How to determine, whether audio was tempered with?

>>60223018
why not just make it illegal then their not allowed to tamper with audio?

>>60223063
Well it's illegal, but some anonymous account released this audio, and I can't seem to find which reporter released it, so it seemed very weird to me.
Right now police is investigating, but I wonder, whether there's a home method how to find out, whether an audio was edited or not.

>>60223088
Maybe /mu/ could help. Or /wsr/. This is a consumerism board.

>>60223111
Thx, gonna check it.

Put it in a daw and inspect the waveforms

Guy who likes to fuck around with audio a lot here.
Can't listen to it ATM, so I'll give you a few pointers.

First of all, listen very carefully to the suspect parts and pay attention to ANYTHING strange or unusual, like background noise changing in volume or frequency content, changes in "clarity" of the voice, weird dynamic range compression, out of place artifacts, etc.

If that fails you can import it into Audacity (or similar) and inspect the waveform as the other guy said.
Be sure to isolate the suspicious parts and zoom all the way into the individual samples (like the pixels of audio).
If you don't find anything conclusive, you can go next level and import it into iZotope RX, and check the spectral content in the spectrogram (orange visualizer) for anything strange.

The next level would be forensic software that law enforcement uses, but I know nothing about that.

That said, if you have to ask, then you probably don't have the necessary knowledge to be able to discern the usual from the unusual when you see it, so don't waste your time.

Also, depending on the audio to tamper with, it could be very possible to make a perfect fake, even with added words if there is enough skill and/or money, so it's very possible that even if nobody finds anything, the tape could still be fake.

>>60225577
Thanks senpai.
The weirdest thing is that the audio is supposed to be months old, but they released it yesterday, 5 months before elections, so that's why I'm curious.

Gonna try the audacity.
Some parts seemed out of place, where the minister of finances is saying "hmmm" but sounds a bit out of touch, and also there's some song in the background in one part getting louder at one point. So gonna check that.

I have a shitty PC speakers though and not very experienced.
If I can ask for some further help when needed, I would be glad.

>>60225693
I'll follow the thread, so if you want me I'll respond when I can, as long as the thread is live.

I'll chzech the recording asap. In the meantime you can ask people with audio setups in the /bst/. Some of them are good with audio.

>>60225756
Czech*
Fuck, I wanted to make a stupid joke and ended up making a stupid joke of myself.

File: spectrogram.png (920KB, 1680x1050px) Image search: [Google]

920KB, 1680x1050px

>>60223018
>>60225693

Alright, so I've listened to the audio in Foobar while looking at the spectrograph (pic related), and while there are some things that could indicate that there has been some editing (like the changes in the volume of the voices and background, some of the clicks, and the noises), I haven't found anything that can't also be a completely natural occurrence (since, I assume, the recordings have been made using hidden microphones in non-ideal situations, so they're bound to have weird stuff like this) like the microphone moving during the recording and things like that.

Also I don't understand the language, so I have a hard time knowing where to focus, and it would take me hours and more effort than I'm willing to put in, to analyze thoroughly the entire thing.