Add to Technorati Favourites
Add to
Dec 1, 2009

Spooky action at a distance

Posted by The Advanced Audiophile

Tonight, I did the impossible. An experiment that is very possibly a premiere global advancement in the science of Beltism, and you're reading about it first, right here on the Advanced Audiophile Press blog! What it means to the science of Beltism, is that with this technique, it is now possible to demonstrate the effects of Beltism (or anything else who's mechanism works by way of listener perception) at a distance. A great distance, across the world, if desired - and in a matter of moments. Anyone can do this, after reaching the end of this article. The problem has always been that talking about the science of Beltism, to those who have no idea what its really about or whether there is really anything to it, as Tracy Chapman might say, sounds like a whisper. Unless you have experimented with Beltism yourself and acheived success in hearing its effect, it may be extremely difficult to relate to it or understand how any of its theories could possibly be valid. And without any understanding of the theories or concepts behind it, many are resistant to exploring this to the extent required for their personal validity. Of course, this isn't meant to pose as any "scientifically valid proof", but more like a (necessarily pale) demonstration of the concept. "Proof" can only come from the listener himself, and only then can it have any meaning.

For me, the experiment started with watching videos on someone else's audio blog. There I saw a video of George Cardas (producer of high end audio accessories) in his listening room, listening to what looks like a million dollar turntable if I ever saw one. At the same time, I had been mulling this idea over for the last few days.... The idea of offering myself the challenge of trying to improve the sound of a music file I download off the net, in order to try to demonstrate the concept of Beltism to those on the net. This means improve the sound of the file, without actually doing anything to the file itself (other than copying it). The Cardas video seemed like a fine place to start. Choosing someone else's file, meant that since I didn't create or upload the original, anyone could check my version with the original version; any way they wish. This would be to ensure that I had not done any processing on the original file on my end, or changed it in any way on my own, other than to copy it.

After choosing what to work on, the next challenge came with how to go about doing this! I was really not sure at first if I could do this, or how to set about accomplishing the goal. So I had to think about ways this might happen. While I had done limited "local" experiments in the past in this domain, they were files from and on my own machine. I'd never attempted taking a file off the net and somehow "injecting" it with deliberate improvements, without ever going into the file, and then putting it in improved form, back on the net. Since I could not change the file itself, I decided to best way to attempt this, would be to change anything that is around the file. That is to say, the environment the file is in.

Few in the world realize or fully understand this, but I learned some time ago that recordings that are made, capture the environment in their recording. I'm not speaking of the "acoustic environment". Everyone knows that! I'm talking about a different aspect of the environment, the "Beltist environment" (for lack of a better term). An example of this would be to make a recording in a room that is full of magnets and-or magnetic tapes. These objects create adverse energy fields; which not only affect human senses, but its effect is captured in recordings. Remove those magnets and magnetic tape or other such materials from the room the recording is being made in, and with keen listening, you will hear an improvement in the recording. If you do and you reason that this is due to EMI, well consider that any Beltist treatment you produce that creates a significant benefit to your live sound, will transfer that benefit to recorded sound. It doesn't have to be magnets. It could be an aspirin, a blank piece of paper, and a picture of a dog. For the entire status of the Beltist environment is captured in all recordings at all times.** This would be true for recordings from the beginning of audio recordings; long before Peter Belt ever discovered the phenomenon.

So what does this have to do with the digital video file? Well, it turns out that under Beltist laws, they too are in effect, "recordings", when copies are made of them. The copies of the files will carry copies of the environment around it. The significance of this can not be overstated, for I suspect its implications reach far, far beyond the world of sound or vision. How far? The nature of this planet far, and very probably, the universe itself. I know from other experiments I have done, that it isn't just abstract digital bits of information on a microchip or HD platter that contain precise reflections of the (ever-changing) environment they are in (with respect to Beltist energy fields). Not by a long shot. My immediate conclusion so far is, that -everything- does. Nothing exists without having a causal connection to the next thing. (Even if that connection flips with every other replication). This proved to be key to my challenge for the video test. When the file is received on my computer, it adopts the imprint of my environment, just as it carries the imprint of the environment it came from. I imagined I might succeed in my goal, if I could make a change to my environment significant enough, that it would be evident by average human ears. For this to happen, it would have to cross a lot of barriers and still retain enough of the original information by the time it reaches those ears across the net.

The method I decided to use to improve my sound at home, was one I had not yet employed. Watering my plants. Of course, I water my plants regularly, and it does not change my sound in any way that I can tell. But I've done other experiments with plants that did. Adding an element to plant water to create better sound was not my idea. This was something Peter Belt discovered decades ago. But using his product, "One Drop", to do so, might be! This is a small bottle of blue liquid intended to be applied to transparent and other objects. I applied a single drop to 4 litres of water in a watering can. Then proceeded to water my house plants (about a dozen). These were located at the other end of the house to where the stereo was. But once I listened to the stereo, the improvement was remarkable. It was among the best I had ever heard, in a single session. Obviously, plants play a significant role in our environment. I think from now on, I will always remember to treat the plant water!

So I then made a straight copy of the video I had downloaded on the computer, and listened. Clearly, the original copy sounded better than it did when I downloaded it. That is because, as I previously alluded to, everything that is now heard or seen in my residence will be influenced by the new environmental state. But the original video file carries much of the characteristics of the environment it came from. Whereas the copy I made, which is something created in my environment, carries more of the characteristics of my environment. Making the copy sound significantly better than the original (because no one tried to improve the Beltist environment of the original!). This difference was still but a fraction of the difference I heard "live", when I listened to music before and after the watering of the plants. Yet I could hear in the Cardas video files, some of the characteristics of the sound of the music files I had listened to before and after the experiment. So I thought it would be a good idea to make this available for others to hear. With the caveat that this is not meant to be a valid test of either the product (One Drop), or the process used! I can only hope to try and give an indication of what I experienced, through these videos. Emphasis on "try", because in general, the experience gets watered down every time it goes through another process.

The process of uploading them, and then downloading them, is enough to reduce those differences in the original files, significantly. But so is the fact that the files I have posted were transferred from my computer to DVD-R, then to another computer in a completely different location, and then uploaded! Making one set of file copies available for immediate viewing, is even worse, because the host I used ("Motion Box"), converts their original FLV format to mp4. So the Motion Box files don't sound the same as the ones I made available for download on my site. But on my computer, I can hear (and see) differences in quality between each of the two sets of files, nevertheless. My version sounds better, natch. I hope you will be able to hear this as well! So I am making the videos available in two formats. The first (embedded video), you can watch immediately, on your computer. The second, you have to download and play it on a video player that can handle FLV files (perhaps Windows Media Player or VLC player). The original source I used for the files, if say you wish to compare them at the bit level against my copies, to ensure they underwent no processing, can be found here.

The One Drop Watering Can Experiment

Embedded Video (can be viewed live):

Original version

My Version

Downloadable version (play on your own computer):

Original version

My Version

n.b. If WMP or your regular player can not play back FLV files, this free player for PC will.

**(Actually, it goes much deeper than this, but this is all I have room for in this article!).

Bookmark and Share