Have you heard this yet? I got it from the C2C site. All it says is:

"On April 21, 2007, while on an expedition in Ohio headed by Mark Maisel, researcher David Donlon captured what some believe is a recording of Bigfoot. Listen to MP3 audio of this Bigfoot vocalization courtesy of stancourtney.com."

http://www.stancourtney.com/sounds/East-Ce...tter4-21-07.mp3

Remember this is not my recording, but was recorded by DB Donlon. I host the sound clip but it was recorded by DB.

Thanks,

Stan Courtney

Thanks for clarifying, Stan. It sure sounds a lot like a gorilla-type animal to me.

At the beginning, it sounds like a dog, but not so much in the middle. Can you post a link to the background story regarding this? Where it was recorded, etc.

Oh wait, I just reread your post. There's no more about it on C2C. Got it.

From Stan's site:



Here's the link.

It's great they are getting strange sounds, but as evidence they are totally useless without having some way of verifying what animal is making them....

Ron Morehead also has a link to the sound clip on his Sierra Sounds / Bigfoot Sounds website and states on his website that "they are remarkably similar to the Sierra recordings."

Ron also states - "Listen first to this sound clip from the Sierra recordings and then link into Stan Courtney's web site and Compare."

Ron was recently a guest on THE AARF SHOW

A Conversation with Ron Morehead - Jun 28, 5:00PM

Ron said about this clip "pretty good collaborative evidence that just surfaced recently...very similar to ours"

I have to admit, they do sound similar to each other.

Fulltimer, were the more recent recordings made in Virginia?

No, they were recorded in East Central Ohio.

Still, that's a long way from the Sierras.

They do not sound similar to me. The Ohio sound makes me think of a black bear huffing. I have no idea what is making the sounds on the Sierra clip.

I tend not to get too excited over sounds, my reasoning being summed up nicely in these two quotes from well-known bigfooters:





RayG

And I still think those two are right.

In listening to them separately, I thought that DB's recording and the Sierra clip sounded so much alike, I wanted to open them both in an audio editor to make sure they weren't identical. As you can see from the attached image, their cadence is not identical, though it is similar. The Sierra clip is on top and DB's is underneath. The Sierra clip is much cleaner which is why the subject's sounds are so prominent. While this is about as far as my audio analyzing abilities go, I'd say the recording are remarkably similar and appear to have come from similar sources.

I meant to post this cleaned up version. Sorry.

Bipto, the pictures you are using show intensity of sound over time, but not pitch information. I could be completely wrong here, but I don't think comparing those really gets you anywhere. A spectrogram that showed pitch, time and intensity (using colors for the last variable) is more useful. I used to post just such around these parts at one time.

To the ear, the sounds are very similar, though mine was not so close to the source and there was a really big tree between the mic and the source too.

A note to keep in mind: the rangers at the park where we got the recording told us they did not have any bears there.

Graphic images aside, just listening to the two clips side by side is enough to make me believe two very similar, large animals made these vocalizations.

DB, you're right. I looked at the spectrum as well and it was similar. When I'm back in front of my computer I'll post that, too.

It sounds quite similar to a couple gorilla huffing and roaring sound clips i have on my machine.

As an aside, it's nice to see that people are using good recording equipment in the field.

So what do you think? They're close...but again, I'm no expert.

I didn't hear any "roars" but the sounds eminded me of Samson. Great work DB, keep it up.



Thanks,

Wild hog although I can see why some would think it is a bigfoot if they are excited about being in the woods for the first time .

DB,

Can you tell us more backstory to this recording? It does sound a bit like a wild hog too, but I'm curious if you had seen any footprints, or if there had been any sightings in the area.

If you already told the story somewhere else and I missed it I apologize for asking you to tell it again.

That's pretty funny. You've (inadvertantly) made a better point than I think you intended. It seems pretty much ALL of the 'sound evidence' we have is regularly debated anectdotally, and not much 'scientifically'. For example, I've never heard nor seen a side-by-side comparison and/or analysis of a 'wild hog' (for example) and the 'Bigfoot sounds' in question. I've heard plenty of 'bragging' so-to-speak about how this or that sound is not-a-this or it's not-a-that because, well, the writer said so? Is that really good enough? Shouldn't every possible KNOWN acquirable 'sound' be eliminated first scientifically before speculating that what made it is truly an unknown? I've seen it more than once where supposed 'Bigfoot sounds' were IMO easily attributable to known (and even DOMESTIC) type animals. I think John Green said it best (per RayG above), until we get somebody, at the very least, actually SEEING the sound being made by the hairy monster, we're mostly just grasping at straws.

The Sierra Sounds were scientifically analysed and showed no evidence of a hoax.


The two clips do sound very similar to me so this is interesting.

Stumpknocker, you might think the Ohio sounds are made by a hog but I guarantee if you listen to more of the Sierra Sounds you won't think that.

I'll start out this post with the Cautious Bigfooter's Standard Preamble: Since I didn't see what made the sounds in either recording, I'm not saying I know what are, blah blah blah.

What's interesting to me is that these sounds are so similar even though they were recorded about 1,500 miles from each other. Are there wild hogs in the Sierras? Maybe, but not that I've ever heard. I'm not saying DB's recording isn't of hogs. Maybe it is. If so, then whatever's on the Sierra Sounds disc sounds (at least in that short clip) a lot like a wild hog. Honestly, I have no idea what to make of Sierra Sounds. I've always been bothered that this remarkable recording of supposed sasquatch has never been duplicated and it is intriguing to me that, even in a very small way, someone may have captured a similar sound. It could all be a crazy coincidence, but even if it is, it's still interesting to me.

Bipto,

I agree with everything you said. Let me add that I have been a hog hunter for about half my life (I'm 50) and I have heard a lot of wild hog sounds. These sounds could be made by a hog, but in my opinion, it would have to be a HUGE one, and when you compare it with sounds made by a gorilla, the match is almost identical.

They also showed no definitive evidence that the sounds were produced by a sasquatch. FWIW anyone can make their effective vocal track 50% bigger.

What do you mean by definative evidence? How can there be definative evidence, short of footage taken while the sounds were being made????



Can anyone also produce the same sounds made as well? Can you, for example?

Bottom line is that the Sierra Sounds are either a hoax, perpetrated by humans, or were made by an uncatalogued animal. I don't think anybody seriously considers the third option........that the Sierra Sounds were made by any known animal. As of now, the Sierra Sounds have shown NO evidence of being hoaxed by humans, so they are very very interesting.

DB,

Can you tell us more backstory to this recording? It does sound a bit like a wild hog too, but I'm curious if you had seen any footprints, or if there had been any sightings in the area.

If you already told the story somewhere else and I missed it I apologize for asking you to tell it again.

Let's be careful about saying things like "showed no evidence of a hoax." I think all that was shown was that the Sierra Sounds were not mechanical- i.e. made by siren, but I've generally avoided sound evidence so I could be totally wrong.

Before I even read the posts, my first thought was "pig" when I heard it. Not sure why anyone would go looking much beyond that since it's a fairly obvious explanation. But again, I try to stay away from sound recordings because, even before the coyote revelation, I've always believed they are inherently inconclusive and therefore more or less worthless.

But maybe that's just me....

insert :earcovering: icon

Apeman

Because it isn't the explanation they want. It's the same with the Sierra Sounds themselves. People who want the sounds to be legitimate want to hang on to the original analysis (which only showed that the sounds were organic in nature and appeared to have a vocal tract larger than a normal humans) but completely avoid the parts that bring the story into question, such as seldom mentioned print photos that were deemed by Dr. Krantz (I believe... might be wrong there) to be some of the worst hoaxed prints he'd ever seen. To say that a person can't repeat the sounds is a straw man argument. I for example can't whistle, but I damn sure won't make the assumption that no one else can. The same with these sounds. A person might not match them syllable to syllable, but it's not to say that a person couldn't create their own free-form string of distorted syllables and grunts. To hang on to the vocal tract analysis is also futile, as anyone can increase the overall length of their's by simply cupping their hands to their mouths. Try it some time and you'll be amazed at the variation you can create.

I suppose it could be anything, but it sounds like hog. Further, not directly on point here, hogs in the woods make same damned freaky sounding noises.

They also showed no evidence of being re-recorded or speeded up/slowed down etc etc. What was shown was that whatever made the sounds did so spontaneously, i.e as it appears on the tape.

Interestingly, a certain vowel was absent on the tapes. I forget which vowel it was offhand.

I hope you are not implying I said that, as I never did. I just asked you to clarify your statement that 'anybody' can do such and such.



Again, I hope you are not implying that I said that.



Once again I hope you are not implying I am, as I never ever ever mentioned that aspect of the analysis. You did.

As I said, the Sierra Sounds are either a human hoax, or some large unknown animal, likely primate. They are certainly NOT made by any known animal.

To be honest, I'm not one for taking too much of an interest in sounds either. Most are so ambiguous and are mainly howls, whoops, whistles, cries etc etc that don't do much to convince me as they could well be other animals. The Sierra Sounds are so obviously either one or the other (human or sas) that we can immediately cut out the 'other animal' theory and I find them, and the analysis carried out on them, interesting.

From Krantzs' book :

I guess those memory pills are paying off.

The wonders of ginseng...

Krantz seems to have made a lot of remarks that have come back to haunt him. Remember the tracks that were hoaxed and he thought they were real? He was also inclined to believe the Minnestoa Iceman was real.

I would like to see somebody demonstrate mimicking the sound characteristics heard in the Sierra Sounds simply by cupping his hands around his mouth. That would interesting.

You know, I find that a funny statement. In many cases Krantz was "the man" in terms of when his beliefs or what he reviewed fit someone else's perspective on something, but when he outright calls something a fake, that someone beleives to be real, the role is reversed , and suddenly he doesn't know what he's talking about.

If we're using that criteria , we need to throw out a lot more things that make up the "overall" Bigfoot evidence that you yourself have talked about on several occasions.
(This is just one example, there are plenty more) I.E. Anything written by Meldrum should now be subject to even more scrutiny since he originally thought the Snow-walker video to be real and it was shown not to be at a later date. That being the case, his comments in the past regarding the redwoods(playmate) video , the PGF or any other video should now be thrown out based on that correct?
One thing I've always loved about Bigfoot research, is that there are more and more people on a daily basis willing to play both sides against the middle based on their own thoughts and hopes, and asking others to do or attempt what they themselves won't or can't for themselves.


*edited to add a line*

Nobody saw what made the sounds, therefore, nobody can say for certain what they are. Krantz, based on his observation of photographs, formed the opinion the tracks were fake, but he did not say why and he did not view the actual tracks. Like so many other objects of interest in this field, there simply isn't any way to know what we're dealing with. That means all we have is dueling opinions. There's nothing wring with that, just wanted to point out that anyone who takes a intractable position regarding the Sierra Sounds is on pretty shaky ground. JMO.

Actually, supposedly what made the sounds was seen, in the area several times, if anyone is going to believe the account of the details posted in the book Bigfoot by Slate and Berry. Most of those event's in question being in Berry's own words . The tracks and alleged vocals in question, along with other vocals and tree knocks supposedly recorded, visual sightings of dark shapes of multiple height variation. Flashing lights, other strange happenings ans playing out the part as described by a psychic's analysis of what the men involved could expect to occur.

All I'm saying that is if were going to be critical of one analysis then we should be more critical of all of them when it comes to basing our own opinions on it. And test it for yourself at some point to see how close you can get to what supposedly occured and not rely solely on the opinions of others , no matter how educated or uneducated they were to form the basis of your opinion.

LOL, good for you. Hope it gave you a real belly laugh Jim.



Who said it's real? Are you, like Bitter Monk, simply reading what you 'think' I have written and not what I 'actually' wrote? I hope that isn't the case and that like Bitter Monk you are not implying something which is completely false.

Twice in this thread alone I have said the Sierra Sounds are either a human hoax or a sasquatch. Never once did I write "the Sierra Sounds are most certainly sasquatch sounds". I'm not 100% sure what they are. I definately find them freaky and bizzare though. If they are hoaxed then they are a pretty strange/weird kind of hoax to bother to come up with.

With regards to Krantz, just because I liked him generally doesn't mean he was right about everying and wrong about nothing. Nobody who has ever lived is that fabulous.

You know, Bernard Heuvelmans thought Patty was an obvious fake but that the Dinsdale Loch Ness footage was the real deal. As it happened, the Dinsdale footage turned out to be a small boat while Patty goes on and every attempt at debunking it falls flat.



I don't believe I have ever once said 'so and so is the man, or 'so and so can't ever be wrong'. I've never held any one particular researcher up to be a demi god incapable of being incorrect and I don't base my opinions solely on one person's word without having a look at the evidence myself or without listening to any other input.



I have already pointed out elsewhere that I can't see any supposed breasts on the MD subject and I'm perplexed why apparantely Meldrum thinks he sees them. I actually rarely, if ever, say "oh, whatsisname said this so it must be true!".



I don't understand that. What is that supposed to mean? Can you be clearer?

Sure .

http://new.wavlist.com/soundfx/016/pig-3.wav

Oh right, I see. That's what you meant. Fair enough Jim.

So what exactly is wrong with that comment I made, seeing as how it was brought up that it can be done and Bitter Monk did write 'anybody' can make their effective vocal tract 50% bigger.

I can't mimic what is heard on the Sierra Sounds. I know that much. If anybody else can, simply by cupping his hands around his mouth then it would be very interesting. I would vouch that person would burst out laughing halfway through trying to copy all that apparant 'chatter' and sounding like an idiot at a drunken chimp party.. LOL.

I agree, in principal. In practice though, it's not practical for me to double check everyone's analysis (nor am I qualified to do so, in some cases). I award some sources more weight than others based on previous results, pass most assertions though my internal logic checking algorithm (AKA, the BS test), and always always be prepared to accept an alternative superior argument when it comes along.

I knew I should never have opened this thread....


A. "Likely primate" based on what exactly?

B. There is absolutely, positively, no way on earth than anyone can claim that any sound is not made by any known animal. Who exactly has that catalog of all possible sounds made by all known animals on earth? Here we were just a year ago realizing that amongst all of us supposed woodsman and NA wildife authorities that we didn't even know all the sounds of the ever present COYOTES, which should be one of the first rule outs for any unknown sound in the NA woods. So today we can't even claim to know all the sounds coyotes make, so how on earth does one propose we know all the other animals in forest? Any sound expert that makes such a claim should be considered highly suspect. What they perhaps meant to say is that "it doesn't match our (limited and incomplete) catalog of 150 sounds of North American wildlife."

Apeman

I find the first CD of Sierra Sounds to be very convincing. That and the Tahoe yell are the only two recordings that are evidence in my mind but I am not looking to prove the existence of sasquatch to anybody. I don't completely limit what I think is likely true to what seems like good evidence to prove their existence or what is 100% certain. That would pretty much eliminate everything. It is interesting that the Ohio recording apparently sounds like a pig but I suppose there is a limited number of ways to grunt. It may well be a pig.

I would go farther than Lyndon in saying that a person could not make the sounds on the Sierra sounds recording, at least not in the field. It is apparently a very elaborate hoax or a family of sasquatch. A group of people in the remote woods that could, and would, anonymously make the sounds together is not credible especially considering they were armed with high powered rifles. There are apparently sounds of at least 3 individuals. Sometimes they are apparently vocalizing at the same time. It would have required careful planning and someone very skillful in the art of recording sounds, not to mention an extraordinary ability to make very strange "inhuman" sounds There may be humans that can produce the really low sound or the high sounds but it would probably take a team of sasquatch vocal hoaxers in the field or a recording studio to put that recording together.

Saying that it could be a known animal is very strange to me. It is even stranger than saying it is must be a sasquatch and makes me wonder what people are listening to. What is is even remotely likely to be, an elk, a pig, coyotes?. Someone want to say what kind of animal they think could possibly make that noise and not limit it to the vague anything or unknown. I could see a howler monkey making some of those sounds but you should probably limit it to animals of the high Sierras or it is just a hoax.

The section where the "old man" seems to get angry at the jet was a very nice touch for someone to think of in the studio. He gets so worked up, phlegm gets in his mouth and he has to spit. I do have to laugh when I try to imagine what the hoaxer must look like doing that. His roar in that part seems to my subjective ears that it sounds very much like the tonal quality of the roar at the end of Tahoe scream considering that it is likely a lower quality recording. It is at about 26 minute 15 second point on the Sierra Sounds where I think they also sound quite similar.

We don't have any wild hogs up here in Alberta Canada and I am only familiar with the sounds of domestic hogs but DB's recordings do sound somewhat similar to an agressive boar... but at least he got a recording. I wish I could say the same.

I had a close range vocalization incident in 2005 that occured after spending two nights trying to attract a sasquatch. I believe I was successful. The sounds this creature displayed from just outside of my tent could be described as a combination of dog and hog with "human" vowel sounds mixed in. These sounds were followed by a high pitched scream then the sequence was repeated about 4 or 5 times. The volume was incredible and there was a emotional quality of frustration with the vocalizations.

These sounds did not compare with any known animal I'm aware of nor the other ear-witness, some who described the screaming as almost human.

I had never heard the Sierra recordings prior to this incident but I purchased them a few months later. When myself and girlfriend listened we both said "that is what we heard". Some of the sounds from the Sierra recordings were an exact match to what we experienced.

I can now imitate these sounds quite well.

You can't have heard much of the tapes. On top of the grunts and growls there is a lot of 'chatter' and a kind of 'half language' going on there at other points. It sounds like it is talking.

What else could it be if not a primate?

I think you should listen to them more.



When you listen to all the sounds on the tapes then you would say they are not made by any known animal. They are NOTHING like anything I have ever heard, nor you. You might pick out one particular aspect and say "well that bit sounds like it could be a hog" but taken as a whole, which we should do and should not pick out just one part, then all the sounds combined and in conjunction with each other are clearly NOT made by any known animal. Unless of course it is a human hoax.



With all due respect Apeman, if anybody listened to the Sierra Sounds with all these grunts, grows, whoops, chatter and half language and then said "hey it could be a coyote", well I would think they are mad quite frankly. Coyotes don't talk.



You would have a point there with other suspected or alleged sasquatch sounds. However, these other suspected sasquatch sounds are mainly isolated cries, growls, grunts, whoops and moans etc etc. Individually, these could very well be from known animals, (a la the Steenburg/Mathews coyote findings). However, the Sierra Sounds are completely different. They simply cannot be from any known animal. They are either a human hoax or an unknown animal, i.e sasquatch.

Bob/CrimsonGoblin,

Thanks for your input. I was beginning to feel outnumbered and cornered for a while there. Thanks for addressing the balance.