Audio Forensics

Audio Forensics

In my quest for ways to increase my earning potential (and to stay in
the
recording business!) a friend suggested that I look into becoming an
audio
forensics dude. Do any of you folks have experience, strength and/or
hope
to share? He pointed me in the direction of these guys:

* w w w .tracertek . com /index.asp?PageAction=VIEWPROD&ProdID=122

They make software that is supposed to be comparable to the mega-buck
software
that the big kids (whoever they are!) use and they also offer training
in
using their system. Unfortunately it's PC only (I'm a Mac dude), but
we have an HP laptop
that I could use w/ Windows XP-Pro and I have a MOTU 828 MK. II, which
might
work...

Any thoughts?

Gantt

Re: Audio Forensics

ganttmann@comcast . net wrote:
> In my quest for ways to increase my earning potential a friend suggested that I look into becoming an
> audio forensics dude.
>
> * w w w .tracertek . com /index.asp?PageAction=VIEWPROD&ProdID=122
>
> They make software that is supposed to be comparable to the mega-buck
> software that the big kids (whoever they are!)


Wes Dooley is one. But I certainly wouldn't classify Wes as
a kid or "dude" with any inflection.

He's written a bit that you might find thought-provoking,
challenging, daunting, discouraging, or perhaps encouraging
depending where you are on the "dude" scale:

* w w w .wesdooley . com /aea/FAREC.html

Good luck...dude.



TM

Re: Audio Forensics

Phrases like "the big kids" and "Mac dude" are expressions that I use
to lighten things up a little in my posts. I don't post here much
and, apparently, my style doesn't go over well with some of you
folks. While I am, no doubt, nowhere near Wes Dooley's level in the
audio industry, I have been working and making my living recording and
mixing music for the last 20 years. I'm 56 years old and my studio
has slowed down enough to make be realize that I need to broaden my
horizons if I'm going to be able to continue to support my wife and
two children. I will follow your link and I appreciate any and all
information I can gather while researching this. Your sarcasm isn't
necessary.

Thanks,

Gantt

On May 5, 9:49 pm, Tmaki <toivo m...@sbcglobal . net > wrote:

> Wes Dooley is one. But I certainly wouldn't classify Wes as
> a kid or "dude" with any inflection.
>
> He's written a bit that you might find thought-provoking,
> challenging, daunting, discouraging, or perhaps encouraging
> depending where you are on the "dude" scale:
>
> * w w w .wesdooley . com /aea/FAREC.html
>
> Good luck...dude.
>
> TM

Re: Audio Forensics

ganttmann@comcast . net wrote:
> Phrases like "the big kids" and "Mac dude" are expressions that I use
> to lighten things up a little in my posts.

"Dude" always conjures up an image of something out of
"Wayne's World" or "Dumb and Dumber". Hard to imagine a
56-yr-old man in terms of "dude". I'm 58, been in the
business 37 years, and kind of consider any kind of "-dude"
not a serious player. But you might be the exception.

I use sarcasm to lighten things up a little in my posts.

Apparently, my style doesn't go over well with some of you
folks.

Carry on...


TM

Re: Audio Forensics

Let's start over.

Thanks for the Wes Dooley link. I'm going to print it out and read it
later. I may, indeed, get discouraged from this idea, but I'll learn
something new, one way or the other.

I have a 10 year old son who calls me "dude" all the time. He thinks
it's funny. Ah well.

Thanks,

Gantt

On May 5, 10:17 pm, Tmaki <toivo m...@sbcglobal . net > wrote:
> ganttm...@comcast . net wrote:
> > Phrases like "the big kids" and "Mac dude" are expressions that I use
> > to lighten things up a little in my posts.
>
> "Dude" always conjures up an image of something out of
> "Wayne's World" or "Dumb and Dumber". Hard to imagine a
> 56-yr-old man in terms of "dude". I'm 58, been in the
> business 37 years, and kind of consider any kind of "-dude"
> not a serious player. But you might be the exception.
>
> I use sarcasm to lighten things up a little in my posts.
>
> Apparently, my style doesn't go over well with some of you
> folks.
>
> Carry on...
>
> TM

Re: Audio Forensics

ganttmann@comcast . net wrote:
> Let's start over.

No sweat...
>
> Thanks for the Wes Dooley link. I'm going to print it out and read it
> later. I may, indeed, get discouraged from this idea, but I'll learn
> something new, one way or the other.

He also makes reference to other publications that
could/would be useful. You might also contact the National
Court Reporters Association. There are similar issues in
their field, and it could help broaden your perspective.

I've done my share of forensic audio work over the years,
and I never fail to get a little nervous when a law
enforcement agency or attorney calls needing something done.
It's not so bad if it's a P.I. or individual needing a
telephone answering machine tape cleaned up. And the
occasional deposition, board meeting or arbitration hearing
is a lot less stressful, but a lot more boring.

The realization that you may indeed have someone's future in
your hands can be sobering. Adhering to proper procedure and
rules pertaining to evidence is almost more important than
the technical process.


> I have a 10 year old son who calls me "dude" all the time. He thinks
> it's funny. Ah well.


Hey, my 50-, 55-, and 60-year-old friends and I call each
other "Dude" in just about every other sentence. We call
each other "Hoser" and "Douche-bag", too. (Our wives and
ladies just roll their eyes...) Didn't mean to be hard on
you. Trying to visualize a courtroom, "Your Honor, the tape
presented as evidence was electronically enhanced and was
certified as genuine by Forensic Audio Dude here in town. We
could call Mr. Dude at FAD to give personal testimony to
that effect if it pleases the Court."

Good luck. It's a fascinating branch of the industry and can
be very entertaining. You get exposed to quite a different
cross-section of human behavior.



TM

Re: Audio Forensics


"Tmaki" <toivo_maki@sbcglobal . net > wrote in message
news:XmQTj.1802$ah4.538@flpi148.ffdc.sbc . com ...

>
> Hey, my 50-, 55-, and 60-year-old friends and I call each other "Dude" in
> just about every other sentence. We call each other "Hoser" and
> "Douche-bag", too. (Our wives and ladies just roll their eyes...) Didn't
> mean to be hard on you. Trying to visualize a courtroom, "Your Honor, the
> tape presented as evidence was electronically enhanced and was certified
> as genuine by Forensic Audio Dude here in town. We could call Mr. Dude at
> FAD to give personal testimony to that effect if it pleases the Court."
>
The Dude abides.

Glenn D.

Re: Audio Forensics

I just finished reading Wes Dooley's white paper. So far I'm more
intrigued than discouraged but I can see that the water is deep and
different! I'm going to go looking for an Forensic Audio person in
the DC/Maryland area.

Gantt

On May 5, 9:49 pm, Tmaki <toivo m...@sbcglobal . net > wrote:

> * w w w .wesdooley . com /aea/FAREC.html
>
> TM

Re: Audio Forensics

ganttmann@comcast . net wrote:
> I just finished reading Wes Dooley's white paper. I'm going to go looking for an Forensic Audio person in
> the DC/Maryland area.


Something tells me you won't have any difficulty finding
somebody in that area.

My step-daughter works in the Fraud and Criminal
Investigation department of the IRS. Want me to ask her who
they use?

:-)



TM

Re: Audio Forensics

That would be awesome! You can email me w/ whatever you discover -
ganttmann at comcast dot net.

Thanks!

Gantt

On May 6, 11:44 am, Tmaki <toivo m...@sbcglobal . net > wrote:

> My step-daughter works in the Fraud and Criminal
> Investigation department of the IRS. Want me to ask her who
> they use?
>
> :-)
>
> TM

Re: Audio Forensics



"ganttmann@comcast . net " wrote:

> In my quest for ways to increase my earning potential (and to stay in
> the recording business!) a friend suggested that I look into becoming an
>
> audio forensics dude.

And where would you expect to pick up this kind of work, given that you
have no experience in it ?

Graham

Re: Audio Forensics

A good question. Scott's suggestion to find someone to work with and
learn from seems like a very good one. I also have friends in law
enforcement who can hopefully give me some guidence.

Thanks,

Gantt

On May 5, 9:53 pm, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelati...@hotmail . com >
wrote:

>
> And where would you expect to pick up this kind of work, given that you
> have no experience in it ?
>
> Graham

Re: Audio Forensics

<ganttmann@comcast . net > wrote in message
news:45e8275b-317e-46b3-b919-f6e8e785948e@e39g2000hsf.googlegroups . com ...
A good question. Scott's suggestion to find someone to work with and
learn from seems like a very good one. I also have friends in law
enforcement who can hopefully give me some guidence.

I think that'd be a good way to go. I'd also add that, like most things in
audio, the person handling the software is really more crucial than the
software. That said, the stuff from Tracertek seems useful, although clunky
in its user interface. The big guys, by the way, tend to use things like
Cedar. I've used the Tracertek products for cleaning up 78s rather than
forensic work, and it's useful there if you use it with restraint. That
might not be the M.O. for forensics, though.

Peace,
Paul

Re: Audio Forensics

ganttmann@comcast . net <ganttmann@comcast . net > wrote:
>Any thoughts?

Forensic audio work is very different than audio production, and a whole
lot of it has to do with managing legal issues.

I suggest you read the basic writeup in the latest JAES which talks about
some of the current research being done. Go to AES show and meet some of
the people on the forensic audio committee. Get an apprenticeship for a
couple of years.

It's a very weird sort of thing, but it does involve some audio. Most of
the required skillset, though, isn't related to the technology. And a lot
of technology is very different than what you'll find in a typical studio.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Re: Audio Forensics


<ganttmann@comcast . net > wrote in message
news:de12925e-0038-405d-9811-dc14413be718@d45g2000hsc.googlegroups . com ...
> In my quest for ways to increase my earning potential (and to stay in
> the
> recording business!) a friend suggested that I look into becoming an
> audio
> forensics dude. Do any of you folks have experience, strength and/or
> hope
> to share? He pointed me in the direction of these guys:
>
> * w w w .tracertek . com /index.asp?PageAction=VIEWPROD&ProdID=122
>
[snip]

Forensic evidence must be presented to the court by an "expert." In the
courtroom, expertise is decided by the judge on the basis of experience
and/or credentials. Even if you become comfortable with this program, you
cannot currently satisfy the requirement of expertise to answer questions
about the evidence. For example, your opinion as to whether two voice
samples are of the same individual would have little or no weight. You've
suggested that you would work for someone else, but, unless he is the expert
in audio forensics, that work experience would not develop your own
credibility.

These are general facts about courtroom expertise. I am not personally
knowledgeable about how to get around the obstacles. One generally
recognized method is to work as an apprentice to a recognized expert. I'm
not saying it's right or logical, but neither is the legal system.

Bob Morein
(310) 237-6511