Yesterday, I brought my little vial of cream electret (a polarized
emulsification of oil and water) over to a friend's house, to
demonstrate the stuff. This was the first time I had demonstrated the
cream to anyone (and I had only used it once or twice myself), so I was
curious to see what would happen. It was as much a demosntration for
me, as for him. My friend has a really nice audiophile system (before
me, he did not have an audiophile system. He had Bose speakers and an
old Sansui amp. That is, until I bought everything in his system and
steered him in the right direction..... he has been very happy with his
audio sound since). However, having an audiophile system does not make
you an "audiophile". Unlike me, he really has no interest in the
equipment or even talking about it, or music reproduction in general.
He does however have about 50,000 records and CDs, so he's a very
serious music lover. And of course, before yesterday, he never heard of
Belt, his products or any of my tweaks.

I did not perform any blind test, as that wasn't necessary. Instead, I
showed him exactly what I was doing. Since most people don't believe
that creaming something can affect our audio systems (and they don't
know that our perception of sound can be affected), it certainly wont
introduce a positive bias. But he was not necessarily what I'd calll a
"skeptic" either. Certainly not the violent extremist closed-minded
die-hard skeptics you find all over this group (ie. Robert Morein). I
found he was naturally open minded, with a very casual attitude of
"I'll believe it if I hear it". Not the extremist attitude of "there's
no ****ing way this thing can work, and obviously if you say so, you're
either INSANE or a willful LIAR!!". Which is the attitude of almost
everyone on this group. That's why I love testing -non-audiophiles-.
They're not brainwashed by silly doctrines.

He had no idea what this stuff was, what it did, or what I was doing
with it. Not having done experiments with the cream on CDs, I took out
a CD he was familiar with (Bruce Springsteen's "Dust And The Devil", if
I recall the title correctly), and smeared a tiny amount of cream on
the label side. He didn't say anything at first, but both he and I had
heard many changes in the sound, which he described to me at the end of
the track. "There was better flow in the music, things sounded less
confusing, easier to follow, the cymbals sounded less splashy" etc. He
asked what this was supposed to do, but I didnt' want to tell him yet
(because that's always the hard part!). I then suggested listening to
another CD to confirm that the stuff really made a difference. So we
pulled out Bob Dylan's reissue of Highway 61 Revisited (a great
audiophile recording apparently, using the old Columbia 360 label). I
smeared a tiny amount of cream again, and we listened to "Like a
Rolling Stone", before and after.

To me, the change was immediately apparent. I didn't know about him,
because he doesn't physically react to the music as I do. But at the
end of the test, he again confirmed he heard differences, and I asked
him if he was sure about that. When he confirmed he was, I started
talking about what it was and why it worked. Being a physicist, he knew
something a little about quantum mechanics, but never heard of "morphic
resonance theory". So he wondered if there were other things that might
explain the effect. His comments after the Bruce Springsteen test
wondered if it reduced static charges on the CD. I said it was an
interesting theory but no, because I also smeared a bit of the excess
near the terminals at the back of the cd player and speakers; because I
knew from experience, the stuff works there as well.

After the Bob Dylan test, he was coming up with other possibilities...
(physicists, engineers, scientists and other skeptics here do the same
thing. They try to understand something they don't fully understand, by
making it fit into something they do understand. This is akin to
pushing a square peg into a round hole, and theorizing that it really
goes in the round hole). "Perhaps it ionizes the air", he thought. "If
the effect dissipates after a few hours or a day, then I'll believe
otherwise". I told him that the effect is permanent, as far as I can
tell, because it has never worn off as long as I have been
experimenting with the cream electret.

After I said I could put some cream on the record shelves and it would
have a similar effect, he commented that it might be affecting acoustic
waves hitting the furniture, or even "energy in sound waves" got thrown
out into the "discussion", after I talked about morphic energy (that's
"discussion", not violent, belligerent arguments, which are the only
kind you find here on this group). So I had to demonstrate that all his
theories were, while thoughtful, incorrect. I did this by coming up
with the idea of creaming another Bob Dylan CD - but not playing it!

Morphogenetic theory tells us that their are linkages between objects,
and I reasoned that creaming a Dylan CD while playing another, might
create a linkage between the two. I don't know if that would happen,
and I stated "I offer no guarantees this will work!" to my friend,
before the test. But I thought it was interesting, because if it did
work, it would prove that it is not working by static, or acoustic
sound pressure waves, since the treated CD was being placed back in its
jewel case, and back into the stack of CDs, while the previously heard
Highway 61 CD would be listened to again, without further alterations
to anything. And after the test, there was no mistake: the sound had
improved yet again.

He described the effect as small (this is relative to your listening
skill of course), but definitely there. I told him the cream electret
cost about 20 pounds (I think?) for something like 15 or 20ml, but you
only require a very small amount (a micron thickness) to have an
effect. Considering that, it can treat many objects in the room. It's
not practical to treat CDs with it, because of the cost in terms of
both money and time. But when I consider how much you can treat an
audio system itself with the cream, the compounded effect from that is
not "small", by any stretch. Any non-audiophile will be able to hear
differences, after the vial is used. Those differences are far greater
than anything I could spend 20 pounds on, in audio. (If someone knows
of anything in audio more effective for the same 20 pounds, please let
me know!).

My friend never talked to me about where to order PWB's "cream
electret", and I could care less about that, as I have no affiliation
with its manufacturer and do not make commissions from him doing so.
What I got from the experience was valuable education about how
valuable the cream is. Not only did it validate the many benefits of
the product, but it showed me that even treating an object that is
inside a storage case among thousands of other such objects in cases, a
non-audiophile could hear the differences a very small amount of cream
can make. You can go on forever arguing about why the cream electret
should or should not make any impact on the sound of your stereo, if
wasting time in life is that meaningless to you. But it only takes
seconds to hear that it does. Then you gotta start rethinking what you
thought you knew about audio.... Which is not something that most
people here are prepared to do, obviously. As the English say... "What
a pity...".