• Due to ongoing issues caused by Search, it has been temporarily disabled
  • Please excuse the mess, we're moving the furniture and restructuring the forum categories

Recording voice in your home

bignickel

Mad Mod Poet God
Joined
Aug 14, 2002
Messages
3,336
Location
Somewhere, USA
I'm not sure if this is a 'computer' question, per se, but more of a technological question.

Is there a way/device/means to record anything spoken / audio in your home on a constant basis, and you can play it back whenever necessary? I don't want to really save it past a day or two, just be able to check something said a minute ago or earlier in the day perhaps.

Checked the internet, but every answer I get is either 'home studio recording' or 'is Alexa spying on you' for answers.
 
I was thinking of old Tricky Dick, and I wondered about how he was doing it in the Oval Office. I think he just had voice - activated tape recorders running all the time? Not sure who switched out the tape on such a setup.
 
I was thinking of old Tricky Dick, and I wondered about how he was doing it in the Oval Office. I think he just had voice - activated tape recorders running all the time? Not sure who switched out the tape on such a setup.

wiki/Nixon_White_House_tapes

"Sony TC-800B machines using very thin 0.5 mil (12.7 μm) tape at the slow speed of 15⁄16 inch (24 mm) per second", controlled by the Secret Service and "First Family Locator" system.
 
Most home security systems, webcam plugged into a Pi, Android device streaming to a storage box, e.g.Echo under -Droid
 
There are plenty of digital audio recorders with 'wake on sound' options otherwise a cheap security cam.
 
*narrator's voiceover: OP thinks they have found a way to conclusively win arguments with their S.O. in the quiet of their home.Watch, now, as OP plumbs the depths of poor judgement*
 
*narrator's voiceover: OP thinks they have found a way to conclusively win arguments with their S.O. in the quiet of their home.Watch, now, as OP plumbs the depths of poor judgement*

You think playing a recording their SO didn't know about is somehow going to backfire? Or that their SO won't absolutely love being in a house where ther eis no actual privacy?

I see no negative consequences to this action.
 
Just put up a security system and if the others have something to say they probably won't say it in the house.

Works like that in the shops I have worked at. Nobody says a bad word about anything near a known hotspot.
 
What a bunch of negative Nancy's here. I can think of a few different reasons for wanting sound verification for things I'm working on. If you work out of your house I could see several more reasons on top of the other reasons. In fact, I just installed a security system for a lawyer that wanted them for his house for exactly the reason the OP said. They wanted to go back and check things if their notes weren't clear enough or if they felt they forgot something.

What terrible relationships people must be in if that's where their mind goes first. Sad times.
 
What a bunch of negative Nancy's here. I can think of a few different reasons for wanting sound verification for things I'm working on. If you work out of your house I could see several more reasons on top of the other reasons. In fact, I just installed a security system for a lawyer that wanted them for his house for exactly the reason the OP said. They wanted to go back and check things if their notes weren't clear enough or if they felt they forgot something.

What terrible relationships people must be in if that's where their mind goes first. Sad times.

If he'd said office or home office I'd be with you but it was "house" which is odd.
 
Plus it's mostly kidding around.

Eta: us we've already got this tech. "Hey Alexa, what did I just say?"

*green light intensifies* "You just said that... er, I wasn't listening"
 
Last edited:
OP is basically looking for an audio version of a dash cam, yes? Records for set times and then records over itself on a loop? Seems conceptually simple. Legal in my State too, as long as one party knows they are being recorded. But if two people were talking when the person who knows the tape is running left the room, there's a legit privacy violation in play, re: reasonable expectation of privacy in a non-public place.
 
OP is basically looking for an audio version of a dash cam, yes? Records for set times and then records over itself on a loop? Seems conceptually simple. Legal in my State too, as long as one party knows they are being recorded. But if two people were talking when the person who knows the tape is running left the room, there's a legit privacy violation in play, re: reasonable expectation of privacy in a non-public place.

I'm absolutely positive there is no state that exists where a person can't record everything said in their home. Perhaps if you were in a public business or on a phone call but you can record any sound that happens in your house. I can't think of any law saying otherwise. Maybe you can't video record your bathroom in some states, but sound? Yeah, no privacy. It's my\your home, I can record whatever I want.
 
I'm absolutely positive there is no state that exists where a person can't record everything said in their home. Perhaps if you were in a public business or on a phone call but you can record any sound that happens in your house. I can't think of any law saying otherwise. Maybe you can't video record your bathroom in some states, but sound? Yeah, no privacy. It's my\your home, I can record whatever I want.

You might want to Google that.
 
I was monitoring/recording on cam a certain area in my living room for a few days to catch the culprit cat who was pooping there. My mid-20s nephew visited and slept on the couch. But only after uh, pleasuring himself late at night. I immediately erased that section when I saw it and am waffling on whether I should tell him or not.
 
You're the one making the claim that it would be a privacy violation to voice record someone in your own house. I'm open to being wrong, but the onus is on you, not me.

Lol, making a passing reference to common knowledge is not "making a claim". Making a claim is your post that you are absolutely positive that no such law exists. Not even getting into "maybe some states don't let you video people in your bathroom". Try NO States allow such a ridiculous violation of privacy anywhere, public or private.

But since you have backpedaled from being absolutely positive to being open to correction, here's my beloved NJ law, that I referenced. Other states have two party consent instead of one party:

https://law.justia.com/codes/new-jersey/title-2a/section-2a-156a-3/

You'll note that it refers to interception of oral communication, with no exceptions for being on private property.

No man, you are not a God in your house with absolute rights over anyone inside it. If you have guests sleeping over, you cannot audio record what they do in bed, or electronically eavesdrop on a couple having a private convo that does not include the one who knows it's being recorded, even on your own property.

ETA: forgot to mention, clicking on "next" under the cited law goes on to list the exemptions for legitimate government surveillance, etc. A person on his own property is not one of those exemptions
 
Last edited:
Lol,making a passing reference to common knowledge is not "making a claim". Making a claim is your post that you are absolutely positive that no such law exists. Not even getting into "maybe some states don't let you video people in your bathroom".

You should read what I said more closely. Let me help:

me said:
I'm absolutely positive there is no state that exists where a person can't record everything said in their home

Try NO States allow such a ridiculous violation of privacy anywhere, public or private.

Good, never claimed otherwise but I've definitely learned something new here. So your lack of knowledge has also increased my knowledge!

But since you have backpedaled from being absolutely positive to being open to correction, here's my beloved NJ law, that I referenced. Other states have two party consent instead of one party:

https://law.justia.com/codes/new-jersey/title-2a/section-2a-156a-3/

You'll note that it refers to interception of oral communication, with no exceptions for being on private property.

Wow, so no nanny cams, eh? That's weird. According to this it says that you can use nanny cams in NJ, but oddly some audio is more restricted. Here's a link. I know this might be a shock but perhaps your interpretation is wrong? I don't know, but we have conflicting information here and I refuse to believe that there are no nanny cams in NJ but I don't really care all that much either.

No man, you are not a God in your house with absolute rights over anyone inside it. If you have guests sleeping over, you cannot audio record what they do in bed, or electronically eavesdrop on a couple having a private convo that does not include the one who knows it's being recorded, even on your own property.

Yes, you can. You can't in every state, but every state isn't ******* New Jersey. You really, really seem to have a hard time with that in almost every conversation. According to my source there are more states that you can record audio than you can't, and ironically Jersey isn't mentioned anywhere.
 
Last edited:
You should read what I said more closely. Let me help:

Good, never claimed otherwise but I've definitely learned something new here. So your lack of knowledge has also increased my knowledge!

I like how you took the response to one point (recording in a bathroom), and paired it with an earlier and unrelated point. Readers can see that blatant dishonesty, dude.

Your own link goes on to describe how NO states allow recording in the bathroom, by the way. That's what the reply you quote specifically referred to.

Wow, so no nanny cams, eh? That's weird. According to this it says that you can use nanny cams in NJ, but oddly some audio is more restricted. Here's a link. I know this might be a shock but perhaps your interpretation is wrong? I don't know, but we have conflicting information here and I refuse to believe that there are no nanny cams in NJ but I don't really care all that much either.

It's called scope of intent, plague. You can't record whatever you want whenever you want. From your own link that it is painfully clear that you didn't understand:

"nanny cams and the laws surrounding the use of nanny cams are intended to protect the use of cameras utilized for the purpose of safety and security. This means that the purpose of the camera plays an important role in whether or not an individual can record others in their home."

{ETA: hilite added because you really seem to be struggling on this point while you say "there's no privacy. I can record whatever I want". }

That means you can use nanny cams as a security measure, like any security system. You can't record, as you blatantly claimed, " its my\your home, and I can record whatever I want". Your claim is wrong at every level. You cannot record "whatever you want".

Yes, you can.

Your painfully stupid blanket claim was that you were absolutely positive that no states restrict recording of others in your own home. That you now hopefully realize there are restrictions in literally every ******* state is the point.

You can't in every state, but every state isn't ******* New Jersey. You really, really seem to have a hard time with that in almost every conversation. According to my source there are more states that you can record audio than you can't, and ironically Jersey isn't mentioned anywhere.

I specifically said in my post that I was referring to my state and its single party requirement. You might note that in other states, you can't even use a nanny cam without informing and receiving consent from the person being recorded, who is at a place of work anyway, even if in a residence.

Your claim that you can record "whatever you want in your own home" is flatly disproven, by your own link. And probably known in advance to everyone reading except you.
 
Last edited:
Lol ok Thermal. I'm not arguing with you anymore. I hate watching the goal posts move and you blatantly ******* lying about me saying you could record someone in the bathroom. I wasn't even referring to ******* video, I was referring to audio.

Anyway, good talk.

To the OP, record whatever the **** you want in your own house (within reason). Unless you plan on using it in court or release it publicly all of the available information shows it doesn't matter one bit.
 
Lol ok Thermal. I'm not arguing with you anymore. I hate watching the goal posts move and you blatantly ******* lying about me saying you could record someone in the bathroom. I wasn't even referring to ******* video, I was referring to audio.

You 100% did say you said something about recording in a bathroom, liar. See the quote reposted below. However, I didn't say anything about video. Stop lying.

Anyway, good talk.

To the OP, record whatever the **** you want in your own house (within reason).

Oh, now it's "within reason"? That's funny, because just a coiple posts ago it was:

I'm absolutely positive there is no state that exists where a person can't record everything said in their home. Perhaps if you were in a public business or on a phone call but you can record any sound that happens in your house. I can't think of any law saying otherwise. Maybe you can't video record your bathroom in some states, but sound? Yeah, no privacy. It's my\your home, I can record whatever I want.

And I'm moving goalposts. Sometimes there aren't enough laughing dogs.

Unless you plan on using it in court or release it publicly all of the available information shows it doesn't matter one bit.

Ya commiting a third degree crime is no biggie. Just do what you feel with no regard for the law and rights of others.
 
You 100% did say you said something about recording in a bathroom, liar. See the quote reposted below. However, I didn't say anything about video. Stop lying.

you said:
Not even getting into "maybe some states don't let you video people in your bathroom".

Funny because I specifically said no video in a bathroom. Called it out in my first post. I'm still reading more wrt audio.

Oh, now it's "within reason"? That's funny, because just a coiple posts ago it was:

Yeah, funny how people change their statements based on information that I, myself, found. I do that because, unlike some, I don't get stuck in my positions. I was open to changing my mind, I found information that showed me where I was wrong, I changed my ******* stance. That's literally called skepticism. Jesus mother ******* Christ with you sometimes. God ******* damn.

And I'm moving goalposts. Sometimes there aren't enough laughing dogs.

That's true. I'd be stuck here typing them out all day for you. "Oh my God, you changed your mind after seeing more information". Unlike you, where I showed you were wrong, I can actually changed my ******* stance.

Ya commiting a third degree crime is no biggie. Just do what you feel with no regard for the law and rights of others.

Lol. Later kid.
 
Last edited:
Funny because I specifically said no video in a bathroom. Called it out in my first post. I'm still reading more wrt audio.

OK, this one may be a legit misunderstanding. You said "maybe some states" don't allow video recording, which is what I was bristling at. There's no maybe, and no some. It's absolutely and all states don't allow it.

Yeah, funny how people change their statements based on information that I, myself, found. I do that because, unlike some, I don't get stuck in my positions. I was open to changing my mind, I found information that showed me where I was wrong, I changed my ******* stance. That's literally called skepticism. Jesus mother ******* Christ with you sometimes. God ******* damn.

Right, but you don't acknowledge that you were wrong, and wildly so. You just reworded your position and keep going like it was your point all along. Dishonest as hell, man.

That's true. I'd be stuck here typing them out all day for you. "Oh my God, you changed your mind after seeing more information". Unlike you, where I showed you were wrong, I can actually changed my ******* stance.

You have yet to show me where I'm wrong. If you mean I'm wrong on nothing here, but you want to wave vaguely to where you're totes sure I was some other unnamed time, then:

Lol. Later kid.

You made up a bull **** argument out of the clear blue sky to be contrarian. You were shown to be wrong by your own presented evidence. No, that's not some failing on my part.
 
OK, this one may be a legit misunderstanding. You said "maybe some states" don't allow video recording, which is what I was bristling at. There's no maybe, and no some. It's absolutely and all states don't allow it.

So I broke the law by videoing my daughter in the bath? Oh dear, never mind.
 
So I broke the law by videoing my daughter in the bath? Oh dear, never mind.

Honestly, my wife and I got in a little bit of trouble for that in the late 90s. We had digital camera pics of our infant daughter getting a bath, and CVS film developing flagged us for possible child pornography. Straightened out quickly, but scary for a couple days.
 
State police handled it, they said our particular pics were being interpreted as artistic, for which there are exemptions, but we were warned that being overly artistic could change that subjective interpretation. We got a guideline sheet which spelled out in super vague terms what was allowed and not. Didn't clear much up.
 
The trick with even audio only recording is the one party (or more) consent, required by all states. That means you can't record two guests having a talk if neither knows about the recording. Like alfaniners... indiscretion... upthread, a reasonable expectation of privacy is a real thing.
 
Re OP: you looking for ghosts??

"And there, fast forward to 03:43:44 you can hear it speak!"
"....oooooooooo I do not consent to being recorded ooooooooooooo..."
"Definitely supernatural! Have there been any other manifestations?"
"Yes, this cease-and-desist letter materialized."
 
You're the one making the claim that it would be a privacy violation to voice record someone in your own house. I'm open to being wrong, but the onus is on you, not me.
I recall a case in Indiana were a man did jail time for invasion of privacy for (video) recording his wife in the marital home in an effort to determine if she was having an affair.
It didn't help him at the divorce either, or with his son.
 
Back
Top Bottom