Frank’s Box – Reviewed

Frank’s Box is a device optimized by Frank Sumption, sometimes described (but not by Mr. Sumption) as “the telephone to the dead.”

Franks Box reviewed - ghost huntingFrank Sumption wasn’t the first to work with this concept, but his results are among the most impressive so far.

Others have tried variations of this concept — a radio receiver that scans a wide range of stations, “grabbing” snippets of sounds and words, to form messages — with some success.

(The popular “Shack Hack” was one attempt, but – as some designed it – it lacked the clarity or durability of its higher-quality counterparts.)

Frank Sumption – now deceased – seemed to make “Frank’s Boxes,” one at a time, and no two looked the same or produce identical results.  (The photo with this article is symbolic.  As far as I know, no Frank’s Box looks like an actual telephone.)

I read the EVP-ITC list online for several months, and I exchanged correspondence with Mr. Sumption, but — even — I’m uncertain of what was (and still is) going on.

I tend to take things at face value and… this seems to be a fairly complex subject with conflicting opinions.

(There’s been a lot of static on the EVP-ITC list, due to very vocal skeptics.  That said, I have heard recordings on that list that claim to be genuine and — if the recordings truly represent what a Frank’s Box can do — they’re groundbreaking.)

I haven’t worked with a Frank’s Box myself.  If and when I do, I’ll happily provide a review.

(Authentic Frank’s Boxes are very difficult to find in the wild, and I’m not sure how or why Mr. Sumption decided to offer them to people. I know both genuine researchers and questionable personalities who own them.)

For now, I try to keep my critical thinking skills engaged, and remember that absolutely anyone can fake “results” to support or dispute what others are saying.  Particularly if money is exchanging hands… well, as the TV show used to say, “Be careful out there.”

However, it would be impossible to mention what’s popularly called “the Frank’s Box” without talking about Christopher Moon’s work.

CHRISTOPHER MOON and Frank’s Boxes

Chris Moon is a paranormal researcher. He was the founder of the controversial magazine, Haunted Times, now out-of-print.

Chris’s successes with the Frank’s Box brought the device to the attention of serious investigators.

From my personal experiences on investigations with Chris, I’m certain he can achieve remarkable and authentic results with the Frank’s Boxes that he owns.

Here’s a video that speaks for itself. Listen to the voices. Watch the video screen on the box. Also note the composition of his audience. Weigh all of those points, carefully.

That video is at (Apparently, there's a longer version, but this gets the idea across.

Maybe Chris’ success is due to his own gifts as a medium, as opposed to the device he’s using. That may be the best explanation.

Other than that…? Well, at the time I met him, and shortly afterwards, I saw some big red flags related to his business practices. Though I believed what I heard in two sessions with Chris (and a Frank’s Box), he then made a statement that made me uneasy.

I later learned that he’d made the same statement (not sexual, btw) to another woman in my age range. Comparing notes, we each raised an eyebrow.

I want to like Chris… but – as of December 2018 (eight years after writing the original version of this article) – I still don’t feel confident about trusting him.

That said, I am convinced of the authenticity of what I heard when he was using an actual Frank’s Box. (Emphasis: What I heard, not necessarily what he interpreted the box saying.)


The credibility of Frank’s Boxes open doors even wider to problems we already have in this field: Charlatans and con artists.

People can be very vulnerable when they’ve lost someone dear to them, or have fears related to death.

After all, if you could pay a certain fee or fulfill a request, and you could talk directly with someone on the other side — via a “telephone to the dead” — well, I think most people would.

Would a Frank’s Box work in the hands of an unscrupulous medium?  I’m not sure.  I haven’t seen anyone except Chris Moon use one.


Another high-profile researcher says she owns several actual Frank’s Boxes (acquired directly from Frank Sumption). I’m not sure if that’s true.

When I spoke with her, she insisted that Frank’s Boxes aren’t reliable for ghost research. She said that a Mini-Box is a better choice.

Maybe she’s right.

The problem is: when a researcher tells me one lie, I’m uneasy trusting other things they say. And, during the same lunch conversation where she & I discussed Frank’s Boxes, she told me something that – later – turned out to be untrue.

So, I’m not sure a Frank’s Box would speak to her, or that alternatives are much better. (When I mentioned her name to Frank – while he was still alive – he was very bitter about his experiences with her.)

Frank passed away some time ago, before he had a chance to give me one of his Frank’s Boxes. I regret missing that opportunity.

Now, I’m still looking for reliable opinions and first-person experiences with a Frank’s Box.


Until I’m more confident about these kinds of devices, I recommend experimenting, yourself.

Try every real-time communication device that you can. (Borrow them, or spend time with someone who owns one. Do not spend money you can’t afford to lose, on devices that may not work.)

Compare your results at home (or at any single, stable location) against results at “haunted” sites.  Frank Sumption seemed pretty adamant that the box works anywhere you have it. He’s said there’s no point in taking it to a “haunted” site.

From what I’ve seen, a Frank’s Box can be remarkable.

Is it always…? I have no idea.

I am 100% convinced that it can work in the hands of Chris Moon.

If you’ve had experiences with a Frank’s Box, especially if you’ve used one yourself, I hope you’ll leave a comment below.

Read Next: Ghost Boxes – Where Do the Words Come From?


Here’s one video showing how to create a “Shack Hack.”

That video is at  <- Directions start around :36 in the YouTube video.

Here’s one about working with a Thompson RT222

YouTube link for that video:

You may also like:

4 thoughts on “Frank’s Box – Reviewed”

  1. I recently acquired a “ghost box” called the P-SB7 — invented my Gary Galka. Gary lost his young daughter to a car accident, and has had success communicating with her through the P-SB7.

    I have only used it a couple of times, and no where that was “actually” haunted, yet. I have so far only gotten real results at my work – where a deceased employee is thought to stick around. We got several responses all in the same voice — some with multiple words. It is not as clear as hearing an evp with your own ears alone, but it seems to work under certain conditions.

    So far, my experience is that you have to be in the right mindset. You have to be calm but serious. You have to speak clearly and the louder the better. And be patient. Sometimes it takes five or ten seconds for a response. I don’t pay much attention to anything that sounds too much like radio static.

    If someone is being silly, either the spirits express disapproval or don’t talk at all. When a coworker asked a silly question, “Were you a pretty girl?” and the male voice who had been talking to us said, “That’s it” and stopped.

  2. In regards to the Frank box, the idea to invent new means to contact spirits is good, but the frank box in our opinion has a fatal flaw. It uses man made radio signals. Skeptics (magazines & websites) claim that all EVP’s are stray radio or TV signals. A recorder does NOT have the technology built in to receive these broadcasts, and because of this, when you get an EVP it is not a man made signal, but a sprit trying to communicate. You can prove this to a skeptic that your EVP’s are authentic.

    When you use a frank box and you hear a voice, is it a spirit, or a DJ, song or ad from the radio station? Can you REALLY say that it’s a voice of a spirit or a radio broadcast, and how do you prove it? Using pieces of equipment that are known to be susceptible to interference from manmade signals, and then trying to pass its results off as paranormal evidence makes non-believers laugh at the paranormal community. (Skeptics groups/magazines LOVE to call out paranormal groups on this one. Let’s stop making it easy for them!)

    We built our own frank box, and then made 100 index cards with colors, shapes, pictures of animals & objects. We would hold up a card and ask the Frank box “what is on this card.” All we wanted to hear was a one word answer of what was on the card. In all the hours of research and out of 100 cards it failed 100%. We never heard any answers and we gave it 3-5 minutes per card. We passed it off to other members over time to do their own research and experiments and log the results. No correct answers were ever given to any members at any location (house or cemetery).

    It was once said “For the frank box to work there must be a signal from an AM or FM” why, they record on a recorder without man made transmissions just fine.

    I feel that the frank box is just a random form of audio matrixing and you open yourselves up to false positives.

    In the end you cannot prove that your recording from the frank box is not just a radio brodcast. Like I said skeptics groups/magazines LOVE to call out paranormal groups on this one. Let’s stop making it easy for them!

    1. Brian,

      Thanks for sharing your opinions and your experiment results.

      I don’t see why man-made radio signals are a “fatal flaw” in Frank’s boxes. Technically speaking, voice recorders are not supposed to have the capability of picking up radio signals. However, there is (admittedly slim) evidence that, under the right conditions, any metal — including dental fillings — can pick up radio signals. So, don’t feel too complacent about the reliability of your voice recorder. The evidence is not wholly conclusive.

      I have yet to prove to a skeptic that EVPs are authentic. If you’ve persuaded a genuine skeptic that your EVP recordings are actually spirit voices, I’d love to know how you did so.

      We’re not trying to “pass off” anything. We’re reporting evidence — for and against certain techniques and equipment — and keeping the discussion open. Frankly, skeptics are perfectly happy to call out the paranormal community at large, when skeptics perceive something as in-house squabbling among us. So, if your goal is to avoid ridicule by skeptics, it’s best to avoid polarizing phrases such as “fatal flaw” regarding equipment with which some of us have had positive experiences.

      If I were to wield that kind of phrase, I’d point out one big problem with your research: You made your own Frank’s box. Many people believe that Frank is in tune with something — I have no idea what — that makes the boxes he personally builds different and more receptive than those built by others, even when they closely follow his plans.

      Some people are going to ridicule us, no matter how compelling our evidence. You’ll still find Flat Earth enthusiasts ridiculing the concept of a round earth. Some people believe no one has landed on Earth’s moon, and others are convinced that different, generally-accepted historical events were false.

      There will always be detractors, no matter what beliefs you’re discussing.

      As of 2009, about 20% of Americans admit to believing in ghosts. Other surveys suggest that the actual number believers may be higher. (The highest I’ve seen is between 60% and 70%.)

      If your campaign is to prove the existing of ghosts to others, you’ve adopted a lofty goal. I applaud you for that. Personally, I’m focusing on research techniques that might clarify the true cause of anomalous activity we call “ghosts.” Towards that end, I’ll keep experimenting and encourage others to do so, as well.

      In my opinion, any experiment in any field is open to false positives. If you know a way to remove them, 100%, I’d be interested in hearing your technique.

      Talking in terms of scientific “proof” is futile. There is no such thing as scientific proof… of anything. We can only demonstrate that some theories are more credible than others.

      For now, experiments with Frank’s boxes are inconclusive. We don’t have adequate laboratory conditions for consistent testing.

      Those of us who’ve had positive, extraordinary experiences with Frank’s boxes and similar devices, are certain that at least some of the boxes produce results best explained as the voice of a spirit.

      Those who haven’t, like those who’ve never encountered something that was clearly a ghost, will remain skeptical.

      Fiona Broome

  3. There is much at stake in this site so unlike the meandrings at mandela effect,i will keep to meaningful findings.A couple of days back i got an indication of spirit activity,as a hobby i tinker with batteries,there were 3 of them lying here and there and by some quirk they all drained off simultaneously two of them irrevocably.It is well known that dc power sources are a favourite food for spirits,what’s new is that only those batteries drained that were unattached to any equipment,those in phones or lights or clocks were unaffected.

Comments are closed.