What is a Frequency Generator?

A frequency generator is a research instrument used by experimenters, both practitioners and private users alike, in an attempt to influence the body in making chemical changes. We use the term experimentation deliberately, as that is exactly what this is. These devices are not approved by the FDA in the US for treating illness with humans. (It has, however, been approved for use in veterinary applications.)

rife machine Frequency generators work on the principle of sympathetic resonance, which states that if there are two similar objects and one of them is vibrating, the other will begin to vibrate as well, even if they are not touching. In the same way that a sound wave can induce resonance in a crystal glass and ultra-sound can be used to break up kidney stones, it is believed by many doctors and researchers that a frequency generator uses sympathetic resonance to physically vibrate offending bacteria, viruses and parasites, resulting in their destruction and subsequent elimination from the body.

The first known publication on this subject (that this author is aware of) was by Nikola Tesla in 1890. Later, in the 1920's and 30's, Raymond Royal Rife is the man who began applying this amazing phenomena to people and the pathogens that make us ill. He used light to see these microscopic invaders while applying sound in the radio frequency range to create a sympathetic resonance of the bacteria or virus until it either exploded or morphed back into a healthy cell. Later, cellular physicist, Hulda Clark PhD, also applied this science to uncover and "map out" the unique bio-frequencies generated by hundreds of parasites and bacteria that invade our bodies. Rather than light, she uncovered these frequencies by sound, using a listening device of her own design. (sincrometer) Her work further supports the validity of applied bio-resonance science.

The Analog vs. Digital Debate

The question always arises about the type(s) of signal(s) that should used, and why. It is generally accepted that the most effective of these frequency generating devices will deliver an analog signal (versus a digital signal) in the RF (radio frequency) range in a square or sine wave pattern.


Sample Sine Wave		Sample Square Wave
Signal gently rises and falls. Can vary the rate of this rise and fall, top and bottom limits, etc...		Signal sharply turns on and off. Can vary the rate of this "on/off" signal.

Analog is better because it is in many ways a "more natural" frequency. It includes the sub-tones and overtones to the base number, providing a maximized fullness, essentially a richness of tonal qualities. A very big part of that is what is called the harmonics. An audiophile understands this. Those who desire only "true" sound on their stereo systems insist on analog devices for just this reason.

The current analog vs. digital discussion is wrought with misconceptions and disinformation. Such as, digitally generated frequencies do not vary, which implies that they do not have overtones and undertones. This would only be true if the frequencies remained digital. That is why digital frequencies from DDS (Direct Digital Synthesis) and DSP (Digital Signal Processing) are converted to analog before they are put out of quality generators. These Digital-to-Analog Converters are called a DAC for short. You can see in the diagram below that a frequency comes out of a DDS or a DSP looking like stairs. The signal then goes through a DAC or Digital-to-Analog Converter. Then it goes through a Low-Pass or Bandpass Filter to finish the analog conversion. Now the frequency that you have is a very accurate analog frequency with all the overtones and undertones of that analog frequency. The analog frequency produced by a digital chip can be swept up or down with more accuracy than any old tube analog instrument. The most important thing to remember is the frequency has to be converted to analog before it is output from the frequency generator.

rife machine signals

Digitally produced frequencies converted to analog are far superior to any signal that comes from an old antique tube type analog frequency generator. Antique tube type generators are very limited. If I want a frequency of 2128.5, an old tube analog generator would not be accurate enough to give me that frequency to use. It could only give me 2128. Also digitally converted frequencies allow me to sweep with far more accuracy than old analog tube type instruments. Even a thousandth or millionth of a frequency is possible even though this kind of accuracy is not needed. This is something that a purely analog instrument could not do as accurately. Digitally produced frequencies when converted to analog can accurately produce minute details. These analog frequencies when converted to a square wave waveform produce square wave harmonics. Some claim that their instruments which output analog frequencies produce advanced analog harmonics, but this is just sales hype. All the digital to analog frequency generators on the market today that have been tested with a spectrum analyzer produce the same analog harmonics. Anyone claiming to have some form of superior advanced square wave harmonics is just giving you lots of sales hype. (Our frequency generator uses this technology.)

Output of contact (or "pad") type instrument vs. output of the RAY TUBE?

Contact or "pad" type instruments deliver frequencies through direct contact, while ray tube instruments transmit frequencies indirectly through the air. Direct contact makes it possible to get the full energy into the body without power loss. Indirect contact though a ray tube is efficient also, but more time consuming, as ray tubes should be held within several inches of the body. The tube is waved over the entire body very slowly.

The laws of physics in regards to signal loss come into play when using a ray tube. It requires much more power at the frequencies to deliver its output. For every foot that you move the ray tube away from the body you have to divide the power output by the ray tube by a factor of 4. If you have 50 watts of power coming out of a ray tube then at one foot away from the ray tube you only have 12.5 watts. At two feet you only have 3.125 watts and at 3 feet you only have about .78 of a watt. Because of this loss Dr. Rife had the doctors who used the instruments stay within 6 to 12 inches of the body with the ray tube. Today many ray tube instruments output about 100 watts or more. Their manufacturers recommend those who use them to stay at least 3 feet away from the ray tube. At one foot away from the ray tube you only have 25 watts. At two feet you only have 6.25 watts and at 3 feet you only have about 1.56 of a watt.

With a direct contact instrument this power loss is not a problem; therefore, one does not need to use anywhere near the same power levels used by a ray tube instrument. This is one benefit of a contact instrument.

Background of the contact or pad instrument.

The first contact instrument was built in 1957 by John Crane and John Marsh. The ray tube instruments were very expensive to build and they wanted to build smaller instruments that would be less expensive. Even today many ray tube instruments are three times more expensive than pad instruments. John Crane and John Marsh took an off-the-shelf frequency generator and hooked up pads to it. These first pad instruments worked quite well but were underpowered like most of the pad instruments built today. They tried to overcome the power problem with larger pads. Because the off-the-shelf generator didn’t have a carrier frequency they no longer used one. This was important. Without the RF carrier frequency, they couldn’t get the same results as the ray tube instrument.

Why Power Output Is Important In A Frequency Generator.

When comparing various instruments, power output is a very important consideration. The first pad instrument developed by John Crane and John Marsh worked quite well but were underpowered like most of the pad instruments built today. The power output of pad instruments on the market today is only about 0.20 of 1 watt. Our generator, with the use of an RF carrier, is about 2 watts and is over 9 times more powerful than these instruments. With the use of the optional amplifier it is over 50 times more powerful.

Audio Range Frequencies Versus Radio Frequencies

In a nutshell, Radio Frequencies are higher than Audio Frequencies. More power and more "cycles per second" (frequency) allow the signal to penetrate more deeply. So why do the instruments built today only use low audio frequencies when original frequencies were much higher in the radio range? The FCC (Federal Communication Commission) is the reason why. In 1935 Congress created the FCC and by 1936 they began to regulate the airwaves. Before 1935 there were no regulations to prevent Rife from using his high frequencies output through a ray tube. The frequencies output through the ray tube would travel about 12 miles in each direction from his laboratory. Rife said his equipment would “raise the devil” with all the radios.

In 1936 Rife’s engineer, Philip Hoyland built the first audio frequency instrument. From this time on Rife’s original high frequencies were no longer used in any of the equipment. This of course made it so his instrument was not as effective. In the 1950s Rife, John Crane and John Marsh continued to build this low audio frequency instrument. Today’s modern frequency generators are patterned after these low audio frequency instruments.

Early generator.