Your the one who says it wouldn't divulge proprietary information. MasterBuilt says different.
MB Thread Comment
- Thread starter DonH50
- Start date
Your the one who says it wouldn't divulge proprietary information. MasterBuilt says different.
No disrespect taken nor do I mean any disrespect to any of the people here at WBF.
Al. M,
You are a scientist. Perhaps you can explain people what is a dielectric, what are "free radicals" and why the sentence as written is deeply wrong and meaningless in all senses. Asking for scientific data to backup what looks a poor nonsense from a marketing guy will not lead us anyway. Just MHO.
Last edited:
So, can we presume that once the patent is acquired for this proprietary science that MB will be only too pleased to share it!
You are working on a patent...yes.
In the highlighted sentence, you explicitly say MB never claimed that the formula used was a super conductor. Now take a look at this post from Amir http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showt...h-Other-Cables&p=413108&viewfull=1#post413108 quoting the original MB text:
Back then, I saw the exact same text as well on the website, it was later taken down, and the rest is history. Clearly, the claim was indeed about a super conductor, and apparently the same alloy used in the LHC. You are now refuting all this in an attempt to deflect, and you attempt to attribute the whole thing to the original MB language being "written poorly". Worse, you accuse those who call you on it. Fine, so be it, but you cannot tell me that "MB never claimed that the formula used for the Ultra cable was a "Super Conductor.""
Having settled that, I also saw recent language about free radicals, etc. This misinformation - aka Fake News, aka "hype" - in the technical claims is the ONE and ONLY reason this firestorm erupted, and will continue to burn until you give up on the obfuscation and deflection - it simply fuels more of it. From my perspective, MB and its representatives have been solely responsible for this mess, which has led to misunderstandings among folks, and accusations flying all around.
If you want to keep going, my armor is on. But I suggest we stop right here, and I hope you will reflect on what's transpired and do the right thing, at least from now on.
You are debating mostly semantics ... It seems Leif can not write anything in this forum anymore without a lawyer and a scientist close by ...
For me it is clear that being a superconductor in Leif sentence means being used as a material with superconductor properties - having close to zero resistance. Yes, it was misleading in the original advertisement and has been corrected.
While I am a scientist, this is not my area of expertise. However, I know enough to be deeply suspicious about the claim that the electrons in the cable "interact" with the electrons of the free radicals. Really? What kind of interaction is this? And how then exactly do you measure this on the atomic/molecular level within a cable?
If MB makes such extraordinary claims then it must be willing to provide appropriate answers. I would personally be really curious what that interaction is about and how they measure that. And I'd learn something from that too.
***
No, Leif, this is simply not true. You can be scientifically accurate without divulging proprietary information. I work for a biotech company, and all the information on our website is scientifically accurate because the scientists write it, and check everything the marketing department wrote. But at the same time we do not divulge, for example, the exact peptide sequences against which our antibodies are raised. This is propietary.
You should tell the scientists at MB to go over the MB website and scrape everything that is either
a) inaccurate
b) they don't want to back up with data.
I'm just curious to why you feel your scientific knowledge in this field is greater than the engineers of MB who are engineers for an aerospace company that hold enough patents to make your head spin?
Friday when I was contacted by one of your locals friends asking about auditioning the cables I was very excited. I wanted to see if he had the same results of so many others that have put MB cables in their system. Now, I have no desire what so ever to do this anymore. I'm very pleased to know how the owners of MB cables feel it has transformed their systems.
I'm officially done with this thread.
Happy listening
For your information I've been contacted by many dealers and distributors because of the thread wanting to try the cables. We will be just fine.
We will have the engineers take a look at the site.
Thank you, Leif.
And I am glad to hear MB have such success! If the audible results for clients are wonderful then you deserve it. Again, my and others' criticisms had nothing to do with the sound, which I cannot comment on. I'd still be curious to hear the cables.
pssst, hey......Al and Ack.....no one cares......at all. nada. the only one cheering you is Amir.....and he is loving it. if that is your intent then god help you. you are saving the world for no one. no one gives a crap about cable technical claims.....now or ever.
if you continue Leif should just ignore you. I can't believe he continues to try and be respectful.
go listen to some music. it's Sunday afternoon.....
if you continue Leif should just ignore you. I can't believe he continues to try and be respectful.
go listen to some music. it's Sunday afternoon.....
All high-end cable manufacturers write terrible nonsenses concerning electrons and signal propagation in cables and miraculous claims. They use words in a figurative way - do not expect them to use Maxwell equations and Schrodinger. I feel as horrified as you when I go through them, but take them with some humor!
Free radicals are important in dielectrics because they can easily release and trap electrons in a random way - they only contribute to noise in normal cables. They are mostly referred in HV cables because under high electric field these electrons can act as triggers to breakdown, something that HV cable manufacturers must avoid. The subject has such importance that was and still is very deeply studied. And yes, my explanation is nor formally correct, but is the best I can do in four lines.
I didn't mean metaphorical.
The bully did have the last word and then chucked his toys out of the cot and shut the thread
I don't know about you, but I for one am kind of fed up with so many individuals trying to pull one over the a'phile consumer! I happen to think if a company, or company rep, comes to a forum and tries to expound a bunch of 'BS' and call it "proprietary science" when called out by those with some scientific knowledge, then I see no reason why we should not call into question that companies way of doing business. Mike, how many times have we ( a'philes) been asked to buy into this or that pseudo science that no one else understands( Except the manufacturer) and not to worry about opening up our wallet to do it? How much gullibility are we expected to exhibit in order for these same individuals/companies to feel gratified? Personally, I happen to think it is somewhat "insulting to one's intelligence" that so many manufacturer's have taken this exact tact in the past. Now, as to "Master Built" -- well I think their original comparison to and verbiage of Super Conductor's was ( IF we give them the benefit of the doubt) an unfortunate mistake. But, I applaud the right of Al M and Ack to question them just the way they have and are doing.
Oh, one of my local a'phile friends would like to know why the cables are called "Master Built" and not " Neophyte Built" or " Beginner Built"....I told him no one cares
Similar threads
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Co-Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |