Twin City Opera House – Investigation

Twin City Opera House

 

McConnelsville, Ohio

 

June 10, 2021

 

Investigation

 

Standing prominently above the town of McConnelsville, the Twin City Opera House has served as a cultural centerpiece for generations. Built during a period when opera houses functioned as the social heart of small American towns, the building has witnessed countless performances, gatherings, and community events. Music, theater, celebration, and everyday human moments have all unfolded within its walls, leaving behind an atmosphere that feels deeply layered with history.

 

Structures like this often develop a reputation that extends beyond their architectural significance. The combination of age, emotional energy, and long-term human presence can create an environment where stories begin to form, some rooted in documented history, others passed down through personal experience and local memory. Over time, reports of unexplained sounds, shadow movement, and other unusual occurrences inside the opera house began to circulate, eventually leading to a request for investigation.

 

 

On June 10, 2021, investigators from Iron City Paranormal conducted a full overnight investigation of the building. The objective was not only to document any potential paranormal activity, but also to evaluate environmental factors, identify natural explanations where possible, and determine whether reported experiences might be attributed to residual or intelligent phenomena.

 

From the moment we began our walkthrough, it was clear that the building carried a distinct atmosphere. Historic theaters often feel different from other structures; their design amplifies sound, light, and movement in ways that can produce both striking beauty and unusual sensory experiences. Large open spaces, aging materials, and decades of structural settling can all contribute to subtle noises and visual effects that must be carefully evaluated during an investigation.

 

Throughout the evening, activity consistently manifested in several primary areas of the building: the backstage area, the basement, the balcony, and the auditorium. Rather than being confined to a single location, experiences appeared distributed across multiple sections of the structure, suggesting a layered environment where different forms of activity may coexist. What follows is a location-by-location breakdown of the investigation and the evidence documented in each of these areas.

 

 

 

Pre-Investigation Walkthrough 

 

Prior to beginning the formal investigation, our team conducted a full walkthrough of the building to familiarize ourselves with the layout, identify potential environmental factors, and establish baseline conditions in each area. This step is a critical part of our process, allowing us to note structural noises, lighting conditions, airflow, and any other natural elements that could later be mistaken for paranormal activity.

 

During this initial walkthrough, we also hosted a live video broadcast on Facebook, giving viewers an opportunity to see the interior of the opera house in real time and follow along as we prepared for the investigation. The live session allowed us to document the condition of the building before equipment was deployed and provided a transparent look at how we begin each case.

 

While moving through the structure, we took time to observe key areas including the stage, backstage corridors, balcony, and basement. Several team members noted the unique acoustics of the building and how easily sound carried from one level to another, an important factor to keep in mind when later evaluating footsteps, movement, or distant noises.

 

No major anomalies were recorded during the walkthrough itself; however, the building’s atmosphere, layout, and natural acoustics provided valuable context that helped guide the remainder of the investigation.

 

Photos:

 

• There were no notable images captured here.

 

Recording 1 – Walkthrough:

 

• Oddly enough, the recorder died mid-way through and nothing saved. This was checked multiple times and noted by numerous investigators to be fully charged. After this, it worked just fine the rest of the evening.

 

Video 1 – Walkthrough 1:

 

• This was meant to be the start of our walkthrough, instead, with all the viewers and commentors, we decided to jump right into the investigation which ultimately led to us not recording a full walkthrough.

 

 

Catwalk

 

The catwalk area above the stage consists of a narrow walkway system used historically for lighting and stage adjustments. The space is elevated, enclosed, and structurally exposed, with wooden planks and metal supports that naturally carry and amplify sound. Due to its position above the stage and backstage areas, sound from lower levels can travel upward, making acoustic awareness especially important during investigation.

 

During the pre-investigation walkthrough and initial setup period, investigators positioned themselves briefly within the catwalk to assess environmental conditions. While stationed above the stage, multiple team members heard what sounded like distinct footsteps and the shuffling of feet below. The movement resembled someone crossing the stage or performing light dance steps. The cadence and clarity of the sound prompted immediate attention, as no team members were positioned on the stage at that time.

 

 

No communication devices were actively deployed in the catwalk during this initial moment, as the sound event occurred unexpectedly while transitioning between locations. However, the clarity of the movement was significant enough to draw investigators downstairs toward the backstage area for further monitoring.

 

Due to the structural design of the opera house, sound travel was carefully considered as a possible explanation. The building’s acoustics allow noise from multiple levels to carry in unpredictable ways. Despite this, the movement heard from the catwalk location appeared isolated and intentional rather than random settling or building shift. No visual anomalies were captured in this location, and no direct device interaction was recorded while investigators were physically present in the catwalk. The experience in this area acted as a transition point in the investigation, leading directly to the more active session that followed backstage.

 

Photos:

 

• There were no images captured here that would be considered paranormal.

 

Recorder 1 – EVP 1:

 

 

• Prior to this recording, we were given names of Victoria, Elizabeth, Robert, and Sarah all through the Ovulis.
• At about :39, as we were using those names were were given, there were footsteps heard coming from behind us.
• The K2 meter lit throughout but we were a little suspicious of all the random and running wires could be potentially setting this off.

 

Recorder 2 – EVP 2:

 

 

• At :09, a loud knocking noise could be heard.

 

Recorder 3 – EVP 3:

 

 

• Footsteps could be heard here at :35.

 

Recorder 4 – EVP 4:

 

 

• Starting at 1:25, creaking footsteps could be heard lasting until 1:31.

 

Recorder 5 – EVP 5:

 

 

• There was a thumping that could be heard at :09 and again at :25.

 

Recorder 6 – EVP 6:

 

 

• A knocking could be heard here at :42 and :51.

 

Video 1 – Handheld Camera 1:

 

• At 11:15, there was a heavy breathing heard.
• A tapping noise could be heard at 23:46.

 

 

Video 2 – Stationary Camera 1:

 

• Almost immediately, at :03, the K2 meter could be seen flickering.
• Around the 4:00 mark, the shuffling of footsteps was heard.
• A light anomaly was captured at 4:12.
• At 12:45, a subtle flash of light could be seen.

 

 

Video 3 – Stationary Camera 2:

 

• Footsteps were captured here at 3:09.
• At 15:44, an odd scraping sound was heard.
• An un-identified whispering could be heard at 27:30.
• There was a popping sound repeated twice at 36:40 and 36:45.

 

 

Video 4 – Stationary Camera 3:

 

• At 7:42, there was a shadowy screen distortion captured moving left to right.
• A humming noise was heard at 11:55 followed by a dull thud at 12:05.
• Breathing could be heard at 18:13 then again toward the end of the clip at 35:14.

 

 

Video 5 – Stationary Camera 4:

 

• The breathing noise returned here at 1:55.
• At 13:16, a thump sound was captured.
• An altogether different sound of a knocking or tapping occurred in a group of three and heard at: 27:04, 27:09, and finally at 27:15.
• The screen seemed to distort then brighten out of nowhere at 33:05.

 

 

Video 6 – Stationary Camera 5:

 

• There was some odd electrical interference heard at :42 followed by the flashlight turning on at 1:15.
• An off whisper was heard at 2:05 followed by footsteps at 2:15.

 

 

Backstage

 

The backstage area of the Twin City Opera House served as a transitional space between the stage, access corridors, and lower levels of the building. Sound traveled easily through this area, and investigators had already noted movement and noise from above on the catwalk, making backstage a natural next point of focus.

 

 

Shortly after entering the space, a flashlight that had been positioned for communication illuminated without direct interaction. Investigators began a controlled communication session, asking direct questions and requesting that the light be turned on or off. Over the course of the session, the flashlight activated multiple times in apparent response to those prompts, though not always immediately.

 

Later audio review revealed several phrases that were not heard in real time, including what sounded like “Save me,” “Ask that person,” and the word “Flashlight” shortly after investigators explained its purpose. While no visual anomalies were documented in this area, the combination of responsive flashlight activity and relevant audio captures suggested that this location was one of the more interactive spaces encountered during this phase of the investigation.

 

Photos:

 

• In this first screen capture, the flashlight could be seen turning on as we gathered answers to our yes/no questions.

 

 

• This set of screen captures shows two different moments where the light up balloon moved, with no breeze to note, which corresponded to answers to our questions.

 

 

Recorder 1 – EVP 1:

 

 

• Before we even started recording, the flashlights had turned on with help from some other worldly activity.
• At 1:05, they turned off after we asked them to do so.
• After we asked them to turn it on if they were with us, they turned on at 1:58.
• While we tried to pinpoint their identity, we asked if they were a performer but the light turned off at 3:08.
• For about 3o seconds, from 3:30 to 4:00, the lights both flickered as if someone was playing with them.
• The last interaction occurred at 4:58 as we asked them to turn it on if they’ve been here for a long time.

 

Recorder 2 – Phasma Box 1:

 

 

• We began bluntly and asked if they were a little girl and, if so, could they turn the flashlight on. It turned on at :31 but followed with audible communication through the Phasma Box with “Save me” at :39.
• After we asked them to turn the light back off, we were given a plea to turn it off with “Don’t do that” at :53.

 

Recorder 3 – Phasma Box 2:

 

 

• As the flashlight started on in this clip, we attempted to get them to turn it off but instead we heard a welcomed question of “How are you?” at :04.
• We explained that they need to turn the light off so we could ask another question and, at :27, we heard “Question?”
• An odd phrase of “Cut to black” was heard at :45 followed by the light shutting off at :55.
• Finally, they told us their feelings about the darkness with “I don’t want to” referencing the recent flashlight shutting off.

 

Recorder 4 – Phasma Box 3:

 

 

• We asked if someone was still part of a performance up here and we heard a confirmation of “Still” at :13 followed by “Two of us” at :23.
• After we paused, we heard a question of “Who is that?” at :32 and “Join us” at :44 after we asked for their name.
• The flashlight turned on at 1:10 after we mentioned it seemed to be a child.
• This was confirmed simply with “I turned the light on” at 1:15.

 

Recorder 5 – Phasma Box 4:

 

 

• As we mentioned there were other things they could activate, the K2 meter flickered on and off at :08.
• We asked if this was a little girl and heard “No” at :38.
• The flashlight again turned on at :51.
• We were eventually told to “Give it up” as we tried to open up some communication.
• After we explained that none of the devices would hurt them, we were told that “He’s controlling” at 1:40 as if someone would not let them step forward.

 

Recorder 6 – Phasma Box 5:

 

 

• “What?” was heard at :01 followed by the flashlight turning on.
• Again, we captured “What” at :20 which was elaborated upon with :27 “What’s that?” as we tried to get them touching the green light (K2 meter).
• At :35 we recorded “He’s on the floor” while the Rempod was alerted at 1:00 and the flashlight turning back off at 1:10.

Recorder 7 – Phasma Box 6:

 

 

• At :16 the flashlight turned on and, at :42, we heard “Yeah” after we asked one another if we have balloons they could play with.
• As we look through our bag, we were asked “What is that?” at 1:00.
• The flashlight shut off at 1:40 as we were told “Above you” at 1:56 “Above you.

 

Recorder 8 – Phasma Box 7:

 

 

• Early on, at :10, the flashlight turned on and we were told “I like the light” at :20 after we asked if they like the light.
• There was an odd whistle heard at 1:14 followed by a strange, unidentifiable sound captured at 1:16.
• At 1:35, the flashlight turned off

 

Recorder 9 – Phasma Box 8:

 

 

• At :05 we heard an unsettling “He’s here?” as the flashlight turned on at :16 after we asked if they were a magician and if you need a volunteer since we misheard the previous communication.
• “Frazzled” was captured at :38, then ten seconds later, at :48, we heard “That’s on you.”
• We were told, at 1:22, that “he’s a bad man.”
• After we asked if they were trying to impress us, at 1:40, we heard “I don’t know.”
• As if a direct response to that, at 1:46, we were told “I like playing.

 

Video 1 – Stationary Camera 1:

 

• A knock was first heard here at :31 then footsteps were captued at :39.
• There were three thud-type sounds heard at 1:52, 1:59, and 2:05.
• Two separate banging sounds were heard here, interrupted only by a pinging noise between them. These started at 3:10, broken up by the ping at 3:15, ending at 3:25 by the last bang.

 

 

Video 2 – Stationary Camera 2:

 

• A 3:46 a knocking could be heard.
• After no activity for awhile, all the way at 14:54, an odd breath was captured.
• There was another break in activity until shuffling footsteps was heard at 28:30 followed by a strange flash toward the floor at 33:25.
• Ending this clip, a tap was heard at 37:12.

 

 

Video 3 – Stationary Camera 3:

 

• Footsteps could be heard at 1:05.
• A thud sound was captured at 6:55.
• There was a strange clicking noise captured here at 16:47.

 

 

Video 4 – Handheld Camera 1:

 

• The flashlight turned on at :25 then back off at :58.
• This occurred once again as the flashlight turned on at 1:20 then back off at 2:00.
• At 3:50, the flashlight flickered on then back off.
• Another series of flashlight activity occurred at 6:10 turning on and remaining on until it shut off at 11:20.
• At 13:20, the flashlight flickered on and off followed by the K2 meter spiking at 13:43.
• Another occurrence of the flashlight flickering on then back off took place at 15:45.
• Toward the top of the screen, a strange light could be seen moving at 17:57.
• At 22″10, the flashlight turned on and stayed on just as we heard the word “Frazzled” on the Phasma Box at 23:33.

 

 

Basement

 

The basement of the Twin City Opera House presented a markedly different atmosphere from the upper levels. The space was unfinished in several areas, with exposed stone and aging structural supports that absorbed much of the sound from above. During the initial walkthrough, investigators described the environment as heavy but not oppressive: quiet, contained, and emotionally distinct from other areas of the building. Because of this shift in atmosphere, the basement became the focus of an extended session.

 

 

During a structured pendulum session, investigators began receiving consistent directional responses to yes-or-no questions. Through this interaction, communication appeared to establish with what identified itself as a young girl. When asked about her presence, responses indicated that she felt lonely and that others avoided her, believing she was something dark or negative. The tone of the session did not reflect hostility. Instead, the interaction felt calm and emotionally vulnerable. This portion of the session was captured on video.

 

At one point, the SLS camera displayed a small, child-sized figure mapped near the pendulum setup, appearing to interact physically with it as it moved. Simultaneously, investigators placed two flashlights on opposite sides of the room and asked the entity to turn one on, turn it off, then move to the other and repeat the action. The flashlights activated in direct sequence as requested, including the transition from one side of the room to the other. The pattern of responses, combined with the SLS mapping and pendulum movement, created the impression of playful engagement rather than chaotic activity. The overall tone of the encounter was unexpectedly warm and cooperative, making it one of the more positive and emotionally significant moments documented during the investigation.

 

Photos:

 

• This first screen capture shows a moment where a figure, cold to the touch, reached out and moved our pendulum seen through the SLS camera which mapped her (pink) movement toward the investigator (yellow).

 

 

• This screen shot is of the exact scenario at the same time captured through our handheld camera to document the crystal pendulum moving as we asked questions and received responses based on the movement.

 

 

• A thermal image captured a cold spot over our investigators shoulder as we were hearing small pebbles being thrown in our general direction, which we later found out to be a type of attention-seeking ploy which others may have interpreted as negative.

 

 

• The SLS camera again provided us with a moment where the energy took form and walked across the room to touch the pendulum. Below is a screen capture of that experience.

 

 

• The K2 meter was also activated during this timeframe, once again giving us yet another form of activity to confirm this interaction.

 

 

Recorder 1 – EVP 1:

 

 

• At 1:30, there seemed to be a heavy breath heard, even in person.

 

Recorder 2 – EVP 2:

 

 

• Prior to this clip, the investigators felt touches.
• We asked if they were touching the group and the flashlight turned on then off at :46.
• We told them we wanted to play a game and the second flashlight turned on at 1:13.
• We asked if they could turn the flashlight back off and, at 1:40, they actually turned the other flashlight on.
• After we explained that in order to play the game they have to turn the second light off and it did at 2:28.
• We again asked if they could turn this light off and, at 2:59, they turned it off.
• We asked them to knock but instead they turned the flashlight on at 4:28.
• After we asked if they could turn this light off and the other one on, they listened and did just that at 4:48.

 

Recorder 3 – EVP 3:

 

 

• There was a rick thrown or kicked in some fashion at :02 here.

 

Recorder 4 – EVP 4:

 

 

• At :30, the flashlight turned off but back on at 1:52 after we told them we wanted to play.
• After asking if they could turn it off, at 2:30, it turned off.
• We tracked a figure in the SLS camera but at 3:50 it disappeared just as the flashlight turned on at 4:00 as if they walked away from the one area and approached the flashlights it turn it on.
• The second flashlight turned on at 4:10 then back off at 4:33 after we asked them to do so.
• We asked them to turn the other light off and at 5:10 the second light shut off.
• The Ovilus produced ‘Kite’ and ‘This’ at 5:23.
• The flashlight turned off at 6:50 then back on at 9:15 to end this time frame.

 

Recorder 5 – EVP 5:

 

 

• Another rock seemed to be kicked or thrown in our direction once again at :06.

 

Recorder 6 – EVP 6:

 

 

• At 2:15, the flashlight turned on.

 

Recorder 7 – EVP 7:

 

 

• Another rock seemed to thrown, this time, the sound was much louder as if closer to us, at :05.

 

Recorder 8 – EVP 8:

 

 

• It took awhile for things to get settled in here but at 9:00 the pendulum began to swing for us.
• The pendulum then swung in the other direction at 9:05.
• Once more, the pendulum moved on its own in the other direction at 9:37.
• Suddenly, unprompted, the pendulum swung in a circle at 9:55.
• We attempted to get our ‘yes’ response movement and at 11:00 the pendulum moved forward and back to signify ‘yes.’
• From there, we asked if this was one of the girls, Elizabeth or Sarah and received yes response through the pendulum at 12:15.
• The K2 meter then activated at 12:30 and 13:15.
• We asked them if they were following us most of the night and were told yes through the pendulum at 13:20.
• After asking if they were mad at us for taking the flashlights away we were told no via the flashlight at 14:30.
• We asked if they felt like we were their friends and were told yes through the pendulum at 15:20.
• The pendulum provided a yes answer at 16:35 to our question of “Were you with us up on the cat walk?”
• While an investigator wore a pendant, and the word “pendant” appeared on the Ovilus while we were on the cat walk, we asked if they liked her pendant. We were told yes through the pendulum at 18:00.
• After asking if they liked the light that the flashlight provided, we were told yes at 20:00.
• From there, we asked if they were still afraid of us and were told no at 20:40.
• We then asked if she liked to watch her mother perform and were told yes 22:00.
• With that thought, we asked if the chair sitting in the room was her mothers chair but were told no at 22:30.
• After asking if they were alone we were told yes at 22:50.
• We asked if they were the ones who touched the investigators back earlier in the night and were told yes through the pendulum at 23:45.
• Following our question of “Is that you standing behind us?” we were told yes at 24:07.
• As we began to pack up and say our goodbyes, we asked if they minded if we left. After some hesitation, we were told no through the pendulum at 25:25.

 

Video 1 – Handheld Camera 1:

 

• The flashligjht began on and turned off warly here at :01.

 

 

Video 2 – Handheld Camera 2:

 

• The flashlight flickered and shut off immediately here as the second flashlight across the room turned on at :06.

 

 

Video 3 – Handheld Camera 3 (SLS Footage):

 

• This clip shows a figured sitting in the central chair moving their way over toward the right ending in the other chair. To note, on the left side is an investigator.

 

 

Video 4 – Handheld Camera 4 (Pendulum Footage):

 

• The pendulum could be seen moving forward and backward in this clip.

 

 

Video 5 – Handheld Camera 5 (Pendulum Footage > Multi-View):

 

• The pendulum was moving in circles here.

 

 

 

Video 6 – Handheld Camera 6 (Pendulum Footage > Multi-View):

 

• Suddenly, after asking them to move the pendulum a different direction, it physically changed direction on us.

 

 

 

Video 7 – Handheld Camera 7 (Pendulum Footage > Multi-View):

 

• The pendulum moved side to side giving us a ‘No’ response after we asked if they were mad at us for taking their flashlights away.
• At :35 of the upper video and 1:00 of the lower video, the K2 meter spiked as mentioned that they were playful.

 

 

 

 

Video 8 – Handheld Camera 8 (Pendulum Footage > Multi-View):

 

• The pendulum moved forward and backward giving us a ‘Yes’ response after we asked if they considered us friends now.
• The K2 meter spiked again for us at :20 on the upper video and at 1:54 on the lower.

 

 

 

Video 9 – Handheld Camera 9 (SLS Footage > Multi-View):

 

• We asked them if they were scared of us and the pendulum moved side to side giving us a ‘No’ response.
• The upper video showed the little girl moving close and pushing the pendulum through the SLS camera while the pendulum could be seen physically moving on the lower video.

 

 

 

Balcony

 

The balcony level of the Twin City Opera House overlooks the stage and seating area below, offering a clear vantage point of the performance space. The area carries a distinct stillness, with limited external light and minimal airflow, making it an ideal location to monitor for visual anomalies. During setup, investigators noted the quiet consistency of the environment, with no drafts or environmental factors that would easily account for airborne visual distortions.

 

 

While conducting a controlled flashlight session, investigators asked a series of direct questions to determine whether anyone present identified with the balcony area. The flashlight activated in apparent response to multiple prompts. When asked if the presence had been a long-time visitor or spectator of performances, the light illuminated in confirmation. Follow-up questions suggesting a fondness for the building were again met with responsive activation and deactivation in alignment with requests.

 

During this same session, video review captured a brief mist-like or light anomaly moving across a portion of the balcony frame. The anomaly appeared momentary and did not resemble dust, insects, or lens flare based on movement pattern and lighting conditions at the time. Combined with the responsive flashlight interaction, the activity in the balcony suggested a presence that identified not with distress or isolation, but with familiarity and attachment to the building — as though continuing to observe from a place it once enjoyed.

 

Photos:

 

• This first image captured a moment that the Rempod was alerted paired up with the flashlight which rested on the ledge of the first row of the balcony.

 

 

• The next pair of images shows an odd light anomaly in the process of working its way up the stairs of the balcony, captured in a sequence of back to back images.

 

 

 

Recorder 1 – EVP 1:

 

 

• While we had three flashlights set up to attempt a different type of communication, before we even asked a question all three turned on at :28 followed by, at 1:10, the Ovilus said “Three.”
• As we discussed how we’d proceed with communication and to turn flashlights on for yes, the Ovilus told us ‘Am not’ at 1:34 as if they did not want to do this.
• We went straight to questioning their identity and asked if this was Elizabeth and the flashlight turned on at 2:20.
• Multiple investigators noticed something moving at 2:40.
• After we asked if there are more than one energy with us and the flashlight turned on at 4:20.
• At 6:40, the second flashlight turned on as well.
• The Ovilus proclaimed ‘We’ at 6:45 to seemingly confirm more than one of them.

 

Recorder 2 – Spirit Box 1:

 

 

• The Ovilus produced ‘Details’ and ‘Intent’ at :10.

 

Recorder 3 – Spirit Box 2:

 

 

• At :08 we heard a greeting of “Hi.”

 

Recorder 4 – Spirit Box 3:

 

 

• The Ovilus gave us ‘Catch’ as the flashlight turned on followed by another word of ‘Age’ at :15.

 

Recorder 5 – Spirit Box 4:

 

 

• At :14, we heard “Hi.”

 

Recorder 6 – Spirit Box 5:

 

 

• The Ovilus produced ‘Judge’ and ‘Knife’ at :42 then gave us ‘Follow’ and the name ‘Johnny’ at :49.
• We asked if their name was Johnny and the flashlight turned on at 1:23.
• There was a knocking noise heard at 2:18 followed by more verbiage from the Ovilus with ‘Guy’ and ‘Design’ at 3:58.
• After asking if they designed costumes, the flashlight turned on at 4:13 just as the Ovilus produced ‘Interrupt’ and ‘Cover’ at 4:38.
• One more word of ‘Wed’ was then captured at 4:50.

 

Recorder 7 – Spirit Box 6:

 

 

• At :06 we captured a soft voice trying to coherence us with “Come.”

 

Recorder 8 – Spirit Box 7:

 

 

• As we discussed weddings (previously came up on the Ovilus) we were told that they “Love” us at :49 directed at the investigator with “You” at :59.

 

Recorder 9 – Spirit Box 8:

 

 

• We were pleaded with by “Help” at :15 followed by “Me” at :41.

 

Recorder 10 – Spirit Box 9:

 

 

• We were given the answer of “No” at 1:56 after we asked if it was their wedding they were discssing.

 

Recorder 11 – Spirit Box 10:

 

 

• At :07, we heard “Hey” followed by an odd knocking in the seating next to us at :20.

 

Video 1 – Handheld Camera 1:

 

• The flashlight flickered toward the bottom of the balcony at :26.

 

 

Video 2 – Thermal Camera 1:

 

• There was a darkness seen moving through the windows and doorway throughout.

 

 

Auditorium

 

The auditorium floor provided a wide, open environment with clear sightlines toward the stage and the doorways along the side walls. After observing a dark figure in the doorway from the balcony level, investigators relocated to this area to attempt further communication and determine whether activity would continue closer to where the figure had been seen. Equipment placed in this area included flashlights, an Ovilus, and handheld cameras for photographic review.

 

Initial communication in the auditorium was intermittent but notable. Flashlight responses occurred sporadically, and brief word outputs from the Ovilus did not immediately form clear patterns, suggesting either weaker energy or a presence that was less inclined to engage directly. While photographing the doorway where the figure had been observed, one image captured what appeared to be a faint mist or vapor-like formation in the same location. Environmental conditions at the time did not indicate temperature changes or humidity levels that would readily explain the anomaly.

 

As the investigation was concluding and equipment was being packed, investigators heard a distinct creaking sound resembling a chair shifting or someone rising from a seated position somewhere within the auditorium seating. The sound was isolated and could not be reproduced or traced to structural settling at the time. Although activity in this location was more subtle than in other areas of the building, the visual sighting, photographic anomaly, and unexplained movement sounds together suggest that the auditorium remains an active space, possibly occupied by individuals who once sat there as part of the audience and continue to linger in quiet observation.

 

Photos:

 

 

• An odd mist, light anomaly was seen moving behind the investigator just before we packed it in.

 

Recorder 1 – EVP 1:

 

 

• At :49, the Ovilus gave the word ‘Voice’ followed by a pair of words at 2:41 with ‘Swim’ and ‘Securers.’
• Further communication continued through the Ovilus at 3:07 with ‘January’ and ‘Choke.’
• A flashlight fell off the balcony at 4:08.

 

Recorder 2 – EVP 2:

 

 

• A chair was heard moving at :09.

 

Recorder 3 – EVP 3:

 

 

• As we asked if Johnny was with us, the flashlight turned on at :45.
• The same chair squeaking noise was recorded here at 1:07.
• We packed up and explained that they could not come home with us but that we would visit them and heard ‘Deal’ through the Ovilus at 1:33 followed by the flashlight turning on at 1:44 to end our night.

 

Based on the collective experiences of the investigative team and the recorded evidence, we conclude that the Twin City Opera House appears to host a combination of residual and intelligent activity throughout multiple areas of the building.

 

Notably, the majority of interactions felt positive in nature. The energy encountered did not present as oppressive or threatening, but rather interactive and, at times, welcoming.

 

The activity was not confined to a single room or environmental condition, suggesting layered phenomena within the structure.

 

It was an honor and privilege to investigate such a historically significant location. The Twin City Opera House stands not only as a preserved architectural landmark, but as a space rich with layered human experience.

 

We extend our gratitude to our host, Sam, for welcoming us into the building and for his continued efforts in preserving its history.

 

 

Investigations like this represent the heart of what we do; documenting history, respecting space, and exploring the unknown with balance and professionalism.

 

We look forward to returning in the future, perhaps once again greeted by popcorn from one friend and stories from the other side from another.