Binaural Beats: Digital Drugs

The science behind binaural beats: What they are, what they are claimed to do, and what they can actually do.

by Brian Dunning

Filed under Alternative Medicine, Consumer Ripoffs

Skeptoid #147
March 31, 2009
Podcast transcript | Listen | Subscribe
Also available in Russian

Today we're going to put on our headphones, kick back in the beanbag, and get mellow to the soothing sounds of the latest digital drug: binaural beats. These computer generated sound files are said to massage your brain and produce all sorts of effects, everything from psychedelic experiences to behavior modification. Let's point our skeptical eye at the science of binaural beats, and especially at some of the claims made for them.

First of all, I'm sure you're curious right off the bat to hear what binaural beats sound like, so let's take a listen:

A binaureal beat is created by playing a different tone in each ear, and the interference pattern between the slightly differing frequencies creates the illusion of a beat. It's intended to be heard through headphones, so there's no cross-channel bleed across both ears. Listen to this, I'll play a simple binaural beat, and I'll slide the pan control back and forth from one ear to the other. You can see that there isn't actually any beat, it's just an acoustic illusion:

If you search the Internet for "binaural beats" you'll quickly find there's a whole industry built on the idea that listening to binaural beats can produce all kinds of desired effects in your brain. It can alter your mood, help you follow a diet or stop smoking, get you pumped up for a competition, calm you down, put you to sleep, enhance your memory, act as an aphrodisiac, cure headaches, and even balance your chakra. offers a $30 CD that they call the world's first "digital drug". They claim it can get you drunk without the side effects. offers a range of music tracks that they say simulates a variety of actual pharmaceuticals, such as Demerol, Oxycontin, and Vicodin. Suffice it to say that no matter what superpower you're looking for, someone on the Internet sells a binaural beat audio file claimed to provide it.

You don't have to buy one, though. It's not too hard to make your own binaural beat, and free software is widely available to do just that. The one that I used to make that little sample is an open-source program called Gnaural, available on the Sourceforge web site. It's pretty easy to use, though it takes some practice before you can generate some of the really cool, more professional sounding beats. A binaural beat consists of two simple tones, and most people add that background pink noise. Nothing special.

But the question is: Does it have a special effect on the brain? A lot of people think so. The basic claim being made for binaural beats is "resonant entrainment". Entrainment, in physics, is when two systems which oscillate at different frequencies independently are brought together, they synchronize with one another, at whatever the combined system's resonant frequency is. Examples of entrainment occur in animals in nature; for example the chirping of crickets or the croaking of frogs. Synchronization of menstrual cycles in women is another example. Even people coming together and dancing with one another is a type of entrainment. The basic claim for binaural beats is that the perceived low-frequency beat will entrain your brain wave pattern, thus forcing your brain into some desired state.

Most of these web sites give some brief explanation of entrainment. The example you hear most often is that of Dutch polymath Christiaan Huygens, who in 1665, hung two pendulum clocks next to each other on a wall. He noticed that the pendulums eventually matched each others' frequency, but always in antiphase, opposite to each other, as if canceling each other out. He'd try disturbing one or setting them in sync, but they'd always return to the same antiphase synchronization. Huygen's experience is widely touted on binaural beat websites as a demonstration of how systems can become spiritually connected through some energy field. However, they misunderstand what happened, and have not read the full story. Huygens also tried taking one clock off the wall, and as soon as they were no longer physically connected to one another via the actual wall, the effect disappeared. It was not the proximity of the clocks to one another that created the entrainment; it was their physical, mechanical connection to one another. As each pendulum swung it imparted an infinitesimal equal and opposite reaction to the wall itself. With two clocks on the wall, the system naturally sought the lowest energy level, according to the laws of thermodynamics; and both pendulums would thus swing exactly counter to each other, minimizing the system's total energy.

So to summarize their claim, they're saying that entrainment means that a binaural beat will cause your brain's electroencephalogram to match the pattern of the phantom beat. Well, if it did, entrainment certainly doesn't apply and would not be part of the equation, so we can scratch that off the list. But it doesn't make the claimed observation wrong. We do know that certain electroencephalogram waveforms are often associated with certain kinds of activity. For example, physical activity or REM sleep often produces an electroencephalogram with a sine wave of between 4 and 8 Hz, which we term a theta pattern. Waking relaxation with eyes closed often produces a pattern from 8 to 12 Hz, which is called an alpha pattern. There are only a few characterized patterns, and pretty general descriptions of what kinds of activities go with them. The claim made by the binaural beat sellers depends on much more granular and specific matches. For example, the claim that a binaural beat with a frequency of X produces the same effect in your brain as Vicodin is wholly implausible. Such claims presume that we know the exact frequency of the electroencephalogram in each of these desired conditions, and the fact is that brain waves don't work that way. It is wholly and absolutely implausible to say that desired brain condition X will occur if we get your EEG to read exactly X Hz.

Not only that, binaural beats presume that brain waves work in the opposite way that they do. Certain brain states produce certain brain waves; brain waves don't produce brain states. You just don't turn a dial to 6.5 Hz and induce instant happiness.

And so, while the claimed science behind binaural beats is unfounded, this doesn't mean that the effect isn't real and simply unexplained. Maybe you can listen to a certain binaural beat and induce a desired state, but for reasons we don't yet understand. So let's take a look at the research, and see if such an effect has actually been observed.

A 2008 study at Hofstra University played two different binaural beats and a control sound (a babbling brook) to patients with high blood pressure. There was no difference between the groups. In one small study from Japan that was published in the Journal of Neurophysiology in 2006, they played various binaural beats to nine subjects, and observed the resulting EEGs. They found great variability in the results. Their conclusion was that listening to binaural beats can produce activity on the human cerebral cortex, however the cause was more likely a conscious auditory reaction and was not correlated to the frequency of the binaural beat. However, a 2005 study published in Clinical Neurophysiology found that they were able to induce a desired frequency in the EEG matching the phantom beat frequency encoded in a binaural beat, however this was with a single subject and was neither blinded nor controlled.

But we don't need any studies to tell us that different people can listen to different kinds of music and be affected. A lot of people who work out have a workout playlist on their iPod that keeps them energized. Some people listen to certain music to help them fall asleep. The Muzak company has built an industry on relaxing music that will keep people in the mood to shop. Music does affect our mood, and so we already have every reason to expect binaural beat recordings to produce the same effect. Different people may find certain binaural beats to be relaxing or energizing. But, we've never found any reliable indication that a binaural beat's connection to our brain is any deeper or more meaningful than any other music track. We do know for a reasonable certainty that specific claims made by most sellers of binaural beats are not credible, and that there is no reason to think that the effect they're claimed to produce will work for you.

Well, except for one reason: The power of suggestion. If I give you a music track and tell you that it will cure your headache, you're more likely to report that it cured your headache than you are to say "Well it didn't effect my headache, but it made my short-term memory better." An interesting experiment would be to buy a binaural track claimed to induce drunkenness, for example; play it for five friends without telling them the claim, and then ask how it made each of them feel. Give them multiple choices to select from. Chances are they're going to respond all over the map. If you have a friend who is a believer in binaural beats, I suggest going ahead and setting up this little test.

Tip Skeptoid $2/mo $5/mo $10/mo One time

So, in summary, binaural beats certainly do not work the way the sellers claim, but there's no reason to think they're any less effective than any other music track you might listen to that effects you in a way you like. If they make you sleepy (like they all do for me), use them to go to sleep. If they relax you or get you amped, use them for that. But don't expect them to be any more effective than regular music. If someone you know claims that they are, put them to the test, and bust the myth.


Brian Dunning

© 2009 Skeptoid Media Copyright information

References & Further Reading

Adams, C. "Can Binaural Beats Improve Your Mood?" The Straight Dope. Creative Loafing Media, Inc., 30 Jul. 2010. Web. 13 Feb. 2012. <>

Carter, C. "Healthcare performance and the effects of the binaural beats on human blood pressure and heart rate." Journal of Hospital Marketing and Public Relations. 1 Aug. 2008, Volume 18, Number 2: 213-219.

Karino, S., Yumoto, M., Itoh, K., Uno, A., Yamakawa, K., Sekimoto, S., Kaga, K. "Neuromagnetic responses to binaural beat in human cerebral cortex." Journal of Neurophysiology. 21 Jun. 2006, Volume 96, Number 4: 1927-38.

Padmanabhan, R., Hildreth, A.J., Laws, D. "A prospective, randomised, controlled study examining binaural beat audio and pre-operative anxiety in patients undergoing general anaesthesia for day case surgery." Anaesthesia. 7 Jul. 2005, Volume 60, Number 9: 874-877.

Pratt H., Starr A., Michalewski H.J., Dimitrijevic A., Bleich N., Mittelman N. "Cortical evoked potentials to an auditory illusion: Binaural beats." Clinical Neurophysiology. 1 Aug. 2009, 120, 8: 1514-1524.

Schwarz, D.W., Taylor, P. "Human auditory steady state responses to binaural and monaural beats." Clinical Neurophysiology. 1 Mar. 2005, Volume 113, Number 3: 658-668.

Reference this article:
Dunning, B. "Binaural Beats: Digital Drugs." Skeptoid Podcast. Skeptoid Media, 31 Mar 2009. Web. 31 Aug 2015. <>


10 most recent comments | Show all 165 comments

fully understand what you are saying. And I agree in part- if your treatment doesn't do what it is said to do then you shouldn't promote it as such. Keep in mind, I am only referring to binaural beats here- something that has VERY limited research available. The link below is one of the only pieces of credible information I can find. And no one could make a call based on this research as the sample size is too small.
But, I stand by what I say, IF a product is harmless, and you have a basis for which to make your claims (I.e some research) then you should be able to market and promote. By big pharma, I'm referring to Pharmaceutical companies that sell drugs on a grand scale and have mega advertising budgets behind them.
Kind Regards.

Lee, Perth, Australia
May 5, 2014 11:32pm

lol, I love how people are so hung up on scientific evidence, and fail to see that science is just a fraction of what exists. Meaning there could, and probably is, millions of things out there (binaural beats being just one example) that actually do work yet people cite scientific studies that basically don't refute and don't confirm it. I have a simple rule. If doing something has no adverse reaction on my health, then I'll judge it for myself. I listen to BBs/isochronic tones and have had situations that came out of the blue. Too much of a coincidence.

And you know what? Maybe it is placebo. But I am a huge fan of the placebo effect. Simply put, this is the scientific communities way of debunking something as useless. The way I see the placebo effect is a window. A window of opportunity. The brain operates based on reference points (past experiences, smells, emotions, etc). If I listen to a BB that has me believing I will be confident in a social situation, then I may very well get a placebo effect. It might make that person feel more competent in a social environment. Guess what? That person will go out thinking 'This BB allows me to be more confident'. So they will be more confident and there's a high chance that it will go well for them. They'll then get reference points (I was confident and people appreciated me). Over time these reference points will help to form a new belief and this person will then begin operating from that new better belief structure.

Maggz, Brisbane, Australia
June 8, 2014 8:52pm

Gee Maggz,

That seems so simple. It seems like you'd be able to prove something like that...scientifically

Andy, Melbourne
June 9, 2014 9:40am

Two dissimilar frequencies do not syncronize. They produce a difference frequency. The beat frequency. The superheterodyne AM radios are based on the principle, unless I'm mistaken.
Whistles on AM radios as you traverse two frequencies the circuit can't resolve, so you hear the difference. Much higher than binaural beats of course.

The subject here is aptly termed, binaural beats. In this case they are Two channels, resolved by the brain.

Make you feel drunk? No idea on that one, but for the ones who actually perceive the effect, they can give you pleasant feelings of calm, warmness, being at peace, and more.

Just as a particular musical recording can cause emotions to erupt in some listeners, so It is with beats. Just because a certain person doesn't respond to the music track and break out in tears as the other listener has, does that mean the emotion is false? Course not. It's a real event.

As always, It's an individual thing.

Best Wishes people. :)

Data, Calendarofupdates
October 15, 2014 4:43pm

Logical issues:
- You cannot expect that one kind of broad brainwave is caused by only one brainstate. If you try to induce one kind of brainwave using BBs, which of possible underlying brainstates will be induced by the brainwave (invalid reverse inference).

- The is no reciprocal relationship between effect (the brainwaves or electric potentials measured on the human scalp) and reason (brainstates). You cannot rinse the street and expect a rain will start (or what ever; kind of an example)

Methodological issue:
- the reverse problem (google is you friend...)

Neurological issues:
- Often it's claimed BB are used to "synchronize the hemispheres". But the hemispheres don't produce synchronous brainwaves. There are synchronous brainwaves present during a grand mal epileptic seizures (actually it's "noise", which is measured) and (brain) death (flat line)

- the sound (like every other sound) has an reliable effect on the auditory system (nerve, nuclei and the auditory cortex). well, that's cool, but how exactly are BB supposed to work? When and how is the whole brain (hopefully not, see above) starting to "resonate synchronously"? How do the sounds induce synchronous brainwave spreading over the whole cortex or even through the whole brain with its deeper structures (wow, that sounds shocking to me)? There is an explanatory gap. Wouldn't it make more sense to put electromagnetic waves directly on the scalp instead of putting sounds into someones ears (Don't do that!)

Brainstorming on BB, Germany
December 12, 2014 1:51pm

sorry, dizzy due to idoser:
inverse (not reverse) problem is the problem in eeg

Brainstorming on BB, Germany
December 12, 2014 2:59pm

Magic lies in interpretation, not in physics for physiological impact.

Maid in Missouri, Gainesville Fl
January 7, 2015 4:23am

Binaural Beats are unfortunately bunk.
The binaural effect is true enough. The brain produces the perception of a sound based roughly on the difference between the 2 frequencies. That is a vestige of our primitive days, when we needed to be aware of the direction or possible predators or prey.
The entrainment claim, however, is false. The original studies were conducted poorly, with standard headphones placed on top of the EEG cap. The electrical signal driving the headphone speakers is more powerful then the brainwave signature, and the EEG sensors are extremely sensitive. The stronger signals masked the real brainwave activity signals .The result was that researchers saw brainwave activity that matched the headphone signal perfectly, because it was the headphone signal. There were subsequent tests that conducted the same experiments with a split group of subjects , half of which used air headphones (rubber tubes to conduct the sound to the ears-no electrical signal) and no EEG signature developed, beyond the normal brain activity.No entrainment. Many of the original papers were then withdrawn, but companies still make reference to them and leave out the part about them being proven invalid.
The important point is this: If the binaural beat track you are listening to actually works on you, relaxes you, makes you have lucid dreams or whatever other effect claimed, then realize that the effect comes from you and nothing else. The consciousness version of training wheels

paddua, orinda
February 13, 2015 8:22pm

While there may be some value hypothetical posts here, Lets look at the primary reason for quoted skepticism. Two research studies. In observing few small but, well, nagging details. These studies are invalid to draw any conclusion from.

Sample size. Insufficient,,, this is not arguable. 15k, well perhaps worth considering . 15? Seriously. Parameters of sample. Mediation studies generally utilize 20 plus minutes exposure. As this is being touted as a meditative aid, to use an exposure of 7 minutes? If one is going to be a skeptic, please have adequate data to support trashing a possible treatment modality.

LLLT has many studies. many are poorly constructed and administered. Yet sufficient have been run properly that some )not all) machines actually achieve the reported result. Ultrasound; bane of existence for a while. Multiple applications today.Biofeedback, acupuncture, Fluoride. Aspartame.

Achieve sufficient sample, size provide adequate controls and methods; then you can speak of scientific method.

Point. Insufficient and poor research do not a conclusion make. It simply leads to an unanswered question.

Annoyed Nurse Practitioner, Rochester, NY
March 9, 2015 3:46am

What strikes me is that, poorly constructed study protocols notwithstanding, the proof is in the usage. I suggest, as scientists did in the 19th century, that we experiment on ourselves to test the validity of these claims. I've tried a number of binaural, beats, designed to induce meditative states, some kind of drug high, or states of sexual ecstasy. From my experience, binaural beats do have an effect on the mind and on bodily sensations, sometimes intense and sometimes quite subtle. It may be that some people are simply more sensitive to various sound stimuli and hence more responsive to BB.

convinced skeptic, Sydney
July 12, 2015 6:48pm

Make a comment about this episode of Skeptoid (please try to keep it brief & to the point).

Post a reply


What's the most important thing about Skeptoid?

Support Skeptoid

Captain Kidd's Treasure
Skeptoid #481, Aug 25 2015
Read | Listen (12:07)
The Nazi of Nanking
Skeptoid #480, Aug 18 2015
Read | Listen (13:49)
Skeptoid #479, Aug 11 2015
Read | Listen (14:28)
Listener Feedback: Natural History
Skeptoid #478, Aug 4 2015
Read | Listen (11:36)
Wag the Dogman
Skeptoid #477, Jul 28 2015
Read | Listen (13:03)
#1 -
Read | Listen
#2 -
Harry Houdini and Sir Arthur Conan Doyle
Read | Listen
#3 -
The Death of Rasputin
Read | Listen
#4 -
The Water Woo of Masaru Emoto
Read | Listen
#5 -
The St. Clair Triangle UFO
Read | Listen
#6 -
Tube Amplifiers
Read | Listen
#7 -
The Braxton County Monster
Read | Listen
#8 -
Read | Listen

Recent Comments...

[Valid RSS]

  Skeptoid PodcastSkeptoid on Facebook   Skeptoid on Twitter   Brian Dunning on Google+   Skeptoid on Stitcher   Skeptoid RSS

Members Portal


Follow @BrianDunning

Tweets about "skeptoid"

Support Skeptoid

Email: [Why do we need this?]To reduce spam, we email new faces a confirmation link you must click before your comment will appear.
characters left. Abusive posts and spam will be deleted.