I've often wondered this too, but I think the number of people who defend it are too many for him to pre-arrange. ...
For these kinds of things, it becomes most clear if one does a little research on the "placebo effect". Many people can be led to believe literally
anything can improve the sound under the right conditions, no matter how nonsensical it may be (just read various audio forums, and you can find enough to make one feel ill and uneasy about the future of humanity). And once someone becomes a sucker for some nonsense, it is usually quite difficult to get them to see reason. This is a result of many factors, including the fact that most people have no concept of how to figure out anything for themselves (that is, they have no concept for how to do a fair and impartial test). They are totally dependent upon some authority figure telling them what to believe. That is why there are so many crazy religious cults, too.
On audio web sites, one constantly reads the mantra, "hearing is believing". Hearing is a lot easier than thinking, which is why so many fools prefer it as a method for belief formation. Never mind the fact that they use non-audible cues to tell them the right answer (who listens in properly conducted double blind tests? -- setting them up requires intelligence, which most people lack). Realizing the importance of the non-audible cues in the "listening tests" requires thinking, not hearing.
Once someone is fool enough to buy into the "hearing is believing" nonsense, they are primed for the placebo effect to work its magic.
