Red Light Therapy and Sound Therapy: Is There Evidence for Combining Them?

August 25, 2026 LLC Lumaflex

Medical researchers examine distinct light-based and ultrasound-based therapy approaches

Medical disclaimer: This article is for educational purposes only. It is not medical advice or a treatment recommendation. Individual treatment decisions should be discussed with a qualified healthcare professional.

What does “light and sound therapy” mean in research?

“Light and sound therapy” can describe several very different research approaches.

Photobiomodulation (PBM) uses red or near-infrared light to influence biological processes. Photodynamic therapy (PDT) uses light to activate a photosensitizing agent. Sonodynamic therapy (SDT) uses ultrasound with a sonosensitizer. Researchers have also studied PDT and SDT together as a combined treatment approach. [1]

These approaches use different energy sources, treatment parameters, and biological mechanisms. They are also being studied for different clinical applications.

Research on combining light and ultrasound therefore does not necessarily answer the question of whether audible sound can be combined with red-light therapy. A consumer red-light device used alongside music is a different intervention from a treatment that pairs light or ultrasound with a specialized sensitizer.

To see what the evidence actually says about combining these therapies, it helps to look at what researchers have tested.

Diagram comparing research on photodynamic and sonodynamic therapy, red and near-infrared light combined with ultrasound, light therapy combined with music, and clinical photobiomodulation.

Combining light and ultrasound

A 2019 review by Yang and colleagues examined photodynamic therapy, sonodynamic therapy, and combined photo-sonodynamic therapy. The paper reviewed research on treatment mechanisms, sensitizers, and the development of these approaches rather than testing a new treatment in patients. [1]

PDT and SDT both use an external energy source to activate a sensitizer. In PDT, that energy comes from light. In SDT, it comes from ultrasound.

The two energy sources behave differently in tissue. Light can be precisely selected by wavelength, but its penetration can limit how deeply it reaches. Ultrasound has different transmission and focusing properties and may reach targets that are difficult to access with light alone.

This has led researchers to investigate whether light and ultrasound can be used together in a treatment system built around a specific sensitizer. The sensitizer is what connects the energy source to the intended biological response.

That is quite different from simply pairing a red-light device with audible music. In PDT and SDT research, the energy source, sensitizer, treatment parameters, and target tissue are all part of the intervention being studied.

Photodynamic therapy

PDT generally uses a photosensitizing drug or agent. After the sensitizer reaches the target tissue, researchers expose it to light at an appropriate wavelength. The activated sensitizer can participate in chemical reactions that generate reactive oxygen species and damage targeted cells. [2]

PBM follows a different approach. It generally does not require an administered photosensitizer. Instead, red or near-infrared light is used to influence biological signaling through cellular pathways.

Sonodynamic therapy

SDT uses ultrasound rather than light. In the research reviewed by Yang and colleagues, ultrasound is paired with a sonosensitizer. Treatment parameters can include ultrasound frequency, intensity, pulse structure, and the location of the acoustic energy. [1, 3]

Ultrasound used in SDT is controlled and focused acoustic energy with defined physical parameters. Audible sound, such as music or spoken audio, operates in a different frequency range and is not used in the same way.

Listening to music during a red-light session therefore does not constitute sonodynamic therapy.

Comparison diagram showing red or near-infrared light in PBM, light plus a photosensitizer in PDT, and ultrasound plus a sonosensitizer in SDT.

Has red light actually been combined with ultrasound?

Yes. Researchers have tested red and near-infrared light together with therapeutic ultrasound in humans.

A 2023 double-blind, randomized clinical study investigated low-level laser therapy (LLLT) with and without ultrasound in 107 adults with idiopathic or refractory tinnitus. The laser treatment used red and near-infrared wavelengths, while the combination group also received therapeutic ultrasound. [5]

The study included:

Participants: 107 adults with idiopathic or refractory tinnitus
Light intervention: 660 nm and 808 nm LLLT
Additional intervention: 1.0 MHz therapeutic ultrasound
Design: Double-blind, randomized clinical study
Outcome: Changes in tinnitus severity using the Tinnitus Handicap Inventory (THI)

The researchers examined whether adding ultrasound to LLLT produced a synergistic effect. The combination did not simply improve the outcome compared with light therapy alone. The authors reported short-term antagonistic effects when ultrasound was combined with LLLT. [5]

The study is particularly relevant because it used red and near-infrared light rather than a photosensitizer-based PDT protocol. The acoustic intervention, however, was therapeutic ultrasound rather than audible sound or music.

A separate 2025 first-in-human study investigated sonodynamic therapy in patients with recurrent high-grade glioma. Sanai and colleagues combined intravenous 5-aminolevulinic acid (5-ALA) with magnetic resonance-guided focused ultrasound (MRgFUS). The study was registered as NCT04559685 and used an early-phase, open-label design. The published analysis included nine patients. [6, 7]

The intervention included:

Participants: Patients with recurrent high-grade glioma
Sensitizer: Intravenous 5-aminolevulinic acid (5-ALA)
Energy source: Magnetic resonance-guided focused ultrasound
Study design: Early-phase, first-in-human, open-label
Published analysis: Nine patients

Participants received 5-ALA intravenously, which is metabolized into protoporphyrin IX and can accumulate in glioma cells. Researchers then used focused ultrasound to activate the sonosensitizing compound in the tumor.

The study reported no drug-related or device-related toxicities in its safety assessment. Treated tumor regions showed increases in markers associated with oxidative stress and cell death compared with untreated areas. The authors described the findings as proof of principle and noted that additional research would be needed to optimize the treatment before clinical benefit could be assessed. [6]

The two studies represent very different approaches. The tinnitus study combined red/near-infrared LLLT with therapeutic ultrasound, while the glioma study used focused ultrasound to activate a specific sonosensitizing compound.

Neither study tells us whether audible music adds to the effects of PBM.

What does clinical research on PBM show?

Photobiomodulation has been evaluated in clinical trials using defined wavelengths, treatment schedules, devices, patient populations, and outcome measures. One example is LIGHTSITE III, registered as NCT04065490, which evaluated PBM in people with dry age-related macular degeneration.

The study included:

Condition: Dry age-related macular degeneration
Intervention: Photobiomodulation using the Valeda Light Delivery System
Comparator: Sham treatment
Design: Randomized and sham-controlled
24-month analysis: 100 participants and 148 eyes [8]

The later 24-month analysis reported statistically significant differences in the prespecified visual acuity endpoint and a favorable safety profile. [8]

The findings apply to the specific PBM protocol studied in LIGHTSITE III, including its device, treatment parameters, patient population, comparator, and outcome measures.

PBM has also been investigated across a range of other conditions and outcomes in randomized clinical trials. The strength of the evidence varies by application, with differences in study design, treatment parameters, patient population, and outcome measures contributing to the results.

There is therefore no single clinical result that represents every PBM treatment. The evidence needs to be considered in the context of the specific condition and protocol being studied.

What happens when light therapy is combined with music?

There is at least some human research that combines light therapy with music.

A 2024 prospective pilot study investigated a device called LineQuartz in 44 adults with chronic pain. The device combined music therapy, light therapy, and chromotherapy. Participants received four 30-minute sessions over three weeks and were assessed for pain, anxiety, depression, and quality-of-life measures. [9]

The study included:

Participants: 44 adults with chronic pain
Intervention: A combined music, light, and chromotherapy treatment
Treatment schedule: Four 30-minute sessions over 21 days
Assessment: Brief Pain Inventory and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale
Study design: Open pilot study with a case-series design [9]

The researchers reported significant improvements in most of the measured outcomes. Background pain intensity and the frequency of painful attacks showed particularly strong improvements, while anxiety scores also decreased significantly. No treatment-related side effects were reported during the study period. [9]

The study is relevant because it brings music into the same treatment as light. It does not, however, isolate the effects of the individual components. All participants received the combined LineQuartz treatment, with no group receiving light therapy alone or music alone. The study also included chromotherapy as a third component.

That means the results cannot establish whether the music enhanced the effects of the light, whether the light contributed to the improvements, or whether the combination of therapies produced the observed changes.

The authors described the work as a pilot study and called for controlled research to confirm the findings. [9]

For red-light therapy specifically, the question remains open: does adding audible music produce an effect beyond what the light treatment produces on its own? The LineQuartz study does not provide that comparison.

Does the research show that red light and music work better together?

The early research is encouraging enough to make the combination worth studying, but it does not yet establish an added benefit from music.

The 2024 LineQuartz pilot study found improvements in pain, anxiety, and other measured outcomes after a treatment combining light therapy, music, and chromotherapy. [9] Because the study used the combined treatment rather than separate light-only and music-only groups, however, it cannot show how much each component contributed to the results.

Scientific illustration of a clinical pilot study combining light therapy, music therapy, and chromotherapy for adults with chronic pain.

Research combining red or near-infrared light with therapeutic ultrasound points to a similar need for direct testing. In the 2023 tinnitus study, adding ultrasound to LLLT did not produce the expected synergistic effect and was associated with short-term antagonistic effects. [5]

Ultrasound and audible music are different interventions, so these findings cannot be used to predict how music would affect a red-light therapy session. They do show that the interaction between light and acoustic interventions is something that needs to be studied directly.

For red-light therapy and music, the research question is therefore quite specific: can adding a defined audio intervention produce benefits beyond those achieved with red-light therapy alone?

The existing findings provide a basis for asking that question, while controlled studies are still needed to answer it.

What would a study of red light and sound need to test?

The next step would be a controlled study that separates the effects of red-light therapy from those of the audio intervention.

A straightforward design could compare:

Red-light therapy alone
Sound alone
Red-light therapy + sound
An appropriate control or sham condition

The light treatment would need clearly defined parameters, including wavelength, irradiance, dose, treatment duration, and schedule. The audio intervention would need the same level of definition, including the type of sound, duration, delivery method, and volume or intensity.

Researchers would also need to prespecify the condition being treated, the participant population, and the outcomes used to measure the treatment effect.

The key comparison would be between red-light therapy alone and the combined treatment. If the combination produced a greater effect under otherwise comparable conditions, that would provide evidence that the audio intervention contributed something beyond the light treatment itself.

The 2024 LineQuartz study points toward this kind of research, but its design could not separate the effects of its light, music, and chromotherapy components. A controlled trial could.

What does the evidence tell us?

Research on light-based therapies has developed along several different paths. PBM has been evaluated in clinical trials across different conditions and treatment protocols, while researchers have also explored combinations of light with therapeutic ultrasound and, more recently, light with music.

The early human research on light and music is particularly interesting. The 2024 LineQuartz pilot study reported improvements in pain, anxiety, and other measured outcomes following a combined treatment involving light therapy, music, and chromotherapy. [9] Because the treatment components were delivered together, the study could not determine how much each contributed to the results.

That leaves an important question for future research: whether adding a defined audio intervention to PBM can produce benefits beyond PBM alone.

A controlled study comparing red-light therapy with and without an audio intervention would provide a much clearer answer. It could also help identify whether particular types of sound, treatment schedules, or patient populations respond differently to the combination.

For now, the research supports a measured but interesting conclusion: light and music have been studied together in humans, and the early findings provide a basis for further investigation. Whether audible sound can enhance the effects of red-light therapy remains a question for controlled clinical research.

References

1. Yang Y, Tu J, Yang D, Raymond JL, Roy RA, Zhang D. Photo- and Sono-Dynamic Therapy: A Review of Mechanisms and Considerations for Pharmacological Agents Used in Therapy Incorporating Light and Sound. Current Pharmaceutical Design. 2019;25(4):401-412. DOI: 10.2174/1381612825666190123114107.

2. National Cancer Institute. Photodynamic Therapy to Treat Cancer.

3. NCBI Bookshelf. Ultrasound Therapy. StatPearls.

4. Panhóca VH, Aquino Junior AE, Souza VB, Ferreira SA, Souza KJO, Tamae PE, Nogueira MS, Bagnato VS. Effects of Red and Infrared Laser Therapy in Patients with Tinnitus: A Double-Blind, Clinical, Randomized Controlled Study Combining Light with Ultrasound, Drugs and Vacuum Therapy. Journal of Personalized Medicine. 2023;13(4):581. DOI: 10.3390/jpm13040581.

5. Sanai N, Tovmasyan A, Tien AC, et al. An Early Clinical Trial of 5-ALA Sonodynamic Therapy in Recurrent High-Grade Glioma. Science Translational Medicine. 2025;17(826). DOI: 10.1126/scitranslmed.ads5813.

6. ClinicalTrials.gov. A Phase 0, First in Human, Open-label Study of Intravenous Aminolevulinic Acid HCl and MR-Guided Focused Ultrasound Device in Participants With Recurrent High Grade Glioma. NCT04559685.

7. ClinicalTrials.gov. A Double-Masked, Randomized, Sham-Controlled, Parallel Group, Multi-Center Study to Assess the Safety and Efficacy of Photobiomodulation in Subjects With Dry Age-Related Macular Degeneration. NCT04065490.

8. Jaffe GJ, Boyer D, Hu A, et al. Long-term efficacy and safety of photobiomodulation in dry age-related macular degeneration (LIGHTSITE III: 24-month analysis). Retina. 2026;46(5):783-795. DOI: 10.1097/IAE.0000000000004822.

9. Son Y, Lee H, Yu S, et al. Effects of photobiomodulation on multiple health outcomes: an umbrella review of randomized clinical trials. Systematic Reviews. 2025;14:160. DOI: 10.1186/s13643-025-02902-3.

10. Suarez A, Delgado Y, Servais A, et al. Effects of Combining Music Therapy, Light Therapy, and Chromotherapy in the Treatment of Chronic Pain Patients: A Pilot Study. Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine. 2024;2024:3006352. DOI: 10.1155/2024/3006352.