Talk:Brainwave entrainment

Marked for cleanup?
Marked for cleanup? What does that mean? This is a perfectly fine entry. Additional information wouldn't hurt, but it shouldn't be removed. &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.65.59.153 (talk • contribs) 06:48, 29 January 2006 UTC.


 * Agreed. This is a good article. Was also marked for jargon - I could understand the technical stuff, and I'm certainly no expert. Someone was being a bit liberal with their tags. Please discuss here before marking it. Zarkme (talk) 00:49, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
 * very little of the article is actually about its subject, and what is, is badly sourced. it needs a ton of cleanup. Jytdog (talk) 01:35, 23 March 2017 (UTC)


 * I agree with jytdog here. The central aspects, i.e. that this entrainment even exists, is not sourced at all. Almost all of the rest is not about entrainment directly. I will re-mark it for cleanup.Marsaute (talk) 04:55, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

What about centerpointe.com?
Why you mentioned only HemiSync, Immrama, and not Centerpointe Reasearch Institute — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.113.228.37 (talk) 20:56, 7 April 2007‎ (UTC)

form/flow is not great yet.
Entrainment section should obviously come first. Minaural and isochronic tones need to be mentioned in the discussion of binaural tones, which needs to be a subsection of the music section anyway. Also, Intermittent Photic Stimulation (IPS) is very important and must be discussed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nhall44 (talk • contribs) 02:34, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

Of interest
Of interest may be Monroe institute and Chandra Stone, Phyllis Thomas, Dennis McClain-Furmanski, & James E. Horton (2002). "EEG oscillations and binaural beat as compared with electromagnetic headphones and air-conduction headphones", Psychophysiology vol 39, pp. S80. — Paleo Neonate  – 06:49, 3 September 2017 (UTC)