headphones.
RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion Volume 3 - lano1106 - 10-18-2018
(10-18-2018, 04:53 AM)RTBoss Wrote:(10-17-2018, 11:07 PM)san_hal Wrote: @Shannon add it in faq . Wasted my loops
If you're affected, and getting results, how is it wasted?
This bluetooth thing is being blown out of proportion. So it's lossy, you're just not getting the full effect of the FLAC file, then. Does that mean you're losing script input? Doubtful. Honestly, I'm one of those people who can barely tell the difference listening to FLAC through wired headphones or MP3/FLAC through bluetooth headphones. Point is, I still hear the music.
For those of us that are concerned, listen to FLAC through your phone speaker, wired speakers, or wired headphones.
Well, I don't fully understand all Shannon technology but one thing that I know is that no matter the audio equipment that I'm using, I have never heard a single glimpse of the hidden subliminal script so it is very hard for me to appreciate the audio quality of the subliminal part.
What a lossly audio codec does is to get rid of very low frequency and very high frequency components of the signal which a normal ear doesn't really pay attention when listening a normal audio content...
With subliminal ultrasonic elements, I wouldn't bet that codec keep that part intact...
IMHO, you better do what you can to stay away from audio compression....
RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion Volume 3 - RTBoss - 10-18-2018
(10-18-2018, 05:07 AM)lano1106 Wrote: With subliminal ultrasonic elements, I wouldn't bet that codec keep that part intact...
IMHO, you better do what you can to stay away from audio compression....
Guess all the results and benefits I've had from subs - as I have used quite a bit of bluetooth - is all made up, then.
All we have here, including my experience, is testimonial or opinion. No facts, just speculation - certainly no facts that point to loss of subliminal audio to the detriment of the user.
EDIT: To extrapolate, I've been using ultrasonic FLAC all week with my bluetooth speaker while on USLMax. I've used Frequensee to determine the volume used, and the ultrasonic frequency was not only present, but loud. I speculate that the ultrasonic information was transferred and received perfectly intact, and my experience (and my wife's) seem to corroborate that. I might as well just use the MP3 track, instead, though, and save the space on my phone. Seems like taking up unnecessary space with the FLAC file is the only detriment.
RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion Volume 3 - Shannon - 10-18-2018
(10-18-2018, 05:45 AM)RTBoss Wrote:(10-18-2018, 05:07 AM)lano1106 Wrote: With subliminal ultrasonic elements, I wouldn't bet that codec keep that part intact...
IMHO, you better do what you can to stay away from audio compression....
Guess all the results and benefits I've had from subs - as I have used quite a bit of bluetooth - is all made up, then.
All we have here, including my experience, is testimonial or opinion. No facts, just speculation - certainly no facts that point to loss of subliminal audio to the detriment of the user.
EDIT: To extrapolate, I've been using ultrasonic FLAC all week with my bluetooth speaker while on USLMax. I've used Frequensee to determine the volume used, and the ultrasonic frequency was not only present, but loud. I speculate that the ultrasonic information was transferred and received perfectly intact, and my experience (and my wife's) seem to corroborate that. I might as well just use the MP3 track, instead, though, and save the space on my phone. Seems like taking up unnecessary space with the FLAC file is the only detriment.
What we know is that IF the process re-encodes the audio or uses lossy compression, the subliminal data WILL be stripped out entirely, or at the very least, damaged in unverifiable ways.
So it would appear that whatever you are using is either using lossless compression, or it is degrading the subliminal but not erasing it completely. That does not mean that the next guy to try BlueTooth wireless audio transfer will not have different hardware, software, design, results.
So unless you can find evidence that what you are using is lossless compression, it makes sense not to use BlueTooth.
RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion Volume 3 - Kol - 10-18-2018
Shannon, thank you for killing my social anxiety and overcome a huge ptsd part of mine Its life changing.
RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion Volume 3 - josh84 - 10-18-2018
Shannon i been off dmsi 3.2 since mid august, but as you are currently working on frm v3 and got lots to add into dmsi 3.3 should i go back onto dmsi again until you give the 35 day notice?
RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion Volume 3 - Shannon - 10-18-2018
(10-18-2018, 06:40 AM)josh84 Wrote: Shannon i been off dmsi 3.2 since mid august, but as you are currently working on frm v3 and got lots to add into dmsi 3.3 should i go back onto dmsi again until you give the 35 day notice?
No. I'm going to finish developing FRMv3 today, and we are still within the reach of releasing in 35 days or less.
RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion Volume 3 - Shannon - 10-18-2018
(10-18-2018, 06:28 AM)Kol Wrote: Shannon, thank you for killing my social anxiety and overcome a huge ptsd part of mine Its life changing.
You're welcome, but how did I do that? FRM? DMSI? USLM? USLM2?
RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion Volume 3 - wolverine_i_am - 10-18-2018
(10-18-2018, 08:12 AM)Shannon Wrote:(10-18-2018, 06:40 AM)josh84 Wrote: Shannon i been off dmsi 3.2 since mid august, but as you are currently working on frm v3 and got lots to add into dmsi 3.3 should i go back onto dmsi again until you give the 35 day notice?
No. I'm going to finish developing FRMv3 today, and we are still within the reach of releasing in 35 days or less.
What's next after developing the FRMv3?
RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion Volume 3 - Kol - 10-18-2018
(10-18-2018, 08:13 AM)Shannon Wrote:(10-18-2018, 06:28 AM)Kol Wrote: Shannon, thank you for killing my social anxiety and overcome a huge ptsd part of mine Its life changing.
You're welcome, but how did I do that? FRM? DMSI? USLM? USLM2?
DMSI
RE: Shannon's Journal Discussion Volume 3 - Shannon - 10-18-2018
(10-18-2018, 08:21 AM)wolverine_i_am Wrote:(10-18-2018, 08:12 AM)Shannon Wrote:(10-18-2018, 06:40 AM)josh84 Wrote: Shannon i been off dmsi 3.2 since mid august, but as you are currently working on frm v3 and got lots to add into dmsi 3.3 should i go back onto dmsi again until you give the 35 day notice?
No. I'm going to finish developing FRMv3 today, and we are still within the reach of releasing in 35 days or less.
What's next after developing the FRMv3?
We will have to look at the list and decide what is best to work on next.