Think what you will... As you never have used the device.

-Dave Wing

Here is a nice if old video on how audio CDs work.  They have extensive redundant coding that tolerates even bursts of errors.  The example given is radial slots cut through the CD. Because of the distributed block error coding (Reed-Solomon), all kinds of bit errors can occur, even in contiguous groups and the original datastream is faithfully reproduced.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sYO6vm9PTsI

This gives rise to the first problem with Bedini's fraudulent claims that you promote:  CDs are highly tolerant of:  smudges, scratches and other surface defects. 

Then there is the second problem with Bedini's fraudulent claims that you promote:  Spinning what amounts to an aluminum and plastic platter around magnets can at most induce heat into the aluminum from eddy currents.  That won't do anything unless the plastic gets soft enough to flow.  It it does then there would be an asymmetric distortion of the plastic at the outside radius if the disc versus the center.  If the distortion is severe enough, the disc will be ruined.  If the disc does not heat up enough to distort then the magnets have done nothing.

Then there is the third problem with Bedini's fraudulent claims that you promote:  frequency signal components occur over the length of track spirals, but they are not linear due to the block error coding.  There is no simple way to get at some frequency band of the source audio material without decoding the disc.  Bedini's fraudulent "Clarifier" has no way to identify different frequency components of the source audio, nor does it have any way to operate on them.

The most basic and complete proof that the "Clarifier" is a worthless piece of junk is to compare the source PCM streams before and after a treatment by the device.  They will be identical.  Bedini has gooped up a motor and some magnets in a box, and you sell it for $200. - $300.  Although looking at your low transaction rate, there are very few people buying this completely bogus snake oil that you offer.

No! What part of "The easiest person to fool is yourself" do you have a problem understanding?

Subjective tests are just that: subjective. I have offered you several _objective_ means of testing, including using YOUR ears as the sensors in YOUR listening room on YOUR audiophile equipment, giving YOU the best possible chance of demonstrating the truth of your claims, in a real objective protocol using Signal Detection theory and analysis, and you have rejected them.  Why should I pay anything at all to test your claims? YOU are the claimant, YOU pay the shipping both ways if you want me to test anything, and I will _donate_ my time and expertise to do the OBJECTIVE tests on the actual data coming off the discs. You are getting by far the better deal out of this. Do you think it's easy or trivial to get to the raw data encoded on a CD and run a reasonable comparison? I will not be using an audio system at all, I will be looking at the actual data on the disc with electronic, visual and mathematical means. All you have to do is box something up and send it off. I not only have to do that to return it, but I also have to set up equipment, extract data, run comparisons, analyze the comparisons, test again after a time interval to see if this "decay" you claim is real.... write up a report.... and you want ME to pay for shipping too? Get real, Dave.

What you want is for me to "confirm" the existence of a _placebo_ effect: a well known phenomenon where, for example, merely _thinking_ that you are getting a real remedy makes your illness go away sooner. This is a psychological effect and the only way to weed it out, separate it from actual physical effects as you and Bedini claim are happening, is to use _objective_ testing in a _blinded_ test protocol. Asking me to do some kind of subjective listening test does two things: it actually reduces your chance of a positive result, since I am skeptical that there is an effect at all, and it gives you Yet Another out, as you can claim that my audio equipment or my ears aren't up to the task.

You can easily set up and run the SDT protocol yourself, with an honest assistant to do the treatments out of your sight, if you dare. You make 20 discs and mark them so that they can be distinguished visually. You listen to the discs first, knowing they are untreated. Your honest assistant takes them into a closed room out of your sight. She flips a coin, if heads, she treats the first disc, if tails she does not. She records the result (Disc A: Treated, Disc B: Untreated, etc.)  and slips the disc to you under the door, so that you can't get any clues from her expression or posture or speech or other sounds etc. Obviously the same amount of time must be used per disc by the assistant, whether the disc is actually treated or not. You listen to the disc enough to make your determination, say ten minutes of listening: Yes, treated, or no, not treated, and you write down your result. You must respond yes or no to each disk, no "not sure" or "pass" responses are allowed. You do them one at a time to avoid the "decay" effect, so you listen to the disc within minutes of the treatment. Repeat the process for all 20 discs. Remember, you are not allowed to exchange any information _at all_ with your assistant during the test. In fact she should even run the Clarifier each time, with the discs not to be treated far away from the machine, so that any sound from the machine that you might be able to hear, even subliminally, won't clue you in. Once you are done, you can send me the two lists:  the actual state of treatment from the assistant, and your evaluation of each disk on listening. I will compute the SDT matrix (the Hit, miss, false alarm, correct rejection percentages) and I'll complete the analysis for you and write it up. Here I am trusting you and your assistant to be 100 percent perfectly honest in running this SDT blinded protocol and assuring that no "leaks" occur ... something that no sane parapsychologist would consent to in a remote viewing or ESP test, but here we are. For your assistant, you can call up the local university and get them to "loan" you a psychology student with some familiarity with double-blind experimental designs. Or you can use a friend, but you have to be rigorously  honest with yourself and with me in preserving the blinding of the test.

I am offering this self-run protocol to you out of respect. It is not formally acceptable to do it this way since there is no assurance that you will run it properly, having no prior experience with double-blind testing or SDT, and because you have a financial stake in the matter. But I'm interested in seeing what kind of results you get and your experiences with attempting to do it right. We both might learn something valuable from the experience. Different things no doubt... but valuable nevertheless. If it turns out to be a placebo rather than a real physical effect, that doesn't take away from your _experience_.  You can still enjoy your own treated discs even though you may know intellectually that there is no real physical effect. This may cause you to have to re-evaluate the basis upon which you conduct your sales, though.

The problem is that the base brightness is not something tangible that can be seen in the PCM data stream, nor does the "clarifier" access that data stream.  There is no possible process driven by the "clarifier" that is an analog equivalent to something like a parametric equalizer or a compressor/limiter/expander to adjust the perception of bass brightness.  In other words, the "clarifier" can't possibly be doing something tantamount to digitally processing the signal to do things like the compressor/limiter/expander.  It's simply impossible.

The whole thing is wrong on so many levels.  It's the equivalent to going to one of those free energy/breakthrough energy conferences and coming back with a $75 "healing crystal."

What is your technical level?   For example, in ten sentences or less, can you describe the steps that take place between the LASER reading the CD to the analog out from the phono jacks?

I am not trying to give you a hard time, I am just trying to understand if you understand the guts inside your CD player.