Milli Vanilly Baby Dont Forget My Number

Voice Vices

For anyone familiar with alternative research, it is commonly accepted visual evidence is often doctored and used in media, literature and science. Image-manipulation constitutes an important tool for the Media and State and Military intelligence for misleading the public. When film is analyzed as falsified evidence, it is quite clear we are most attentive to what we see, but sound is altered as well.

Many films and documentaries have proven fraudulent from research into media fakery and other propaganda, and the sound that accompany these images is likewise edited and tampered with. Sound is the silent partner of visuals and equally fabricated to fit into the narrative and the object of intelligence operations, psyop’s and memes.

Sound is often manipulated together with photo and film, yet it is rare the importance sound and audio effects are analyzed in regards to conspiracies to the same level of scrutiny employed for imagery. The 1963 JFK Dallas motorcade would for instance not have succeeded without the fake sound of gunfire. Sound was center stage in JFKs fake shooting.

Despite the relative lack of attention to the role of audio artifice, manipulation and fabrication relating to conspiracy theory research, sound nevertheless constitutes a tool nearly as widely used as image manipulation. The reason sound is seldom scrutinized is not because it is rarely fabricated and deceptive, it is because sound and particularly voices are harder to interpret than visual evidence.

When Milli Vanilly’s playback looped live on stage in 1989 during an MTV concert in Bristol (Connecticut) – it raised much debate at the time as it exposed how a fraudulent technique such as lip-sync was in widespread use in the music industry. The public at this point realized they were victims of systemic audio fraud since some time already, and that many artists were much better stage and video performers than actual authentic singers with great voices.

• Proof The Music Industry Is Fake, Everybody Using Autotune & LipSync (YouTube – Providence – 22 Dec 2014 – 12:54 mm:ss)

“I’m not a perfect note hitter either but I’m not going to cover it up with Auto-Tune. Everybody uses it, too. I once asked a studio guy in Toronto, ‘How many people don’t use Auto-Tune?’ and he said, ‘You and Nelly Furtado are the only two people who’ve never used it in here.’ Even though I’m not into Nelly Furtado, it kind of made me respect her.”
Neko Case in 2006 interview


Of course, Milli Vanilly was not the only band to use lip-sync and most bands were in reality already using voice modulation to enhance their voices, a technology best known as Auto-Tune (wiki). Both Auto-Tune and Melodyne are names that come from proprietary software programs that alter the pitch and frequencies in vocal and instrumental recordings & live streams.

What these technologies do is rather simple – they analyze and quantify audio characteristics before resampling them anew according to a predetermined, fine-tuned profile. In music this will be mostly used for cleaning up lackluster voices and rendering them sublime – hence the heavy use of voice alteration (or morphing) employed by todays and yesteryears popstar voices.

If Auto-Tune wasn’t such an inoffensive term and more appropriately called ‘voice modulator’ or ‘voice changer’ it probably would raise more awareness among the public and skeptics alike about the fact voice is not objectively reliable when played back or digitally rendered real time. Voice is easily altered to effects that are hard to discern for the general audience, and yet it is rarely taken into consideration when analyzing disinformation and misrepresentation.

X-Factor Auto-Tune suspect Gamu Nhengu in 'Shake the Room'
X-Factor Auto-Tune suspect Gamu Nhengu in ‘Shake the Room’
X Factor 2010: ITV show in new ‘auto-tune’ row over Gamu Nhengu
X Factor admits tweaking vocals


The technology of voice-modulation is since long proven, and while the results are impressive and well known in music, voices are also modulated for other purposes and just as effective, if not more. Electronic voice disguise is on the rise and today causes security concerns as banks and call-centers invest important resources for efficient automated, biometric speaker detection and recognition against fraud.

It would be naive to consider the current international efforts in voice recognition unrelated to the rise in performant, available technology. Electronic voice disguise is not only performant; it is quite easy to execute. Despite the best efforts by software companies to advertise voice changer technology as fun additions for pranksters and underage gamers – the fact is that voice modulation and morphing technology makes fraudulent use both widespread and hard to detect.

But no way that State and Military intelligence would have or use any of this auto-tune voice modulator technology right ?

The use of voice disguise is not new*, but the skills required for classic voice acting previously made such methods less accessible as it required a trained performer, while mechanical aids (mouthpiece, cloth on mouth, cheek and nose pinch, etc.) does not offer as probing results as a skilled voice actor. Today, a performant voice modulator or voice changer will be more than sufficient to produce credible new voices, even modifying age and gender with relative ease.

It is easy to see how voice disguise and other sound manipulations have been discretely and successfully used for a long time already. The current propagation of capable public tools for sound and voice alteration nevertheless makes its use more widespread in correspondence with its easy access.

The difference between investigation of image fakery and audio deceit lies in the relatively easy access of image manipulation whereas technology such as voice recognition demand more advanced methods of examination and more specific knowledge.


Adobe Voco Audio Manipulator “photoshop-for-voice”
(YouTube – Shad Productions – 30 Jun 2018 – 06:03 mm:ss)

Vocal theft on the horizon
Voice hackers record voice and use morpher to trick authentication

Generally we all share a quite acute ability for recognizing sounds and voices, but our auditory sensory system remains very subjective and difficult to share and agree upon – we need further corroboration before an ‘ear witness’ testimony is taken into consideration. However, our innate ability to discern sound and voices should not therefore be completely ignored, but it is hard to convince someone of a false speaker identity with only our hearing ability as proof*…

Forensic speaker identification (FSID) is today a very specialized field of investigation with a limited amount of experts who apply a number of different algorithms to speech recordings and often realize what is described as a biometric voiceprint or spectrogram.  Spectrograms are meant to represent three essential voice parameters with a time axis, a frequency axis and an amplitude chart covering the whole surface of the graph combining time and frequency expressed as shades of grey (or color in some cases).

Bin Laden voiceprint 2003 Tom Owen
Spectrogram of Bin Laden telephone recording (top) and Spectrogram of Bin Laden sample from ABC News interview (bottom)

No doubt New Jersey forensic specialist Tom Owen is part of the 9/11 deception with his positive identification of Bin Laden’s voiceprint in 2003 from an alleged phone call to Al Jazeera. However, it is not uncommon that that State and Military intelligence agencies do make use of forensic evidence and thus demonstrate how they are quite on top of voice analyses and subsequent disguise. It takes one to know one…

The main hindrance to more scrutiny of voice impression, digital and analog voice disguise resides essentially in the subjective judgement we mostly will rely upon when we seek to examine occurrences of suspect speaker identities. Maybe some of the ridicule and critique proffered against investigation of voice disguise in reality comes from technical and intellectual inability to do research in a meaningful way, while for others it is a question of protecting a well-known concealed intelligence operational tool.

It seems unreasonable to remain in the dark when it comes to the capabilities and technology behind voice disguise and defer from making inquiries when such legitimate suspicion arises. Yet it is difficult to avoid harsh criticism from many who seem to trust their own ears only and wishes to remain free from any in cumbersome new insight…

Alternative researchers need to break the taboo of ridicule that surrounds such straightforward techniques of deception as voice disguise in conspiracy culture, and lend their ear and attention to the increasing use of such deceit, and not shy away from exploring forensic tools and techniques that are at our disposal that may unveil the likelihood for voice disguise malpractice.


The 138 Show w/ Bobby & Bobby – T138S, Episode 7
Convex Earth doc Recall & CIA – Apr 2 2018 – 35:02 (mm:ss)
• The likeness of voices between the 138 show co-host Bobby and Chris Kendall is quite striking, my auditory system finds the two voices a match.

Voice Disguise Deception (forum discussion)
http://fakeologist.com/forums/topic/voice-disguise-deception/


*earwitness testimony is allowed in military and federal courts (some state courts only)

*in Genesis 27:22 Jacob tricks his elderly, blind father Isaac into pronouncing the patriarchal blessing upon him instead of his brother Esau. In this case Jacob changed both his physical appearance as well as his voice