The Golden Sound Intelligent Chip

   I have been corresponding with an applicant for the JREF one million dollar challenge. This is part three of a series. Part one is here.

The Golden Sound Intelligent Chip

   One of James Randi's pet targets in his weekly commentaries has been the audiophile community. Extreme audiophiles spend outrageous amounts of money on stereo system upgrades that the scientific community has for years stated can have no audible effect on musical reproduction. The most common upgrades are wiring; speaker wires, interconnect cables, and even replacement power cables. More esoteric 'tweaks' are things like brass or ceramic 'tiptoes' or cones that you place under the feet of your audio equipment, ostensibly to 'decouple' it from the shelf upon which it sits. Then we have things like the Bedini Clarifier, the JSMR Quantum Waveguide Tube, and the Golden Sound Intelligent Chip.
   According to those who are familiar with the science of how audio equipment works, these items can have no explainable effect on the sound of a stereo system. That does not stop audiophiles from spending hundreds, or even thousands of dollars on these, and other devices, and claiming that they dramatically improve their enjoyment of their equipment.
   Most recently, Randi wrote about the Golden Sound Intelligent Chip. According to the distributor's website, the GSIC repairs an error present in the recording of all CDs. It does this by simply being placed on the top of the CD player for two seconds while the CD is playing. The improvement is reportedly permanent, and improves the sound of the CD even when played in other players. The chip can be used a limited number of times, and then it is exhausted. They sell a model with ten charges, and one with thirty. The makers claim that the chip will not exhaust a charge if there is no CD in the player, nor will it exhaust a charge on a disc that has previously been treated. How it knows the difference is anybody's guess. The chip apparently works through the metal top of a CD player, but can be protected from inadvertent discharges by placing it in its supplied plastic storage case. No one, anywhere, has been able to supply a satisfactory explanation of what the chip actually does, if in fact it does anything.
   That it does not do anything at all is the position of the JREF, and the skeptical community. Their opinion is the people buying the product are predisposed to believe it will work because they have already spent thousands of dollars on other dubious devices. Having spent the money, they then convince themselves that they do hear a difference in the sound. Like the dowsers, who perform perfectly when they know where the water is, skeptics believe that these audiophiles can only hear the improvements in their systems when they are aware that the improvements have been applied. The question is, will they be able to tell the difference in blind listening tests when they do not know if a 'treatment' has been applied or not.
   The JREF believes they will not. In fact, it is the position of the JREF that because, according to currently held scientific principles, these items cannot work, their use falls under the umbrella of paranormal phenomena, and it has extended the one million dollar challenge to the audiophile community. James Randi regularly sends e-mails to the manufacturers of these items, and the reviewers who pile accolades upon them, inviting them to apply for the challenge. None have done so, until now.

The Audio Critic Protocol

   Several months ago, the JREF received an application for the one million dollar paranormal challenge from a gentleman who claimed he could hear the difference between CDs treated by the Golden Sound Intelligent Chip and untreated CDs, under proper observing conditions. This application came, not from the manufacturer or distributor of the product, nor from a professional reviewer, but from an audio enthusiast who had tried the chip, and written an amateur review on a website called Audio Asylum.
   According to his review, CDs treated by the GSIC exhibited

"greater resolution, better dynamics, [and] improved spatial presentation."

After treatment, he said, the CDs were

"vastly superior to non-treated discs, providing for an exceptionally more believable presentation."

Vastly superior. Exceptionally more believable. Strong words.
   The JREF accepted his application, and work began on designing a test protocol that both sides would find acceptable. Much of this work is done in public on the forums at the JREF website. The gentleman JREFchallenge facilitator Kramer dubbed the "Audio Critic" was encouraged to join the forum and discuss test design ideas with the regular posters there, and he did so.
   The ensuing discussion stretches across seven threads and more than 2000 individual posts. What began as an optimism filled topic has deteriorated into accusations of lying and fraud, and intimations of possible legal action on both sides of the debate. This was the way of it.
   The initial letter of claim from the "Audio Critic," that accompanied his $1,000,000.00 challenge application stated,

"I can detect a difference [between a CD treated with the GSIC and an untreated one] using source material with which I am familiar in the context of my own primary sound system. I subjectively find this difference to be pleasing and worth the cost of treatment. I propose that if I positively identify 10 times - without error -whether a given disc is treated or untreated within the terms of a mutually agreed upon test protocol, I will have successfully proven my ability in this regard."

Sounds simple, right? It turned out not to be so simple.
   The initial protocol included with the letter of claim included a number of things to which the JREF objected. The subject wanted to apply a liquid treatment called Walker Audio Vivid to the discs. He was promptly informed that he would not be allowed to handle the discs at any time. He proposed leaving his seat, and approaching the CD player to place a marker of some kind on top of it to indicate his determination of whether he was listening to a treated or an untreated disc. He was informed that a verbal designation would be sufficient. His initial protocol design also called for two discs to be used, one treated and one not, and that he would be allowed to play each disc in its entirety prior to the test commencing. Some quick thinkers on the forums pointed out that all the Audio Critic needed to do was to identify any difference between the two CDs, be it a small audio glitch due to a scratch, or a drop out of the audio at some point. If he could reliably detect that difference, all he had to do was identify that disc every time, and he would have a 50/50 chance of it being the treated one. The JREF considers 50% odds to be insufficient. A challenge applicant must be able to demonstrate his ability at a success rate that far exceeds chance probability.
   In general terms, James Randi wants to see a test protocol for the preliminary test with 1000:1 odds against a positive result happening by chance. So, in our dowser example, the one-in-ten chance of choosing the right bucket across ten separate trials results in approximately one in a thousand odds of guessing correctly all ten times.
   The challenge applicant readily accepted the stipulations of the JREF, and in fact, appeared quite interested in receiving guidance in the proper design of a testing protocol. The JREF representative expressed great optimism that a test of this claim would be conducted, which is an extraordinary event. Although the JREF receives dozens of applications every year, rarely are more than one or two actual tests conducted annually.
   Then the wheels fell off. In hindsight, I think the JREF simply made a mistake. They allowed themselves to think that this applicant was somehow different from a Dowser, or a Psychic, or an Astral Traveller. Because the Audio Critic was obviously intelligent, and well spoken; because he was open to suggestion, and willing to negotiate a protocol; because they were talking about listening to a stereo, for Pete's sake, they thought that his belief was somehow different from someone who believes they can dissipate rain clouds, or predict lottery numbers using a pendulum. And so they were caught off guard.

Tomorrow: Paul gets involved.