Whould this be proper way to make a working subliminal?

[dongwarper]

If I take a whole hypnosis file. Then lower the volume till can barely heard.
Then put into an ambient music.

Do you think this way will work as a it intended? If not, what would you suggest?

[wohermiston]

start with the ambient background you want to use. music or noise. perhaps the best way would a white noise like a fountain or waterfall. then mix the file against that background lowering the level until you cannot detect it. Then add music. The main power of a subliminal is the setup description. I tend to believe that if you made a subliminal and did not tell anyone what it was supposed to do, it is likely it would not do anything. so think out your description carefully.

[OxyFemboi]

dongwarper wrote
If I take a whole hypnosis file. Then lower the volume till can barely heard.
Then put into an ambient music.

Do you think this way will work as it is intended? If not, what would you suggest?

If you have Audacity -- it's free to download, which is probably why it's so popular -- you can follow these directions to make a Lowry's Silent Subliminal. These pages will tell you rather more than you probably want to know unless you are a techie who lives and breaths stuff like this. This is, alas, not my brand of techie jargon, though I can (mostly) understand it.

https://forum.audacityteam.org/viewtopi ... 13&t=53615

https://forum.audacityteam.org/viewtopi ... 42&t=58548

http://forum.audacityteam.org/viewtopic ... 46&t=81759

I have not been able to find the rather extensive warning that Audacity software wrote. It basically boils down to:

There is still sound produced in a "Lowry's Silent Subliminal, Patent Number ...date, etc." It is hard on your sound system, especially your tweeters, which produces the treble high tones. It is even harder on your ears. DO NOT, under ANY circumstances, play this louder than normal volume (about 33 on the computer MP3 player that comes with your computer. If you do, you could become deaf.

[mareake]

If I take a whole hypnosis file. Then lower the volume till can barely heard.
Then put into an ambient music.

Do you think this way will work as a it intended? If not, what would you suggest?

Try to check on audacity guides,it have a big help to you when it comes to sound volume.. audacity is a sound editor expert you will enjoy to use that.

[sarnoga]

Hello dongwarper,

In trying to answer your question, at least to some degree, let me offer the follow observations and experience.

Let me start by saying that as to the Lowry's Silent Subliminal that Oxy mentioned as being available in Audacity I have no knowlege, either good or bad. I have never heard of it before his reply and have never examined it or considered it in any way beyond what I have deduced about normal "silent" subliminals.

My guess is that the Lowry's Silent Subliminal uses technology similar to that used in noise cancelling headphones. Noise cancelling headphones have a microphone that picks up and measures the ambient sound or noise that it wants to cancel and then creates a sound wave that is the exact opposite. Some how that results in not perceiving that the sound is there. The ability to do that has always been present in Audacity before someone made a special way to use it to easily make a so called silent subliminal.

What I do not know for sure, 1. if that is what they are doing, 2. if so, is the cancelled noise perceived by your brain in any way that allows the information to be passed on to your subconscious. Before I would have any confidence in the effectiveness of such a process I would want to see how they claim to demonstrate it's effectiveness.

That said, let me go on to what I wanted to relate.

When I first came to this site I checked out the files. There were not nearly so many back then and not nearly so many authors.

One of the things I checked out was the subliminal files. They seemed, at least to me, to be nothing more than files were the volume was so low it was beyond your normal perception. I didn't like them then, I don't like them now, and I doubt they are effective. My reasoning is as follows...

If your ears cannot pick up the sound, your brain doesn't register it and it has no effect. The original use of subliminal was not sound files but rather visual. Briefly flashing an advertisement on a movie screen, but doing it so quickly that it doesn't register on your conscious thought. Your eyes saw the picture, it registered in your brain, but it all happened so quickly that the conscious mind missed it, yet it was processed by the subconscious. This was proven to be effective yet unethical and the practice was subsequently outlawed at least in the context of flashing ads at the movie theater.

Trying to adapt that to an audio file is somewhat problematic. If you tried to take an audio message and compress it in length it would be just a brief noise and incomprehensible to both your conscious and subconscious. The same problem if you try to lower the volume to the point where is it beyond conscious perception. Is your brain able to perceive the message and pass it along to your unconscious? Do your ears even pick it up? I have my doubts

Another way would be to try to mask the intended subliminal message with some white noise or background noise. The question then becomes, can your brain perceive the message and pass it along to directly to your your subconscious while bypassing your conscious. I suppose you could devise an experiment that could help make that determination, and maybe someone already has, but until I see the results from a valid definitive experiment I will continue to be skeptical. Additionally the few "subliminal" files I have listened to that were made that way I found extremely unpleasant to listen to.

I tried to come up with an alternative way of making subliminal audio files. Do they work, are they effective. I don't know. But applying logic to what I do know of how a subliminal should work they seem more likely to be successful than the other methods. I suppose someone could devise an experiment to determine if they are effective, but I have never bothered. One would first need to prove definitively that the message itself, if not subliminal would be effective, otherwise if the experiment found that the subliminal file didn't work you wouldn't know if it was because of the subliminal portion being ineffective or if it is just the entire file, subliminal or not that is ineffective.

There are two reasons i can think of why a subliminal file would be desirable. The first would be to cause the effects of the file on someone without them being aware they were being influenced. That to me seems unethical for the same reason that flashing subliminal ads at the movie is unethical.

The other reason would be to try to get a message to the subconscious, bypassing the conscious mind without resorting to typical trance or hypnosis methodology such as preceding the message with a hypnotic induction. Again, while that has been proven to work with simple subliminal visual suggestions such as suggesting someone get up in the movie theater and go buy some refreshments, how effective that would be with an audio suggestion I don't know. If it has been scientifically demonstrated I have not seen the proof. One might also consider that the more complicated the message the less effectively it likely to be if presented subliminally.

Anyway, back to my attempts at an alternative method of creating a "subliminal" audio file.

What I did was take the message, record it on multiple tracks, the more tracks the better up to a point. I then split each one of the tracks into a right and left track. Each track i altered slightly in pitch, to help the brain distinguish the different tracks. I then moved the sequence or timing of each track so that none of the tracks were synchronized but all were playing at a slightly different time. Usually I did this by changing the tempo of the various tracks. Slightly speeding up each one in relation to the previous track so that each one would be slightly shorter but with the same content The result was that it sounded a bit like being in a crowded room with many people talking at once.

I would slightly change the tempo if each of the tracks. I would then have half of them start at the same time, and half of them end at the same time. What was being said was fairly determinable at the very end and very beginning as the timing of they voices came closer together. To compensate for that I tried to make sure that the very beginning of the file and the very end were basically innocuous and of little consequence so that it mattered not that it was understood. The file would start out being discernible by the conscious mind for the first few seconds Then the beginning of the tracks that matched at the end would start and they didn't match at all and at the same time the tracks that matched at the beginning would be drifting apart.

The object or intention was to make it so that the words could be distinguished but the sentences could not be followed by the conscious mind. The hope was that the conscious mind would not be able to perceive the message, yet it would register in the brain and be absorbed by the subconscious. It seemed to me that if two few tracks were used that the messages or voices were too easily identified by the conscious mind defeating the purpose. My thinking was also that if too many tracks were used it would just turn into an auditory blur and the brain wouldn't be able to pick out the messages at all, again defeating the purpose.

It has been awhile since I made any so I cannot remember how many tracks were optimal, but I think it was between eight and ten, maybe it was ten and twelve. I recall that six didn't really cause the effect I was looking for. Just to be clear, I am not talking 8 seperate tracks that are then split into right and left. I am talking about four seperate tracks that are then split into right and left making a total of eight mono tracks. I would then turn those eight mono tracks back into eight stereo tracks and off sent the balance on each track so that the first would play entirely on the left. The next 80 percent on the left and 20 percent on the right, the next 60 percent on the left and 40 on the right, and so on.

What I discovered was that in some of the files, if i concentrated very hard, I could choose one track and follow it, ignoring the others. This would make the process ineffectual if the goal is for the file to have an effect on the unsuspecting, which in most cases would be unethical. As far as being effective in the other sense, for those who are trying to get he message into the subconscious by bypassing the conscious without the use of trance, my thinking was that being able to follow one of the tracks would make no significant difference for two reasons.

The first reason is that if you are wanting the file to work you need not concentrate to follow one of the tracks. The second reason is that even if you follow one track out of 8 or 10 or 12 that means that all the other 7, 9 or 11, tracks are being perceived by your brain and hopefully registering in your subconscious without interference from your conscious.

Of course all of that still leaves the question of whether or not the whole process is effective. It may be that it is completely ineffectual. I think quite some time after I started making those "subliminal files" I found some other "hypnosis" files on the net that was using that technique. I don't know if they stole it from me, developed it on their own, or if it had been around awhile and I just never knew of it. I think they had a different name for it than "subliminal" and they were passing it off as thought it were an accepted and proven technique without referencing any studies, experiments or proof.I do not now recall what name they called it by, if I did it would be easier to see if there is any supporting research.

In addition to the process I just described I would generally overlay the entire thing with stuff that sounded like music but that had binaural qualities. That seemed to increase the difficulty of following any one given track, while not making it impossible. My hope was also that the binaural qualities of the "music" would aid in the messages being taken in by the subconscious.

Another thing that seems to me to be true but that seldom is mentioned or discussed, is that to me, strictly speaking, the use of subliminal messages is not technically hypnosis, at least not in the way I understand hypnosis. But that I suppose is a discussion for another time and another thread.

If you want to listen to some examples of the "subliminal" files I am referring to, you can find some in some of my files. You can also find a number of them in some of EMG's early files as I made many "subliminal" files out of his early files using that process.

Of course the question has not been answered if those "subliminal" files made using that process are effective.. does it work? That I do not know and cannot answer definitively. What I do know is that they can be relatively fun to listen to, and, at least to my mind, are more likely to be effective than the ones that employ the technique of simply reducing the volume beyond levels of perception. They are also more pleasant to listen to than those files that try to mask the message with white noise or background noise.

My suggestion is to find some of those "subliminals" that I made using that process and see what you think of them. On some of them i did a better job than on others. For example on a few I may have only used six tracks and that didn't seem to work as well. Maybe you want to use that process, maybe not.

I do know that I received some occasional sporadic feed back concerning those files. The feedback was mixed. Some loved them, some hated them, and some were indifferent. Early on when I first started posting them There was one person that became upset and irate and demanded that EMG remove all of those files because he said that if you could perceive that there was a message then it wasn't subliminal by definition.

My thought was that it was still subliminal unless you could discern the message itself rather than just that there was one. Also My reasoning was that even if one of the tracks can be followed with the conscious mind, all the others that cannot be followed at the same time are still subliminal.

Maybe the irate listener was right, I don't know. Maybe it was more a question of choice of words whether the term "subliminal" was the proper term to use. Again, I don't know. EMG did not dismiss his complaint and opinion off hand. He gave it some consideration for a day or so and ultimately decided to leave the "subliminal" files as they were and still are.

Like I suggested earlier, why don't you find a few, listen to them and decide it that is what you are looking for.

Regards, Sarnoga

[OxyFemboi]

Greetings.

The only other sort-of-subliminal type of audio track I am familiar with are the “paraliminal” cassettes and CD audio tracks made by Learning Strategies Corporation. These have two main tracks. The track for the right ear/left brain has more logical phrasing.The track for the left ear/right brain has more emotional phrasing There are a few more tracks with important concepts repeated on them.The suggestions are based on. NLP/Neiro-Linguistic Programming. They are very effective.

What I think a “Lowry Subliminal” does is move the recording of the suggestions to a higher pitch, between 15Kh and 20Kh. I may be completely misreading what the Audacity creators are saying in their effort to explain how to create Lowry-type audio subliminal recordings, but I don’t think so. They are usually pitched at a frequency where it is still possible for a human to hear, but they are at a frequency that is rarely used. If I remember correctly, the Audacity Forum dedicated to this topic recommended the recordings be centered around 17.5Kh. I know that some people lose the ability to hear in the upper ranges. That may be why these Lowry audio subliminal recordings may not work for everybody.

Like you, I never found “normal” masked-sound audio subliminal recordings to be effective. I read the phrasing of the suggestions that were included in each cassette tape/CD. The suggestions were mostly ineffectually worded. Negative phrasing, conditionals, and future tense phrasing was common. Some suggestions were extremely lengthy.

OxyFemboi