Founder and software developer, Antagrioin · Writes and fact-checks every page on this site
The short version, before anything else: I am a software developer, not a doctor, psychologist or neuroscientist. Nobody with a clinical qualification reviews what is published here. If you are looking for medical advice about a diagnosed condition, this site is not the right source and every health page on it says so.
What I can offer is narrower and, I think, still worth something: I build the audio engine, I read the source studies rather than the headlines about them, and I check every citation on this site against the paper it names.
Health content on the open web is usually written by somebody you are never told the name of. That is a problem, because the value of a sentence like “binaural beats reduce anxiety” depends almost entirely on who is saying it and what they read before they wrote it. So rather than leave a byline hanging, this page states plainly what my expertise is, where it runs out, and how to check my work without taking my word for anything.
This is also the answer to a fair question about a site that sells an app: why should you believe a page that ends in a download button? You should not, automatically. You should be able to check it. That is what the rest of this page is about.
Three separate jobs, and they are worth separating because I am much better qualified for one of them than the other two.
The free web generator synthesises two sine tones in real time through the Web Audio API at your device's own sample rate, one per ear, with the beat frequency being the difference between them. The mobile app does the same thing natively, offline, plus 44 presets, isochronic pulsing, and the tools in the Frequency Lab. Generating two tones accurately and keeping them phase-stable for twenty minutes is ordinary, checkable engineering, and it is the thing I am genuinely trained to do.
It also means I know exactly what the tool does and does not do, which turns out to matter editorially. It is why the generator page tells you the oscilloscope cannot show you a binaural beat — in binaural mode each ear gets one steady tone and the beat is reconstructed in your brainstem, so it is something you hear rather than something a waveform contains. A marketing writer would have drawn the pretty pulsing wave anyway.
The claim I want to make here is narrow, because a wider one would not survive contact with this site’s own history. Earlier in August 2026 I went through the older pages and found citations to work that does not exist — a “Journal of Cognitive Enhancement, 2020”, an MIT memory study dated to a year it was not published, a Stanford paper with no Stanford behind it. I then wrote on this page that every study named on the site had been read and checked against PubMed.
That was not true, and on 28 August 2026 I proved it to myself by actually doing it. Checking every remaining citation against PubMed and Crossref turned up, on pages I had already called clean: five systematic reviews that do not exist (including “a 2015 Cochrane review” of music and pain, and “a 2023 meta-analysis in Psychological Bulletin”), roughly ten primary studies that do not exist, and about fifteen real papers filed under the wrong journal — two of which had swapped journals with each other. Several pages named one study in the prose and a different study in the footnote beneath it. The site also carried invented statistics attributed to our own users, and mechanisms — endorphin release, dopamine, cortisol — that no binaural-beats study has ever measured.
All of it is corrected now, and the corrections are published on the pages themselves rather than quietly deleted: where a claim was wrong, the page says what it used to say and what is true instead. That is deliberate. A page that only ever shows its final answer gives you no way to tell a careful site from a lucky one.
So the honest version of my claim is this: every study named on the English pages of this site has now been checked against PubMed or Crossref, and the ones that failed are gone or corrected. The twelve translated locales are a separate matter — they were taken out of the search index earlier in 2026 precisely because they carry claims like these, and cleaning them is unfinished work rather than something I can tell you is done. Not “this site is reliable because I am careful” — I was not careful enough, twice — but “here is what was wrong, here is what replaced it, and here is the link so you can check me.” All forty are listed in one place on the corrections page, and the research hub and study dataset exist so that checking me is cheap.
Reading a paper carefully is not the same as being able to design one, run the statistics, or judge whether a small crossover trial with eighteen participants should change anyone's behaviour. Where the literature is thin, contradictory or underpowered — which on this subject is often — the honest move is to say so, and that is what the pages do.
There is no editorial team here, and the site should not pretend otherwise. When a page on this site is wrong, one person wrote it and one person failed to catch it. The upside of that is that corrections do not have to survive a committee: email me the page and the sentence and it gets fixed or it gets defended, usually the same week.
None of the following requires trusting me:
The pages I would point a sceptical reader at first — these are the ones where the research is doing the most work:
The pages where the subject is genuinely contested, and where I have tried hardest not to oversell:
Antagrioin is a small technology studio in Turkey. Brainwave Generator is its flagship product: a binaural beats app on iOS and Android, plus the free web generator that requires no account and uploads nothing. More about the studio and why it built this on the about page.
If I have misread a study, overstated a result, or cited something that does not say what I claim it says, I want to know — that is the only mechanism a one-person site has instead of an editorial board.
Email: [email protected]
Editorial standards: Editorial Policy
Studio: Antagrioin, Turkey
If you are in crisis, please do not wait for a reply. In the United States, call or text 988 to reach the Suicide & Crisis Lifeline, available 24 hours a day. If you or someone else is in immediate danger, call your local emergency number.