FORENSIC SOLUTIONS / AUDIO & VOICE
Separate what was recorded from what is assumed.
Bring confidence-marked transcription, recording comparison and edit-point screening into a connected audio examination. Produce clearer listening copies while preserving the original recording as the transcription source.
01 / EXAMINATION CAPABILITIES
Ask a better question.
See more of the evidence.
What was said, do recordings share content, and where might the recording change?
Confidence-marked transcription
Produce a draft transcript with per-word confidence and visibly bracketed uncertain words.
Explore confidence-marked transcriptionVoice & recorded-content comparison
Compare voice similarity and shared recorded content as separate questions with separate outputs.
Explore voice & recorded-content comparisonContinuity & enhancement
Inspect detectable mains-hum continuity, screen adjacent segment changes and produce non-generative listening copies.
Explore continuity & enhancement02 / FROM SOURCE TO OUTPUT
A practical route
through the evidence.
Confidence-marked text, comparison scores, continuity traces and listening copies.
- 01
Start with the original
Retain the original recording and its container information. Extract audio from supported video when needed without replacing the source evidence.
- 02
Answer distinct audio questions
Transcribe speech, compare voices, compare recorded content or inspect continuity and environment changes with the corresponding workflow.
- 03
Prepare a clearer exhibit
Create a separate listening copy with conditional hum removal, noise reduction and level control. Keep the original as the transcript source.
Original audio or supported video with audio. A known recording is required for voice comparison or shared-content comparison.
03 / A MORE CONNECTED PROCESS
Less fragmented work.
More visible context.
Bring repeatable processing and measured comparisons into the workflow. Time and cost depend on the source material, selected methods and reporting scope.
| The task | Manual workflow | With Admissible Lab |
|---|---|---|
| Prepare material | Organise files and prepare each comparison separately. | Use defined input requirements and linked source material. |
| Inspect relevant features | Locate features and record observations individually. | Combine targeted processing with quantified or mapped outputs. |
| Connect the record | Collect notes and derived exhibits across separate tools. | Carry selected outputs and source context into reporting. |
| Assess performance | Effort varies with the material and the examination task. | Evaluate suitability and validation for each specific method. |
04 / PRACTICAL QUESTIONS
Know what
to bring.
Technical scope
Voice comparison reports raw similarity, not a calibrated identity conclusion. Hum continuity needs a detectable mains trace and does not establish an absolute recording date or time. Transcription is performed on the original recording.
Is voice similarity the same as matching a recording?
No. Voice comparison measures similarity between speaker representations. Recorded-content comparison asks whether two files share the same underlying recording, including possible excerpts or re-encodes.
Can a noisy recording be transcribed after enhancement?
The supported forensic transcription workflow uses the original recording. Enhancement creates a listening copy; uncertain transcript words remain visibly marked rather than silently guessed.
Can electrical hum date a recording?
This platform checks continuity when a detectable mains-hum signal is present. It does not have an external grid-reference database and does not provide an absolute date or time match.
YOUR NEXT INVESTIGATION
Start with the question.
See what is possible.
Explore the workflows with your evidence requirements in mind.