In the muddled maelstrom of the sad year that 2003 may have been for some of us, it is not without considerable cheer that I introduce the much anticipated Christmas Newsletter. And unadorned by competitions, free gifts, or junk mail (sorry to disappoint some of you) you will find within these pages a wealth of thought, bracing ideas, and some useful tips.
Many of the latter come to us in the form of May Belt's, almost legendary (not quite there yet, May!) 'Digests' from the Discussion Forum. In many ways, for those of you on-line, this increasingly vibrant discussion arena throws up real issues, helpful solutions, and the periodic and much valued words of Mrs. Belt when we get stuck on a particular issue, and in a way this takes over much of the function of the Newsletter. But there is a place for the more thought out, less conversational style, in which the more difficult notions find a place, where they can be reflected upon and digested at leisure. Frankly, I find reading long pieces on a PC screen rather difficult and it is hard then to find space in my mind to comment. The very speed of the IT world seems to go against something more contemplative, and so for now, these leaves of dead tree remain.
As usual, we have between these pages the usual and monotonously enthusiastic accounts from myself on Peter's latest works - I was saying 'it' was fantastic when he introduced Rainbow Foil, and I get a bit stuck to find more superlatives 12 years on! Of course such descriptions also include my versions of what Peter has achieved theoretically, and condensing his iconoclastic accounts of mental processing, evolution and perception of music remains quite a task. I hope you find it as stimulating as I did writing it, as it raises quite fundamental questions about the recording and audiovisual world. Since Edison's early cylinders, and the early photographers, we have rather gotten used to the fact that we attempt to capture in a stored form moments of experience, and that this process is very different from dynamic memory. The latter is worthy of a piece itself, as much psychological and analytical research has been devoted to the accuracies of memory storage, and it's recall, and we perhaps too readily accept that recordings afford us anything like an accurate perception of the original event. Peter's work adds an interesting layer to the understanding of such processes. And the proof really is in the eating of the pudding. Really.
I hope it all stimulates thought, or at least makes sense because understanding seems to me to be an increasingly important aspect of our appreciation. I state this, partly because of May Belt's piece on autosuggestion within these pages. This is a timely piece, written in May's typical, earthy and moving style. It struck a chord with me, because it raised again that spectre of banal argument from the band of psychological misfits that seem to find poking fun at P.W.B. stuff very gratifying. It seems to me that all P.W.B. users are more interested in music than many who comment in this field, and many critics appear to be aspiring or frustrated physicists, bursting within an engineering framework. May points out that, if you were to acknowledge that the Rainbow Foil 'worked' for you, there would be accusations of your being suggestible, and therefore your view would be negated. But if this were true, why would you then not agree with such a majority view, or what possible psychological gain would there be in acknowledging the efforts of an allegedly odd or exploitative man in Leeds, England?
Of course those that rally to the flag of plausibility have little awareness of the implausibilities of their arguments. It is sad in a year that has been rather too full of war, conflict, terror and pain that one feels very much like banging heads together, but I feel we must start to do this. I myself wrote an (I hope publishable) E-mail to the UK Hi-Fi magazine 'Hi-Fi Choice' after yet another 'sensational' piece on Shakti Stones. The author of the piece clearly felt troubled that these funnystones might be effective, and lo, that Abbey Road Studios might use them. In my ever-so-friendly communication, I criticised the inherent laziness of the audio press for not applying the same techniques they apply to equipment (blind-testing), to so-called 'Tweaks'. Some, as you may read later, of these accessories may not be very good value, but overall, I have found Peter's work to have been very cost-effective. Of course our reliance on visual cues as to what something looks like colours very much the response from many, and if Peter made a Clip out of titanium, with gold-plated Tweezers, some more may be tempted. But it is our ears, and eyes, that eventually do tell us the truth. May correctly indicated that we must lend our senses more authority, for they tell us things that may not be comfortable. I, for one, feel increasingly tired of, and bored with the nonsense that emanates from the audio industry, and I am feeling very much like grabbing some writers/posters by their neck, and making my point very clear.
Now, if this does seem like a call to arms, or an accusation that we are rather too cowardly – you're right. In the same way a trace of Cream can really enhance our pleasure, our few words in the correct space might also change something. And this is only partly supportive of P.W.B. – the industry is sick, and we may just be the cure (medically speaking).
There is little place here to thank people for their pieces (Thank You!) – or criticise others for not making Public-ations (Come ON Now!). But it is not easy, and never has been. But the rewards remain very great.
So, with a little fire in the belly, it is a good time, and perhaps this Christmas we can be more on the side of hope, and pray not just for peace, but growth, life, and change.
Have a very Merry Xmas and a truly 'Inverted' New Year!
Richard Graham
Address for correspondence
P.W.B.
Newsletter
P.W.B Electronics
18. Pasture Crescent
Leeds
LS7
3QB
England
Or for you sophisticates
E-mail – to
Newsletter@belt.demon.co.uk
New Products
This season has brought a bumper crop of Foils, Creams and Clips, which afford some breathtaking advances, some nerve-shattering techniques, and then some very rewarding listening, viewing. Indeed the latter experiences really raise the ceiling as to what one should expect and pretty much shame everything else – but more of that later. Here's the info.
Inverting, Copper and Aluminium Foils; Green, Violet and Orange Creams
That's' s right, three Foils and three Creams, one of which is already known. I have a sense that they should all come under some general label describing their function (the Memory Foils?) as they take forward an issue that has always been there, but with intensive work, we have some resolution of. This is the point where I clumsily try to grasp the nettle of Peter's conception, and leave many bewildered and frustrated – hold tight.
As I understand it, we have evolved foremost to apprehend or predict what is going o happen next, and that safety is core to this. It clearly relates to fear of being someone else's lunch, and in evolutionary terms, the better this ability to apprehend future threats, the more likely survival is. In that way, our senses attune to a forward temporal direction – from present to future. However, the ability to learn from experience became just as crucial, and the process of memory – initially sensory, and later verbal – became important e.g. remembering where the lion's den was, may have extended life through judicious avoidance of that area. To remember though, the mind has to change or invert direction, and look temporally backwards instead of forwards. I am assuming of course that the time taken to focus on the present either causes us to focus on the immediate past, or to look into the immediate future – the present being no more than the infinitesimally small intersection between past and future. So far so good.
Memory for man has always been an elusive treasure house (see Proust) and the desire to capture experience has driven us to create artificial memories in the form of recordings that become increasingly detached from how memory functions. If one considers early painting, song, and writings involve an active participation by the viewer/observer, then later, and for that matter digital reproductions take us far away form that. We have stored in our home, hundreds – perhaps thousands of artificial memories, stored in bizarre patterns that bear little relation to human memory. Indeed, as we know from Peter's past work, many of these objects become bound to the strangeness of threat rather than the familiarity of memory. So every time we purchase or play one of these recordings, we issue to the mind a confusing signal suggesting immediate future uncertain threat rather than great memory of great performance.
'Poppycock!' you may say, and who could disagree if Peter hadn't found processes by which these nasty little recordings couldn't be rendered more akin to our familiar memories. And of course the proof comes from our sense, not from intellectual grasping of theory – how many audiophiles get stuck on the latter!
The Inverting Foil, with supplied Creams, gives an opportunity to lend objects and discs a pattern more in keeping with memory, such that the mind can focus on them, as if they were memories, and enjoy the products of them, as if remembering something lovely from the past.
In a sense, all of the products deal with this issue of memory, and the Creams, used with the Foils facilitate the appreciation of the correct temporal direction, leaving our senses free. Each Cream is associated with a temporal position – Green (Future), Violet (Present), Orange (Past) – and each is applied in a particular sequence either before or after the application of Foils. This is thus the most labour intensive of all Peter's products, and requires much concentration. This is a bit of a drain, but the results are so extraordinary.
For the Inverting Foil, one applies to the object a layer of Orange Cream first (tiny amount) and then you wipe off the excess. I cannot over-emphasise how import this step is, and one almost polishes the surface with a tissue. This because the next step is to apply a 3 mm strip of Inverting Foil onto the area that the Orange Cream was applied to. Then one applies Violet Cream onto the Foil surface, which is then wiped again, and finally Green Cream is applied last, to the surface. This pattern hold true for the Copper Foil, but Aluminium involves applying Green, then Violet, the Foil, before applying Orange Cream to the Surface of the Foil i.e. the process is inverted.
Of course one is very suspicious that such messing around and staining of fingers can do any good, but the results are shockingly good. I admit, I was worried that all that wiping would cause problems, but it doesn't seem to.
Great on any replay equipment – especially CD/DVD players – but a strip on the case of a CD threw me totally. I just hadn't expected the amazing lift in quality, with naturalness of instruments and increase in ambient detail just staggering. As one might expect from the above explanation, it was like unlocking a memory of being at the recording session/event.
I have proceeded quite slowly with this range of products, partly because one cannot apply the stuff that quickly, but also to give my mind a bit of a rest from all of the leaps in sound. And just to help you understand the order of change: I had borrowed from a dealer one of those very fashionable mains conditioning devices, mainly to protect the equipment from voltage spikes, as it is left on all of the time. To many, these devices improve sound considerably – and perhaps they do in some areas. Well the gain was but a fraction of the gain I got from applying a strip of Inverted Foil to a CD case. It is always hard to see value for money in P.W.B. devices, given that they look so harmless, but this confirmed for me again that Peter's products are very good value. Hope Santa gets to give you some!
The Electrical Conduction Corrector Clip.
Almost as an antidote to the Cream smearing , time-consuming Foil activities described above, here is a highly developed Crocodile Clip, adorned with small electrical items, Foils and a Blue Ring Tie. It deals with problems inherent in the mains power supply/cables and is just clipped on to any mains cable – anywhere. And it really cleans up the sound. Again a fraction of the price of some mains conditioners or cables, and very much more effective to my mind. And you just Clip it on!
Heaven!!!
Richard Graham
Open The Mind And Walk In
As visitors of the Yahoo Group may remember, I have made more than one reference to the enormous amount of my time spent remodelling a place of residence I bought two years ago. That mistaken purchase has cost me a great deal of time away from audio gear, and hence, P.W.B. treatments. It has not been the happiest of absences. My youthful dreams never encompassed being forced into the role of carpenter, painter, tile setter et al.
But recently I realized there may be a positive lurking in there somewhere. First, some details: For over six months I had no system at all, no chance to use my treasured P.W.B. products. Finally I decided to set up a temporary system, just to keep some semblance of auditory sanity (and the mental kind as well). A pair of low-cost mono blocks were purchased and some other pieces put together to make my B system, which served as an A system for quite a while. Soon after the system was assembled, I used some P.W.B. treatments on them - and the sound improved.
Then there was another period of relative inactivity followed by the temporary set up of the main system. Some new cables were added to my A gear, then treated - and the sound improved. It was a source of regret that months would go by without any significant audio activity or any indulging in P.W.B. treatments.
But here is the silver lining: no matter how much time was spent away from using P.W.B. treatments, whenevernew applications could be made, they worked. The positive effects of Belting were evident, no matter how much time elapsed between their use. They never became routine; they never failed to offer satisfaction, and they always built on each other.
Many times when things become familiar, they seem to lose their effect. But with P.W.B. treatments the bloom is never off the rose. They continue to maintain an interest and excitement for the listener. Just when one treatment has been tried, a new discovery seems to come along, or a new spot to apply a familiar treatment pops up. Even such regular routines as foiling and creaming a CD continue to pay off. I always force myself to listen to new albums in the condition that God made them, regardless of the price to my ears. But after a while the auditory nerve can only stand so much and the rush to the Rainbow Foil ensues.
All this adds up to the happy prospect that many years of increasing satisfaction with beautiful music lie ahead. How many members of the world wide audio family can look forward to such a happy prospect with mere mortal (read "untreated") equipment and environments? At the time of such a reminder I must confess myself guilty of the sin of smugness. My only salvation is the awareness that the wonderful world of P.W.B. is available to all. The only requirement is to open the mind and walk in.
As always, blessings to you all at P.W.B. for your wonderful work.
Best wishes,
Gary Lee
USA.
Momentum Surge.
Am I the only one, or are others out there sensing a momentum surge regarding P.W.B.? It's not just the increasing activity on the Yahoo site; I am beginning to get some enquiries from friends and colleagues that rise above the usual banter I'm used to whenever I mention the word Belt. It may be some way off them placing orders for Devices, but it's a start. The Latest P.W.B. Devices too, seem to have potency unmatched by anything that went before - of which I'll say more later. Part of the reason for the extra curiosity at work stems from my increasing tendency to "give it to them undiluted" when responding to Belt questions. This new found confidence was boosted in the last few weeks by an event that came about following a comment by May Belt.
For a few years now, I have been passing around to anyone interested, a video talk by May in which she explains how Peter progressed from his original "conventional" HI-FI engineering work to go on and make the momentous discoveries of which we now enjoy the benefit. I requested a second copy of the tape from P.W.B. after my original failed to return. May sent me a new copy and asked for any feedback generated to be passed back to her. And so, the idea occurred to me to organise an evening's viewing of the tape with a few friends including one of my brothers. A quantity of beer and a phone in curry was the bait. And what an interesting evening it turned out to be!
First off, it came as a bit of a surprise to realise others could view me as a little eccentric (even if in a nice sort of way)- especially as some of them are people I socialise with on a regular basis- but that is one of the things that occurred to me during the evening's viewing. Almost from the start, the tape had to be stopped for quite long debates where the conversation veered between sensible and, shall we say, not so sensible. One individual in particular delighted in taking up an attitude that basically consisted of rubbishing whatever point was being discussed. A bit like the present HI-FI industry's attitude to P.W.B. really! Mr. Sceptic, as I shall call him, in fact proved to be a most important member of the group. His constant poo pooing had the effect of concentrating the attention of the rest of us on the subject at hand. Watching the reactions of those individuals to the talk made me realise just how difficult a task it must be for P.W.B. to make headway in the conventional HI-FI world.
In the end we did so much talking we ran out of time and did not manage to finish the video. The only concession Mr. Sceptical gave was a willingness to see the final part of the tape. I am at present trying to arrange another evening where all the original crew can be available. I see it as vital that Mr. Sceptical is present, as he seemed to galvanise the thinking of the rest of us into a more focused unit.
I hope this little episode does not come across as a bit fraught and tense. It wasn't. Quite the opposite in fact. It was a fun evening for all involved. Me, in the end, having to shoo my guests from the house in the early hours. Some sort of impression must have been created because two more have shown an interest since. The only problem with the group involved was the lack of music lovers - as we would understand the term - among them. If what was being demonstrated that evening was a revolutionary new way to catch fish, play football or take prize winning photographs, I would have been bang on their wavelength. But, every man to his own as they say. To everyone's credit, I got far more of their attention than I had hoped for at the outset. As a parting shot, I gave them a bit of Rainbow Foil to try for themselves. I won't hold my breath waiting for any response on this, as one of the group (you know who you are if you read this), became the subject of a recent cartoon for his lack of surprise when he actually admitted hearing a change for the better following application of P.W.B. Products I gave him.
Whatever good the evening did for the P.W.B. cause I cannot gauge, but it certainly did me some good. In the past, it was usual for me to tuck P.W.B. Foils away out of sight on equipment and furniture so that inquisitive eyes would not spot them and prompt awkward questions. Now, I put them in the most prominent position possible in order to provoke such questions. Every CD copied for someone at work gets the full P.W.B. treatment; my cell phone has foils in full view and any bar code will have the Red Pen line across it. One of the first consequences of this approach, I found out recently, was that I am getting to be known around my work place as Tin Foil Man! Quite wonderful really, it's like shedding a load. Going about your life with all that P.W.B. knowledge spinning within ones head can be like carrying a millstone.
Some time back I wrote something on the Yahoo site that comes back to bite me. I said something like, "I think I have reached some sort of P.W.B. high point with regard to the sound from my system"- rashly inferring future sound improvements might not be large. Well, there have been several sound lifts since then that make nonsense of that statement. One came about when I made up some plastic "isolating" bags as per the recent postings on the Yahoo site. Enclosing anything from equipment manuals to batteries within treated bags brings forth very worthwhile sound improvement. But the real fireworks erupted with the arrival of a new Foil and associated creams. I did exactly what it said in the explanation paper that came with the Foil sample - attach the first Foils to CD player, Turntable and DVD player. How can extremely good sound get better by a huge margin? I have no idea. But believe me it does! I sit back and read the P.W.B. explanation paper more carefully. Yes, I can take in what it says about how difficult it is for our senses to process all the contradictory information flowing from past to present and vice versa. But, as always the case, nothing can prepare you for that initial moment when you play a CD for the first time after a new treatment. It will always be magical and a privilege to witness.
Kevin Kehoe.
UK
Sheldrake In The Demo Room
Reading the work of Rupert Sheldrake has given me cause to think about many aspects of my life and work over the past few weeks. For example, if I forget the name of a student in one of my seminar groups, could I prompt her to speak merely by staring at the top of her bowed head? Could I stop my six year old crying after a nightmare by sending reassuring messages along one of the morphic fields that links us, rather than having to get up and negotiate the landing in the middle of the night? Actually, I tried this one and it seemed to work, although the experience brings me up against the big problem with testing the hypothesis of morphic fields in practice: the real world is not a laboratory wherein we can perform truly rigorous repeated tests, and most of us (hi-fi journalists especially) lack any training in the methods of objective experimentation. This is, of course, not to say that there isn't something funny going on out there; as Sheldrake himself has argued, the attitude that simply dismisses unexplained phenomena as invariably bogus or insignificant is hardly a scientific one. Although often depicted as belonging on the extreme margins of modern science, to me Sheldrake seems to be advocating a commendable middle way: he is the rational sceptic who is prepared to confront, and seek to understand, the apparently irrational. His theory may not be proven (indeed, it is very hard to see how it could ever be convincingly proven), but at least he is offering a theory.
Now, to apply this Sheldrakian spirit of suspended disbelief to matters hi-fi … I've been thinking about my experience in the demonstration rooms of various dealers over the past twenty or so years, one that could hardly be described as edifying. In fact, I don't think it would be exaggerating to say that I haven't had a single 'good' audition in a hi-fi shop. OK, early on, when I knew precious little about the subject, I used to be impressed by the impact of sound you can get in the demo room, but when I think back to such encounters, I can't recall that they were terribly musical. Since funds and time and research have enabled me to nudge and tweak my hi-fi into listenability, my demo experiences have invariably been on the one hand depressing (apparently there is no equipment worth buying) and, on the other hand, encouraging (I can save my money in the knowledge that I am not missing anything).
What can we put this down to? Once upon a time I used to think it was poor equipment, but this now seems a naïve view: too many decent enough (and expensive) brands have under performed for me to believe that they are all hopeless. More recently I've attributed it to interference: electromagnetically speaking, hi-fi shops are not exactly the quietest of places. There may be something in this: I've yet to audition a top of the line isolation transformer, but theoretically this ought to cure such ills, and hence radically improve the traditional 'demo sound' - I'd be interested to hear from anyone with such experience. Then there is the acoustics of the room itself. I've heard baby bookshelf speakers in cavernous halls and hulking towers in spaces resembling a spare bedroom; I've stood on bouncy wooden floors and sat in squishy low sofas in front of huge pains of soundproof glass. And such uncomfortable memories bring me on to the most recent of my explanations: the alien-territory theory, if you like.
Why do cats return to houses abandoned by their owners? Why do dogs wake up when the homeward car journey is nearly over? Sheldrake would argue that they are sensing a familiar field. As Peter's inventions make clear, our houses may not be the ideal places to listen to music, but they are our places. The uncomfortable resonance's of bar codes and batteries are at least contained within the presumably more reassuring morphic fields associated with the concepts of 'home' and (to those who are blessed with one) 'family'. In contrast, there can be few places more alien than a hi-fi dealership: full of unfamiliar things and full of people you don't know, people who are – furthermore – out to influence you and to extract your wallet.
Let me tell you about the worst ever audition that I have endured (I shall name no names). The equipment – all fairly reputable stuff – was not to blame; the room was surprisingly free of wires and spare hardware; the acoustic was bearable if not perfect. But the audition was a nightmare, it all sounded terrible: I was greatly relieved when my wife came in and gave me an excuse to flee the building. Why was it so bad? On reflection, I now put this disaster down to two things. Firstly, I had parked my baby in a pram at the door of the room. The baby was quiet enough, but now I think that the strong morphic bond between us threw the alien nature of our surroundings into starker relief, as it were. On some subliminal level, I was in a radically defensive mode. Secondly, the salesman sitting with me also happened to own the dealership (which had only recently opened). Even at the time, I was vaguely aware that he was quite jealously possessive of his new shop, and that - of all rooms in this shop - he regarded this one as his inner sanctum (his assistants lurked in the front room, and did not interrupt us). He was only granting me temporary permission to intrude on this sanctum: he chose the music; the cup of coffee he gave me, though undoubtedly intended as a welcoming sign, passed on the subliminal messages that he was provider and I was passive, and that I was only allowed to stay until the cup was drained (incidentally, the coffee tasted foul too). If I was more or less conscious of these things, think how powerfully communicative those alien morphic resonance's must have been! Now I wonder how that system would have sounded if my wife had taken the baby, and it had been demonstrated by an assistant in the more obviously compromised (in terms of EMI and acoustics) front room? Well, I don't wonder, really, I just know it would have sounded better.
Given all of this, it would seem that dealers ought be onto a loser where auditions are concerned (apart from those dealers with a secret supply of green cream, of course…), yet the fact that so many auditions that fail, musically speaking, nevertheless succeed, financially speaking, reflects the sad reality that, as with the world of fine wine, the great majority of people buy on image rather than for sensory pleasure.
Tim Hancock
Northern Ireland.
How It Started For Me.
Are you all sitting comfortably? Then I'll begin.
Around the early 90's I was a fairly avid reader of Hi-Fi magazines as at that time the upgrading bug had bitten and I had spent a lot of money on a new amplifier, Pre-amp and speakers (namely Hafler XL600, Michell Argo, and B&W CDM9). I already owned a Linn Sondek with Ittok arm. Later I upgraded to an ex dem Ekos 2, so you can see that I already had a reasonable quality system.
Hi-Fi Review was one of the latest magazines on the market and one of the contributors, or he may have been the Editor, was Paul Benson and both he, Jimmy Hughes of Hi-Fi Answers, and eventually Peter Turner began to write articles about Peter Belt's theories and products which, although I didn't really understand and still don't, I found interesting.
One of the articles suggested that aligning screw head slots could affect the quality of sound. Being a simple soul I thought, "what the hell, let's do it". So armed with a screwdriver I set to work. I must point out at this juncture that my wife was out!! Does anyone realise just how many screws there are in the average house? However the task was eventually completed and I settled down to listen. I was surprised to say the least that the quality of sound had improved so much after what seemed to be a silly waste of a couple of hours.
Some time later Paul Benson wrote that he was prepared to come to people's homes to demonstrate P.W.B. products. I contacted him and he came and spent a whole afternoon doing little things with Cream made of 'eye of a newt and wing of a bat' and listening to the results. We were listening to a track by U2 on which neither he nor I could decipher the lyrics. By the end of the afternoon they were quite clear and I was convinced that "Beltism" was the way ahead (finances permitting of course).
Since that time I have tried and bought most of the P.W.B. products, and have only added Kimber mains and speaker cables, plus a mains purifier. The last 12 months or so have been an absolute revelation with the Real Foil, Freeze Foil and Inside Foil, not to mention the "Green Gunge". I have used all these products extensively in my home and inside my "equipment" with great effect, but the biggest improvement came when I treated the inside of every power socket and every light switch in the house. These were treated with Frosted, Real, Freeze and Inside Foils, Morphic Liquid, Electret Cream, Green Gunge, Electret Oil on screws, Superwipe and last but not least The Quantum Clip. The result of all those treatments was truly astonishing.
My family hold me up to ridicule for sticking foils on everything and I must admit that it has been hard going being teased unmercifully at times, although they think my system does produce brilliant music they do not believe that it is down to the P.W.B. devices.
Now, come on Peter, let us have a switch that will turn off (and back on) the P.W.B. effect so that the doubters can be convinced and I can get these family monkeys off my back.
Graham Mountford.
UK.
This is a long overdue submission; although I frequently read the P.W.B. Yahoo message board I rarely have time to post anything myself.
Lately I have read with some sympathy, pleas from "newbies" to this alternative form of audio enhancement as to where to begin and I echo the thought of one poster that some sort of guide as to how each device can be utilised and what it is (It took me ages to realise that "Cream Electret" was different from "Electret Oil" for example) is needed. (Any volunteers?).
All credit and recognition to Richard Graham for his sterling work in answering everyone's queries and keeping this dialogue alive (I was going to say "debate" but I think it is safe to say that if you subscribe to the P.W.B. philosophy then the "debate" is over!).
I have been using P.W.B. devices for about four years and have worked my way through about a third of their kit.
If you are new or considering "having a go, I would recommend "foils" as a good starting point. These are strips of self adhesive foil that can be cut into eighth of an inch pieces and applied to CD's, records, tapes, speakers, audio kit and just about anything. They are reasonably priced, easy to use and go a long way.
Cream Electret is a similar good investment; and also goes a long way!
A Red X pen is a possible logical next step – mine is three years old and still going strong.
The ultimate for me is the Quantum Clip – expensive as an initial outlay but cost versus length of life and multitude of uses makes is viable – think about the cost of a reasonable mid range CD player.
There are a lot of free tips if you search through the P.W.B. archived supplements on the web, which will cost you nothing to try.
I have to admit that some posters seem to be taking things to extreme lengths in their quest for the perfect sound but hey! It's a free country (so they tell us!)
Morphic resonance is an extremely interesting and credible philosophy, originally mooted by a learned gentleman by the name of Richard Sheldrake and championed by P.W.B. (see their various articles). This theory may explain why EVERY piece of music that I copy to my computer and then burn to CD subsequently sounds smoother and more "unstressed" than the original. (And that is before any P.W.B. treatment i.e. clipping and foiling).
I was recently in a quite expensive Hi-Fi shop with a friend who had gone to buy a turntable in what turned into a rather long-winded process. Whilst waiting I had the opportunity to listen to various quite expensive pieces of kit, CD players, amps and speakers. Not a single one impressed me as better than the sound I enjoy at home. The reason I mention this is that the effects of P.W.B. devices are easily taken for granted after the first few listenings and it is only by such a rude awakening as a comparison that you realise the improvements that such treatments can make to your listening pleasure.
John Traynor UK
Extending The Mind:
A review of Rupert Sheldrake The Sense Of Being Stared At – Hutchinson 2003
Materialism likes to keep things simple. If you are a true materialist the only reality you have to worry about is that which is measurable by scientific instruments. The rest is just imagination. Children are naturally not materialists and neither are large numbers of teenagers and young adults.
In his most recent book Rupert Sheldrake traces the history of scientific thinking about perception. He writes in a lucid gripping style and quickly comes to the point on page after page. For example, at the age of ten years children first start to grasp what the education system wants them to believe: everything we see, touch, smell, taste and hear is experienced inside our heads. But extensive research says that only 30 per cent of children and only 40 per cent of college students actually believe what they have been told.
The material world, according to modern science, is "causally closed" – this means that it cannot be influenced by anything other than physical things or measurable, known forces. This materialistic view has dominated the official ideas about perception for the last 250 years.
In The Sense Of Being Stared At Sheldrake has amassed a vast amount of evidence which points us not in the direction of spiritualism or even parapsychology but towards a new biological theory of how we see and hear things. He uses lab results and databases of personal experiences to establish the reality of telepathy, precognition, remote viewing and the sense of being stared at.
In order to support and explain these phenomena a new concept – that of the extended mind – has been formulated. However, the extended mind is not only involved in the operation of the sixth and seventh senses, it is also at work in the way our common or garden five senses work. If you are familiar with morphic fields (see Geoff Kait's excellent article in the Christmas 2002 edition of this Newsletter) the concept of the extended mind will be comparatively easy to grasp. Sheldrake proposes that the act of everyday seeing involves the outward projection of perceptual images (extramission) and that this process involves "perceptual fields." These fields enable the mind to actualise the object of vision not somewhere in the brain but "out there" where it seems to be. The human mind, and that of non-human animals, is thus extended into and through the surrounding space. This is both psychological and physical.
Of course this does not deny that perception also comes about through light entering the eyes and resulting in an image on the retina, which goes for processing via the optic nerve to the brain (intromission).
As an analogy a mobile phone both receives information in and also transmits it out. However a perceptual field is very much like a morphic field. The laws of space/time location bind neither.
The work of Sheldrake is, of course, highly controversial. He has reinterpreted and challenged the basic tenet of scientific orthodoxy, namely that there is an unbridgeable gap between the mind and the physical world. The gap is in fact bridged by the going out of the mind into the outer world.
His brilliantly argued book is both theoretical and experiental: the experiences from his database include wonderful animal stories. There is the grey parrot who announces accurately which member of the family is calling as the phone rings; there is the cat who answers the phone and meows to its owner; there are countless dogs who warn their masters of impending danger. Thereare examples of human intuition and results of research into telepathy and other skills. Marvellous and exciting to read as these facts, figures and true stories are, it is Sheldrake's interpretation that should make us sit up.
There is a fascinating symmetry between the scientific inventions of P.W.B. and the formulations of Rupert Sheldrake. This has been noted by May Belt in the Spring issue of this Newsletter.
It is not as if P.W.B. in any way set out to implement Sheldrake's theories. It is rather that Sheldrake has provided a new picture of how the universe and our perceptions are linked. As a biologist he asserts that evolution is controlled not only by genes but by morphic fields. Genes are the building materials. Morphic fields organise and give structure to organisms and behaviour.
P.W.B.'s discoveries do not, as we know, appear to fit into the causally closed model – the old mechanical model of how the universe works. May Belt, in a letter to me, summed up this model with regard to audio: "The belief structure of the audio industry is that the sound consists only of air pressure waves and vibrations."
P.W.B. have discovered that the perceiver's environment sends all kinds of subliminal or subtle messages to the listener, which inhibit or conversely help the mind to pick up information from the object of its attention.
Sheldrake's world picture and P.W.B.'s discoveries sit comfortably together. Both are a triumph of the scientific method over the taboos of orthodox teaching about science. Sheldrake's latest book sits alongside P.W.B.'s own explanations of what is going on when we treat a CD or another aspect of the environment.
Sheldrake writes: "Through focusing our visual attention on something at a distance (or by focusing our hearing) it is as if our mind extends outwards to connect us with the distant object." This focused awareness is backed up by a general sense of the environment, which is also attributable to a perceptual field all around us. Even our behaviour is "embedded" in this three-dimensional space.
P.W.B. might add that by removing threatening signals from the general perceptual field and by replacing them with friendly, reassuring ones, the focused perceptual field functions much better. P.W.B. have always said that the human being senses these changes in the environment, even though the environment may look the same. May Belt writes: "We have discovered how to induce certain beneficial energy patterns into chosen materials so that these materials now have different properties & abilities, even though they look no different"
In short Sheldrake's concept of the extended mind is a framework into which our experiences of dramatic improvements to perceived sound through a treated environment fit perfectly.
Sheldrake, aware that he sits on the borderline between orthodox mechanical science and a new freed up science, carries out research to establish the reality of his ideas. Many of these pieces of research can be done by ordinary people, college students and even school children. The results are positive and statistically significant. In an appendix to the book the author sets down how anyone can set up or take part in these experiments.
Now, isn't this what May and Peter Belt have been encouraging us to do all along? Time and again we receive invitations and outlines: try this out, remove the effect, listen again etc. Only recently I received a Red x Pen, which I'd ordered, and with it came an eraser pen for undoing the effect.
P.W.B. have given us the tools and the blue print for carrying out research of our own. I suggest that the aim of this research should be to show categorically that P.W.B. effects are working in a real and biologically verifiable way. I have suggested how this might be approached and some of the pitfalls in an accompanying article.
Ken Hyam
UK.
Less Money - Huge Upgrade.
A friend of mine told me about the web site from P.W.B. When I looked at it I thought how is it possible that these products really work. Well; I tried a sample of the Rainbow Foil and I used it on CD's and on the back of the equipment. It was amazing. You get much more information from a CD. And a little bit more warmth and there were things I had not heard before. Next thing the Cream Electret. In my case Creaming the outside gives again more information and treating the inside was again a huge step. Image was much better, also more depth. You also get more space between instruments.
Everything you try from P.W.B. in most cases it is absolutely amazing. I'm trying a sample (thank you Peter and May) of the Morphic Message foils and yes more information. Soon I will try the Spiratube.
So, for less money you get a huge upgrade.
Bernard Knoop,
The Netherlands
Bottoms Up!
Here's an experiment. It's easy to set up and do. Whatever the result, it's going to be fun.
Get two wine glasses. Wrap some Spiratube round the stem of one of them. Get a bottle of wine. Open it and let it breathe.
Now pour the wine into the Spiratube glass and the control glass. Blindfold yourself and ask your co-experimenter to pass you a glass in such a way that you hold it by the bowl only. You do not know which glass you are holding.
Sip and repeat with the other wine glass. Repeat the tasting several times.
Your co-experimenter must now record your impressions of each sip and, of course, note down which wine glass you have been drinking from.
Our findings were that the Spiratube glass definitely tasted smoother and mellower. At first we actually preferred the raw coarser taste of the control glass but after a few more sips the Spiratube glass was offering more flavour to go with its smoothness.
The second experiment also needs a collaborator or even two collaborators.
You need a cushion and P.W.B. Fabric Pin.
Go out of the listening room and let your collaborator attach the pin to the underside of the cushion. Now enter the room and listen to a track from a CD. Move your seat to an adjacent stool without the treated cushion. Listen again. Can you hear the difference? Can your collaborator hear the difference? Joyce and I could both hear the base more tuneful, the lyrics easier to hear, subtle ambient signals coming over more clearly. You can do this experiment blind (hence the going out of the room) – it also makes it seem like more of a game.
In the blind experiment, you go out and come back but you do not know which cushion the pin is under. You have to "guess" by listening to the CD from each cushion in turn.
With three people working you could see if the second person could hear the difference without knowing where the pin is even though only the first person is sitting on the cushion.
In my case I was able to identify where the pin was. I was very sure indeed where it was and I was right. However, whilst this is convincing to me, it would not be considered a proof per se that the result was real, unless I could keep doing it again and again.
This brings me on to an idea for readers to consider. Experiments based on very simple procedures, such as the ones above could be set up. They would serve the purpose of showing that P.W.B. is a reality and no "autosuggestion" technique. We – after countless experiences of better sound – know that it is a reality but to produce statistics that indicate this objectively is another matter.
Experimenters would need to work with groups of volunteers and would need to widen the choice to four i.e. you would have to pick from four cushions or four wine glasses. In this way you would only have a 25 per cent chance of guessing correctly.
If the records showed that over many repetitions with several volunteers the correct guesses were higher than 25 per cent the results would then be seen to be statistically significant.
There are all sorts of objections: the different stools might be deemed to produce MECHANICALLY DIFFERENT LISTENING SPOTS. So you would need to stick to one stool perhaps…
People might simply get bored. Once the fun element wears off, the mind might not focus as we predict it will. Scientists and statisticians look for patterns over many, many repetitions. The experimenters would need to control their experiments taking all such factors into consideration.
Rupert Sheldrake has published examples of such experiments and how ordinary people can set up and take part in them. The appendices of his book, The Sense Of Being Stared At, give the details. These experiments are designed to test the reality of telepathy and precognition and remote seeing. The results show that these are real, perhaps normal animal and human attributes.
I suggest that similar experiments about P.W.B. devices could alter the public perception and help change the intellectual belief system of the establishment – but against this must be weighed the difficulties of controlling the experiments, amassing the data and most importantly finding sensitive and open-minded volunteers to take part over an extended period.
In the meantime, bottoms up!
Ken Hyam.
UK.
Listen And Enjoy The Music.
When P.W.B. announced the availability of the beginners pack, I obtained one and gave it as a gift to a friend and colleague of mine for the last 23 years. He observed all the changes the P.W.B. treatments made in my Audio and Video equipment, and commented that the changes are more than what one can hear from changing cables or other popular tweaks.
I also gave him the printed version of latest Newsletter.
His comment was that these devices may not have any effect on the tynpanic membrane, 8th nerve or the auditory nucleus and auditory path ways. The way the perception of sound changes with treatments is only part of the story. They may have other benefits which may not be readily appreciable .They may work by radionic principle, may be acting on the morphic resonance patterns, or several other energy patterns which we are not aware off.
To comment without knowing is like the 8 blind men and the elephant story. The modus operandi is not physical, hence cannot be measured. My friend asked my help in treating his house. We both are senior citizens and close to retirement and are empty nesters.
We tried few simple experiments. Keeping some toxic substances (which unfortunately every home has many of them such as highly alkaline oven cleaner, many aerosol cans, swimming pool chemicals etc.) next to audio equipment. There is a subtle change in the sound and more than that an uncomfortable feeling.
All of the chemical cans and bottles were promptly creamed, Red 'x' Pen - labelled ---safe home > O.K. -- and a rainbow foil strip stuck on and they went away to the garage, away from living quarters.
Morphic messages
These have been used in many ways before in other cultures. About 50 years ago I remember on wedding invitations a senior member of the family used to hand write using red ink:-
blessings for
"peace prosperity, health for the married couple". With changes in time they are now printing it.
We picked some commonly used words from greeting cards.
Peace (in Sanskrit chants this word is repeated three times)
Prosperity, Happiness, Joy and Health.
This is what we want in our life. The idea of adding "PROSPERITY" with a Red 'x' Pen to the message labels is that of my friend's daughter who said we must add prosperity to the morphic messages. Her rationale is simple" without prosperity and health one cannot be happy- -if not happy one cannot enjoy music and I may not be able to buy in future Morphic Green Cream and a Quantum Clip.
These ideas may appear different to veteran P.W.B. users but influenced by our different background.
I lived in Hurricane prone US Virgin Islands for four years. When a hurricane hits with winds blowing at 140 MPH the house indeed becomes a safe hole and the ideas of sealing and securing all the openings in the periphery of the house including doors, windows and all vents becomes very relevant.
We preferred-- ALL ARE O.K. or YOU ARE ALL > OK., Or the Sanskrit chant 'Sarve Janah Sukinah Bhavanthu" which Means " Let all people be comfortable and happy".
My rational --- we cannot be happy if our spouses, children, pets like dogs and parrots are unhappy or sick.
We preferred them over- JOHN DOW > O.K which may be self centered. Some labels with V.R .SOLA JOYOUS FAMILY > O.K.
Since I have a Red 'x' Pen we made about 200 labels on the above themes on Scotch clear post it notes. My friends daughter objected to Sound has Priority label and changed to "HAPPINESS AND PEACE HAS PRIORITY"
Verbal morphic messages.
We say many verbal reassurances to others like" have a good day", " wish you all the best" "Honey I love you". Many times these words are spoken mechanically with out real feeling or intent. My friends daughter wrote all the messages with all good intention and sincerity.
For the bed we wrote:-
GOOD NIGHT SLEEP > O.K.
REST RELAXATION > O.K.
PEACE PEACE PEACE > O.K...
SAFE HOME > O.K. (replacing hole with home).
Future > O.K.
Why treat the environment?
Can we really enjoy music if we are unhappy, tense, anxious, angry or if someone in our home is sick?
There is a constant change IN OUR ENVIRONMENTAL ENERGY- dynamic flux, interaction of us with our environment. There are few known environmental factors which can degrade joy of listening to music such as RFI, EMI, ELF etc. But there are many we are not aware of and which cannot be measured.
In toxic rooms such as one in my PREVIOUS home office where lot of junk, unused equipment is stored and where someone was sick for several years the basic P.W.B. treatments are ineffective. RELOCATE THE AUDIO EQUIPMENT TO ANOTHER room and there is a significant improvement.
My recent relocation to another house made me to remove - give away lot of things I have no use,. Never used in the last three years. Removing the clutter and organizing the things containing toxic chemicals helped a great deal. Few people mentioned free Internet browser discs that come in the mail with bar codes such as *** have a stronger negative energy pattern. They go into the dust bin.
Bills to Pay which come in the mail also creates a tension. The telephone book with lots of alpha numeric listings also can create an adverse environment.
They all went into treated zip lock bags. The freezer bags are longer lasting and more durable than others.
We spend at our home, about 7 hours on our bed 3+ hours watching video or listening to music on the living room couch, and about half an hour or so in the bath room.
We thought we should treat where we spend most our time.
One additional treatment we did was to write a morphic message on the bulb itself directly using a Red 'x' Pen - a message such as Happy joyous family > O.K.
My friend wants to try and test the P.W.B. treatments in his own home. We treated the periphery of the house with an opening such as windows, doors, point of entry of power, water, vent on the roof for the whole house fan, satellite system, mail box, utility meter and gate at the outer fence of the house. The only items treated inside the house are the light bulbs with morphic messages written directly onto the bed frames, chairs with a few foils.
No gold standard treatments, 5 strips of rainbow foil, about 200 labels with Red X Pen, a jar of Cream Electret, Quantum Cream, very few Morphic Message Foils, few Frosted Foils, Morphic Liquid and few Real Foils, a small length of Spiratube which came with the basic package and I gave him a meter of 12 mm Spiratube, one each of Yellow Magnadisc a Blue Magnadisc and Sol-Electret oil.
These ideas are pooled with ideas from the three of us and we worked in getting the treatments done. It is a kind of double blind test, one in that our spouses did not know what exactly we are doing, but they know we are doing some crazy things. Their spontaneous comment that the TV picture looks good and better or the comment this person is singing better than before is more than enough for us.
Responses for the P.W.B. Treatments.
Can be immediate, or delayed and slowly growing later.
The delayed responses may be from getting acclimatised to the changes slowly - usually a day or two, but I think there is a tendency for progressive increase from then onwards.
There may even be no response at times. The harder one tries to notice a change the less obvious it becomes. The easy way is "let it go". To quote Rupert Sheldrake "People are being asked to do what they are doing unconsciously".
I think it is dose, threshold, or trigger effect related.
For example. If one needs 20 mg of Lasix to act as a diuretic 5 mg may not be enough. There is a symbiosis between different treatments even though they may be minimal. Four treatments may not show a change but the addition of a 5th one will trigger a perceivable change. If the environment is treated, a few strips of Real Foil on equipment will make a big change.
.Acclimatisation process to P.W.B. treatments. After treating and listening for a month one may not continue to feel what P.W.B. treatments did to their perception. Removal of all the treatments is difficult if one wants to compare.
To give an example:-
One man went to an astrologer and asked him how his life and fortunes will be in future. The astrologer said for the next 10 years he will face lot of difficulties and troubles in his life. When asked "What will happen later ?" the Astrologer replied you will get used to all the difficulties and troubles. You won't feel them any more.
Potential effects of P.W.B. Treatments.
Probably partially cure upgradeitis and periodic desire to purchase the cable f the month.
Could, most likely, make many simply listen and enjoy the music instead of evaluating sound stage, midrange blacker backgrounds and hanging around audio boards etc.
Listener fatigue is less.
The treatments of environment are subtle and palpable by many such as less anxiety, calmness etc.
V.R. Sola
USA.
Bizarre P.W.B.
Through our experiences we learn about ourselves and others.
P.W.B. is bizarre. For me, the original meaning of this word is apt; handsome, brave. Some others would choose the current usage; eccentric, grotesque. This divide has seen me on occasions wanting to proselytize.
Why? I have desired to share the amazing discoveries and the resultant great advances in listening pleasure. Given the disparity between the accepted and the P.W.B. approaches to the experience of reproduced music, there has also been an element of seeking validity through the acknowledgement of others.
The cost of the urge to proselytize has been uncomfortable ridicule, with the minor benefit of some pandering to my egotistical elitist streak. I would never like to be accused of being normal or average! I now ignore this urge and content myself in the knowledge and experience of what has become unfortunately my own private P.W.B. Journey.
That journey recently had an interesting and exciting twist for me. I live in an apartment which has flooring consisting of many strips of solid timber laid on top of concrete slabs. Reading the Morphic Green Cream instructions and the recommendation to treat wood, I asked May whether it was necessary to treat each individual wooden strip. The answer I feared came back. Yes, it was. I proceeded to treat (Morphic Green Creaming each strip followed by Quantum Clipping, with the latter adding considerable enhancement) a section representing about 25% of the listening room with stunning results. A horrible thought then occurred to me. How would this wonderful treatment be affected by the weekly floor polishing? May advised that a subsequent chemical application such as this would neutralise the treatment. The flooring could only be cleaned with water. There is a doubt in my mind as to whether chemicals in my domestic water (e.g. chlorine and fluoride) will also have a detrimental effect. I am yet to experiment on this point.
One last experience I would like to share. I started listening one night, and became most dejected. What had happened to my post P.W.B. much improved appreciation of my hi-fi? I then remembered an E-mail from May noting that the beneficial effect of treated photos in the freezer can be adversely affected by placing a credit card with a hologram into that freezer. I then thought that a bar code may do something similar. Sure enough there was a bar coded item in the freezer. On its removal, my musical appreciation improved considerably.
I have a long way to go in banishing my pet hate of harshness in the sound of reproduced music in the home. P.W.B. products have made a great difference in this regard, but unfortunately their application is time consuming, and so I have much to do.
I would like to end with an apt quote.
"Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds. The latter cannot understand it when a man does not thoughtlessly submit to hereditary prejudices, but honestly and courageously uses his intelligence."
Albert Einstein
My thanks to Peter and May,
Chris Ingram.
Hong Kong.
Autosuggestion and Blind Trials.
In one of my 'postings' on the P.W.B. Discussion site, I promised that I would try to write the story of our experiences with the audio journalist and 'measurer' Paul Miller for this Newsletter. This promise was triggered by an interview with Paul which was published in a Spring 2003 issue of an audio trade magazine where the editor described Paul as laughing when he (Paul) described his early experiments with some of the P.W.B. devices and techniques.
However, other considerations have come to the fore in that I have just read over 100 'postings' on one particular web site just a few weeks ago regarding the effect of our Rainbow Foil. All of these 'postings' seem to encapsulate the reactions Peter and I have experienced since introducing our devices and techniques 20 years ago. I do not intend to name this web site because I feel that it would be unfair to single out one particular web site and one set of responses and leave many other similar ones unnamed !
I will outline below just a few of the various responses which appeared a few weeks ago just to give you a flavour of what has been happening on and off for the past twenty years.
Quotes from the recent web site:-
"Now, there is no LOGICAL reason why this works - however it does work for me, and that is all that matters. The best thing to say is that it doesn't change the music - that's obvious - but somehow it changes you."
"Look guys, no two ways about it. I heard a difference........ I am one very convinced person, that's for sure."
"Well, got my sample today and it does seem to work, which is odd.
Nothing scientific yet - but what the hell"
"Please, please don't buy any, it cannot work."
"The Foil looks remarkably like dodgy "3D" wrapping paper I had last year at Xmas."
"It CANNOT make a difference, it's shiny foil like the stickers kids swap in the playground.
Please, are you all about to take leave of your senses ?"
* * * * * * * * * *
Over these past twenty years, the response to our products and concepts has been dominated by demands for blind trials to substantiate the claimed effects of our devices and, in addition, other people's positive experiences with our devices have been dismissed as purely "autosuggestion".
Now, I am fully aware of all the arguments in favour of the concept of autosuggestion and in favour of blind trials. I know
1) that autosuggestion can take place and I know
2) that the results of blind trials can form a strong part of research.
These two statements are "truisms" (statements of truth) which anyone would be a fool to argue against.
But, let me take you through what happens in reality. What happens when one begins to consider the option of beginning such investigations because we have been down that path - not the path of actually doing scientifically rigorous blind trials but the path of considering all that would be involved in doing so.
I will use one subject as my illustration - hearing aids.
Quite a number of people in the audio industry (many of whom have read the paper I wrote in 1986) and the people who have seen the video recording of the talk I gave in 1998 know the fact that our daughter has had impaired hearing since she was very young. The story is quite a long one and has been told in greater detail elsewhere (both in my 1986 Paper, available at the P.W.B. Web site, and in the talk I gave in 1998). However, I will give a brief outline.
Whilst our daughter was still at school, she tried a hearing aid on a few occasions but rejected it each time saying it gave 'harsh, shouty' sound and that she preferred to try to cope without one. In her early twenties, she was at college and living away from home so, in the early 1980s, had no idea of the experiments which Peter had been doing and how he had discovered that he could 'treat' batteries and improve the sound ! By the time she came home on a visit, I had already borrowed a hearing aid from an aged Aunt, and had experimented with it by blocking off one ear, fitting it into the other ear and had worn it for a week in as many situations as possible. I too found it gave 'harsh, shouty' sound in all the different situations. All in all, I found wearing it a very stressful experience. Then Peter 'treated' the battery of the hearing aid and I wore it again in the same situations. I perceived the sound as so much better and I felt so much more relaxed after wearing it.
When our daughter arrived on a home visit, we still did not tell her what we had been doing. I told my daughter that I had borrowed a hearing aid and would she, to please me, try wearing a hearing aid one more time. I used my well worn argument that I felt that she was missing out so much by not wearing one. She pulled her usual facial grimace but, to please me, fitted it and switched it on. Within a very short time, she was saying that she was going to get one, thinking it was a new model of hearing aid. To me, her reaction was both amusing and heartbreaking. Amusing because we had taken her completely by surprise and heartbreaking because we had not been able to do it all those years ago.
She made an appointment to see her Ear Nose and Throat Consultant to be tested for a hearing aid. Peter and I wrote to the ENT Consultant prior to her appointment to explain to him what we had discovered and then, at the time of her appointment, I accompanied her.
If people think that members of the audio industry etc. would be sceptical and disbelieving, believe me, this would be nothing, nothing to the scepticism and disbelief I was met with by the Chief Technician at the audiology department at the local hospital.
To shorten the story at this point. When I tried to describe how we could improve the sound of a hearing aid by 'treating' the hearing aid battery, I was met with the sentence "No, Mrs Belt, the battery is only the power supply. You cannot change the sound of a hearing aid by 'treating' the battery!!"
However, to give credit where credit is due, the ENT Consultant asked the Chief Technician of the audiology department to carry out some trials. Some weeks later I was told that the results of the trials were that over 75% of the people taking part in the trials had registered an improvement in the sound of the hearing aids, using a 'treated' battery - describing the improvement as 'better'., 'clearer', 'a lot better', 'more natural', 'better' and so on. All this took place in 1985 - 18 years ago !!
These initials trials were carried out by the hospital purely from a curiosity point of view. Yes, they were carried out under quite strict (medical) guidelines i.e. blind testing (the patients did not know what exactly was being tested) but they were not conducted under the more strictly controlled and scientific and rigorous double blind conditions. However, the ENT Consultant would have been sufficiently interested in taking investigations to the next stage but the Chief Technician's attitude began to be cooler and cooler towards going any further. In my many discussions with him, I knew he was extremely interested in listening to music, in fact it was one of his greatest pleasures, and I also knew that he read the Hi-Fi magazines from time to time. But, from the moment that a flippant, dismissive article appeared in a Hi-Fi magazine, he began to distance himself from any further involvement. The particular article was by Jonathan Kettle and was entitled "Beyond the Fringe" and, amongst other things, it included a description of one of Peter's techniques. It became obvious to me that the Chief Technician had seen this article and had decided that it might seriously damage his professional reputation if it became known that he was involved in anything which could be described as "Beyond the Fringe".
Let me now use the hypothetical approach.
Imagine it is the month of January and Peter and I begin to consider what would be involved in trying to organise a set of blind trials. One of the most important things to be aware of at this stage is that there is no money available to pay people to participate - everyone would have to be prepared to take part on a voluntary basis !!
The first and most important part is to get together a panel of adjudicators - a group of say four or five eminent and well respected people to assess, scrutinise and give their verdict on the results of such blind trials. They would have to be well respected and acceptable to the majority of both the audio and medical profession. If any person could challenge any one in the chosen group with the words "No way will I accept anything that he (Professor Joe Bloggs ??) says - he is a twithead." - then we would be wasting our time even doing the trials. So, everyone in the chosen group of adjudicators have to be above reproach (and they would have to be prepared to work for nothing).
Having chosen the adjudicating group, we would then have to consider what number we would need to take part in the trials. If we start at the figure of 100. No way ! The figure of 100 would be dismissed as 'not a significant number' and any results would be challenged and could be dismissed. So, then, what number would be accepted as significant - 500?, 1,000? If you look at 500 or 1,000, it becomes obvious that there is no way one could organise 500, or 1,000 people to be in one particular place, on one particular day, at a particular time - particularly if they have to be unpaid volunteers. So, the trials would have to be held in different places (cities) - a few hundred people here, a few hundred there, a few hundred somewhere else. And, as with the choice of adjudicators, the people chosen as the supervisors of the blind trials would have to be well respected and above reproach.
Let us jump to, say July, and to a hypothetical position where all this has actually been achieved and the results are available for the group of adjudicators to assess and give their verdict. I will split it into three different sections, each dealing with a different hypothetical result.
Result One.
Say, hypothetically, 75% of the people taking part in the trials registered an improvement in the sound of the hearing aid using a 'treated' battery. The adjudicators pronounce that is a good, significant result. Their job is done, they pack their bags and go home - as far as they are concerned that is where it ends.
But it would not end there for us. Whilst we are sitting, in January, thinking about what all the implications would be with such results, we realise that many of those 75% would want to carry on having the 'better' sound which they had heard during the trials. So, they would either want to know how to 'treat' their own hearing aid batteries or they would want to know where to buy already 'treated' batteries. So, in January, we are already aware that there would be a need to write some instructions in the following July. To our logical way of thinking, and realising that the task of organising such blind trials would be huge and could mean that they may never take place, we think "If, in the July, we know that we would have to write some instructions telling people how to 'treat' their own hearing aid batteries, why don't we write them now, in January, and let anyone who is interested have them now ? Why wait ?"
The second serious thing we would have to consider in the July, following the results that 75% could hear an improvement, is the following. If 25% of the people taking part could not hear the same improvements in the sound as the other 75%, what more do we have to do, what more treatments do we have to carry out to get more of that small group to hear what the other 75% heard ?
Result Two.
Say, hypothetically, 50% of the people taking part in the trials registered an improvement in the sound of the hearing aid using a 'treated' battery. The adjudicators would pronounce - a result no better than chance. Their job is done, they pack their bags and go home - as far as they are concerned that is where it ends.
But, again, it would not end there for us.
Everything listed previously would still apply. Of the 50% who heard improvements, very many would still want to continue having those improvements so we would be faced with having to write a set of instructions. If we know we would need to write some instructions in the July, why don't we write them in January ?
Also, we would need to think about what more treatments needed to be done so that more of the people who did not register any improvements could hear what the other 50% had heard.
Result Three.
Say, hypothetically, 25% registered an improvement in the sound. Not a good result.
But, all of the above would still apply. We would still need to write a set of instructions for the people who did hear an improvement and we would still need to consider what additional treatments we would need to do to get better results. If we would need to do all those things in the July, then why not do them in the January ?
* * * * * * * * *
People can carry out their own blind trials to convince themselves that any improvement they are hearing is not caused by 'autosuggestion' but to organise double blind trials, which would be scientifically recognised, is a mammoth task.
If you are capable of thinking it through, you will come to the conclusion that any results from blind trials are only a small part of the overall task. In our experience, blind trials create more questions than they answer. When blind trials HAVE been conducted and the results show that what has taken place is not through 'autosuggestion', what then ? What answers have you got other than it is not 'autosuggestion' at work. How have you got the answers to the questions :-
"If 'treating' a battery, in a torch, tucked away in a drawer in the study, can improve the sound in the listening room and it cannot possibly be anything to do with 'affecting the acoustic air pressure waves in the listening room', what is going on ?"
"What is being affected ?"
"How is (something) being affected ?"
"Why is (something) being affected ?"
If the answer could be 'it is the human being who is being affected', then the questions start all over again !
Let me move away from the hypothetical example now and back to the true story.
In the mid 1980s, when Peter discovered how freezing things using a domestic deep freezer could give one considerable improvements in the sound we decided to write a set of instructions and let anyone who was interested have them. We had the choice. Either to let people know then, or try to go down the path of trying to organise blind trials. We chose to let people know. Twenty years later, whenever anyone describes (either on an Internet web site or in a Hi-Fi magazine) using the freezing technique to improve their sound, they are usually met with an avalanche of other people demanding that they either keep quiet until they have actual firm blind trial results proving that the freezing technique works, or their experiences are dismissed as "autosuggestion at work". Usually, the people doing the challenging will not have tried the experiments for themselves but they are still prepared to dismiss other people's experiences.
What in reality they are doing is attempting to deny other people's intelligence. As though other people cannot make their own judgement as to whether any improvement they hear could be because of "autosuggestion".
Our experiences over the past twenty years are that when a person dares to publicise how using some of Peter Belt's treatments have given them improved sound, they are usually met with derision. But, more often than not, the people doing the deriding will probably never have tried any of the treatments nor have they done any of the (free) experiments which Peter has described over the years. Their reaction is usually that (it) cannot work, that there is nothing in conventional theories which would suggest that it could work, therefore it must be 'autosuggestion' - end of discussion. When the accusation of 'autosuggestion' does not silence people, then ridicule is applied. When ridicule fails to silence these people, then verbal attacks are used (what I call verbal bullying). What usually happens then is that intelligent people realise that further discussion will get nowhere, so they back off. And, the ridiculers win again.
Coming back to the subject of hearing aids.
The ENT Consultant and the chief technician of the audiology department frustratingly pointed out to me "How can one change the frequency range of the hearing aid and change the frequency range of the patient by 'treating' the hearing aid battery ? when the patient only has a narrow frequency ability and the hearing aid only amplifies that narrow frequency ?"
My answer was always. "Treating the battery in no way alters the frequency range of either the hearing aid or of the patient but (somehow) stops the sound being perceived as 'harsh', 'shouty' and therefore the sound was perceived as 'better', 'clearer', 'more natural'" - exactly as had been described by their patients !!
Many people may chose to dismiss the people who have 'treated' or have 'frozen' their hearing aid battery and have experienced an improvement in the sound from their hearing aid by doingso as "autosuggestion at work". If it IS only autosuggestion at work, then all I can say is "Whoopee for autosuggestion !"
Below, I will fill in, for some of our readers, some of the background to what is understood regarding the hearing mechanism.
At this point I will have to be outrageously simplistic.
It is believed that air pressure waves associated with sound reach the outer ear, are processed by the ear drum, travel through the middle ear as vibrations and reach the inner ear where there are (to use the medical term) rows of inner and outer hairs. These are not actual hairs but are elongated cells but their actual medical term is 'rows of inner and outer hairs'. Information is then transmitted from the base of these inner and outer hair cells, along the auditory nerve by electro chemicals (i.e. positive and negative ions) to the brain, to then be interpreted by the working memory. What is described here is a 'one way' system..
I will quote a small section of my 1986 paper.
"The text books on the hearing mechanism are not a great deal of help. But at least they are truthful ! What they do not know, they say they do not know, unlike many electronic text books which give the impression that everything is already known regarding electronics and acoustics.
For example from 'An Introduction to the Physiology of Hearing' published 1982.
'The intracellular voltage changes of inner hair cells cause the release of transmitter at the synapse at the base of the hair cells, so activating fibres of the auditory nerve.
Outer hair cells will be omitted from the model; we have too little information on their properties and are not sure of their role in transduction."
And, from "Science & aesthetics in sounding and hearing" 1985
"Much remains poorly understood about the functions of the hearing mechanism."
What they do know about the human hearing system however, has been of considerable help to us in understanding the results of our research.
For example from "An Introduction to the Physiology of Hearing."
"It is presumably advantageous for the current to be carried by K+ rather than say Na+..... We must not however forget that the transducer current may also be carried by other ions, for instance Cl- and Ca2+. A second relevant property of neuronal membranes is that ionic conductances can be electronically modifiable".
(K+ is potassium, Na+ is sodium, Cl- is Chlorine and Ca2+ is Calcium)
In my 1986 paper I also describe how Ian Russell of Sussex University had reported how, in the course of his research, he had discovered that the outer hairs respond to an outside electrical field. He proposed the new concept that the hearing mechanism is a 'two way' system. That information is fed from the ears, along the auditory nerve, to the brain for the working memory to identify the information but also that electro-ionic signals are sent in the opposite direction i.e. along the auditory nerve from the brain to the ears.
Because of his latest findings, Ian Russell was beginning to believe that the outer hairs act differently to the inner hairs. That the outer hairs are under the direct influence of the brain by electrical (ionic) signal. That when the working memory is unable to correctly identify the information, the brain sends a signal to the outer hairs to become more rigid - to 'tune in' to the sound. Alternatively, when the sound is too loud, the brain sends a signal to the outer hairs to 'go limp'., 'to lay flat', to 'de tune'. The belief is now that that is the reason why many people who have worked in loud working conditions now have a reduced level of hearing - because the outer hairs have been told to go limp, to lay flat so many times that many of them are now permanently in that position. According to Ian Russell, it now looks as though the outer hairs are the ears ' fine tuning' mechanism.
So, friends, to conclude. Do not neglect the treatment of batteries. ALL batteries, not just batteries associated with audio equipment. Batteries in ALL remote controls, in battery powered clocks and so on. And, what are often forgotten are the batteries in torches and in such things as mobile phones, smoke alarms, calculators etc. Also, if you have the P.W.B. Inside Foil, then remember to attach a narrow strip of Inside Foil in the battery compartment.
It is quite straightforward to treat normal type batteries. If you have no P.W.B. Devices, then putting a battery through the freezing process will give some beneficial results.
If you have P.W.B. Rainbow Electret Foil, then attach a strip of Rainbow Foil into the body of the battery and then put it through the freezing process.
If you have P.W.B. Cream Electret, then apply a small amount of the Cream to the body of the battery and so on. If you have the P.W.B. Red 'x' Co-ordinate Pen, then sign your initials on the body of the battery. If you have the P.W.B. Quantum Clip, then treat the battery (around the insulated body of the battery) with the Quantum Clip. The advantage of experimenting with batteries (treating, freezing etc.) is that they are relatively inexpensive so one can carry out many experiments.
With hearing aid batteries, however, they are more difficult to treat. Hearing aid batteries are usually shaped as a small metal disc with the top face the positive and the bottom face the negative. The main problem is with the electrical connections within the hearing aid. Some hearing aid's internal connections are - one connection to the flat upper (positive) face and the other connection to the flat lower (negative) face. Other connections are - one connection to the side wall of the upper (positive) section and the other connection to the lower (negative) face. This makes treating the metal faces practically impossible because it would interfere with the electrical connection. And, in both situations, there is a narrow band of insulation in between the positive and negative faces. The safest suggestion I can make would be to use the freezing process. One good experiment to do is to have two identical hearing aid batteries. Put one through the freezing process and listen to the hearing aid using the 'frozen' battery, then try listening to the hearing aid using the non frozen battery.
If you have a P.W.B. Quantum Clip, DO NOT grip the hearing aid battery in between the open jaws of the Clip. Use the Quantum Clip in the closed jaw position and merely press the closed jaws of the Quantum Clip against the metal face of the battery.
Regarding treating the actual hearing aid.
I would recommend only using treatment which can be easily reversed - i.e. Experiment by attaching a strip of any of the Foils to the plastic body of the hearing aid. The hearing aid can be used with a strip of Foil on it's plastic body, listened to, and then, if necessary the strip of Foil could be removed and the hearing aid listened to again to see which (with or without) the user preferred. The hearing aid is such a personal thing, special to that individual and, as a hearing aid is usually worn all the time, the sound has to be the one preferred by that individual.
May Belt.
UK
Amazing.
Received beginner's pack from P.W.B. late last week. Not exactly the best timing, as I had just gotten my amp back from my dealer, upgraded with new input connectors, MIT caps, and input wiring, and was in the process of burning in the components.
So I tried the Cream Electret in my TV room (meaning, my bedroom). Rubbed it on a piece of furniture: no difference. More furniture: no difference. Hmm. I locate the Red Ring Ties. Hey, these are just alligator clips with a small red cable tie on the end! I know what steel sounds like on a power cord, having "ferrited" every PC in my home about 10 years ago. I used garbage bag plastic-and-steel wire twists to keep the ferrites from sliding on the skinniest cords- BTW I also found the ferrites degraded the sound of every component I ferrited, but worked well on non-stereo system appliances. Well, I'll just clamp one end of the TV's power cord: no difference. (I wonder how much postage is back to England?)
Fast forward 36 hours. Amp finally settling down. Cleaner and less grainy than before mods, but also a little remote, detached. Last chance for P.W.B.- I rub some Cream Electret on the shelf holding the amp: What was that? Some kind of difference. Cream a short section of Absolute power cord which is feeding the CD player: Louder, more dynamic. Touched (I mean just barely touched) the Sakura interconnects with my Cream coated fingertips: Wow. Vivid, more dynamic. Hey, this stuff really works.
Next up, the Red Ring Ties again. On the CD's power cord: Blacker background, images emerge more clearly. Exactly the opposite effect of ferrites- which compresses the dynamics- the Ring Ties make the sound more lively, more interesting.
Spiratube: Blacker backgrounds, more sound stage depth and space (I tried them only on non-stereo appliances).
Various Morphic Foils: Only beginning to play with these, but they are very powerful, and location sensitive.
I've only begun to experiment, but the sound I have is reminiscent of the sound I had many years ago with a SOTA turntable/Fletcher, Arm/AQ moving coil cartridge as source, with tube electronics, driving Stax F81s. The emotional content is there, and this running CDs and solid state electronics. Though my speakers today are very nice, the electronics I use are jokes ($US 160 for both CD and amp, used). It may seem silly treating your electric meter and refrigerator with foils and creams, but the results really show the effectiveness of P.W.B. products.
Amazing
James Takamatsu.
Hawaii.
Beginners Pack and Intermediate Pack
We have recently introduced a P.W.B. Beginners Pack so that people can start 'treating' their equipment and their environment with a variety of P.W.B. Devices and which will also enable them to 'treat' as many things as possible, as quickly as possible.
The Beginners Pack consists of :-
1) A full pack of P.W.B. Rainbow Electret Foil - a full pack consists of 3 x 17 cm lengths.
2) A 15 cl jar of P.W.B. Cream Electret
3) One metre of 6 mm diameter Spiratube
4) Two Red Ring Ties for starting the treatment of AC power cables.
5) Samples of three of our six Morphic Message Foils. i.e. 'Blue Z' Foil., 'Safe Hole' Foil, and 'Comfort' Foil.
Intermediate Pack.
After using the Beginners Pack, many people then wish to progress to the next stage but are unsure of how to proceed because the next devices are more expensive.
So, we are now introducing an Intermediate Pack which consists of :-
1) A P.W.B. Red 'x' Co-ordinate Pen
2) A Brown Tie assembly for Upholstery Curtains Carpets - CCU on a safety pin. This is for attaching to curtains, carpets and upholstery.
3) A sample of the new Inverting Foil with a small amount of each of the three Creams.
4) A sample of the new P.W.B. Copper Foil.
5) A sample of the new P.W.B. Aluminium Foil.
6) A sample of Real Foil
7) A sample of Inside Foil
8) Half a metre of 12 mm diameter Spiratube
9) Two Yellow Ring Ties for starting the treatment of audio interconnects.
Motor Car treatments.
With the above packs (the Beginners Pack and the Intermediate Pack), you will have enough devices on hand to extend treatments to your car. The automobile is your own mini environment. You will have the general purpose Rainbow Foil and Cream-Electret, the Red 'x' Pen for signing your name or initials and for writing your own beneficial morphic messages.
The 12 mm diameter Spiratube is suitable not only for treating the water and central heating pipes in the home but a small section should be attached around the metal bars of the accelerator pedal and around any exposed metal supports under the car seats. If the metal supports under the car seats are too thick to treat with the 12 mm Spiratube or have an unusual shape (as in the case of our own car), then we would recommend attaching strips of any of the Foils to anywhere suitable on the metal supports.
The CCU Ring Tie on a safety pin can be experimented with by fastening it into the upholstery of the car seat.
All the various Foils can be used to treat the sound system of the car in exactly the same way you would use them in your home.
For the next stage after the Beginners Pack and the Intermediate Pack, our next recommended devices would be a syringe of P.W.B. Sol - Electret for treating all screws and metal connectors and then the Morphic Liquid for treating all glass and all transparent objects.
You will see references in the accompanying Selection from the P.W.B. Discussion group of the problems associated with mirrors. The treatment for mirrors would be to attach any of the Foils and to attach beneficial morphic messages to the rear of the mirrors and the front of the mirror should be treated with the Morphic Liquid. If you do not have the Morphic Liquid, then a small amount of the Cream-Electret should be applied to one corner of the mirror.
You will also see references to the subject of treating photographs in the accompanying Selection from the P.W.B. Discussion group.
If you have not already done so, we would recommend you read our paper WHAT A MESS !!!! -- An alternative view of reality. which is published on our home page and follow the procedure described of placing two photographs of yourself in the domestic deep freezer. We would also recommend that you read Carol Clark's experiences (Adventures in Cryogenics - experimenting with the theories of Peter BeltaudioMUSINGS Issue 10 ) - in the Internet magazine audioMUSINGS when she experimented by using P.W.B. Techniques to 'treat' her photograph.
May Belt.
UK
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
The following cartoon by Kevin Kehoe refers to an experiment conducted in November 2003 by some members of the P.W.B. Discussion Group.
However, although the experiment is described in the Discussion Group Selection, I feel that Kevin's Cartoon also deserves inclusion in this general P.W.B. Newsletter -
So here it is !! Thanks Kevin.
Soory I still need to upload this - Graham
May Belt.
UK
Don't forget to visit our Web
Site
@
http://www.belt.demon.co.uk
And subscribe to the P.W.B.
forum
@
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PWB
© P.W.B. Electronics 2003