Comparison with other methods

In comparing two voices with the phonetic method, the phonetician mainly uses his human sense of hearing. It must be ensured that the hearing organ of the phonetician functions perfectly and is not damaged in any way, such as certain unnoticed or suppressed frequencies. In addition, the comparison of voices is even more difficult for the phonetician, if the speakers speak a foreign language. It is quite common, that for example over 20 voices have to be compared in search of a match. Here, the already subjective impression of the phonetician can fail. The human sense of hearing cannot cope with the demand. Some phoneticians claim, there is no such thing as a voiceprint or a voice profile. This claim has been disproved by the methods presented here and also by the results of the established companies from Munich, Germany: Voice.Trust AG and Telenet GmbH.
The phonetic method can hold an advantage, if e.g. the German dialect used in a short conversation is to be determined or to uncover a speech impairment, aiding in recognizing a suspect. The presented method is a digital evaluation of the human voice. Using physics, mathematics, psychoacoustics and last but not least the computing methods of real structure research, it is possible to exactly define a voice profile of a speaker with a self-developed computer program system. For this, a representative cross-section of the voice is needed. A representative cross-section is achieved through a speech duration of about 40-80 seconds. Subjective errors are impossible with this method and the language used does not play a role, furthermore the spoken text does not have to be identical.