Diplomacy wins
High end audio is a fascinating, multi-faceted, multi-talented hobby, and we music lovers/audiophiles benefit from the hard work so many other people put in and the risks they take, all around the world. The love of music is the primary driver of all things audio - from musicians, to recording engineers and studios, to music media production companies, to audio manufacturers, to distributors and dealers, and audiophiles. This journey is a learning process for everyone, excluding none, and this is why we all make progress in the enjoyment of music. An inevitable part of this journey are mistakes, made along the way by just about everyone; whether it's in the way recordings are made, or the way web sites attempt to convey a message, or the seemingly endless purchasing cycles some of us engage in, and even the heated debates we frequently see, they are all part of the learning process.
Some are better at building things than others, some are better at debating than others, others are better at listening than others, and some are better at understanding the science involved than others. Yet, deep down, everyone is fundamentally driven by the love of music and audio, and of course the economics of it all is also an inevitable part of it. With respect to the various audiophile personalities, some are very passionate, others more moderate, others not so much (even cold), and others just indifferent. When it comes to debates, passion is the fundamental driving factor; but we must not let passion overtake us.
I had some great discussions with Steve and other folks today, and there is no doubt in my mind that the subject of the latest [endless] debate - the MB cables - is driven by passion on all fronts: from those building them, to those waxing and glowing over their sound, and those debating and challenging their virtues. The problem, though, is how we all express ourselves. At this point, I think it is generally agreed that the original MB marketing language was overreaching and poorly written, while the main goal was to convey a product which by most accounts appears to be fundamentally ground-breaking in many ways, just not in the way it was originally written up. MB ought to clear up the design goals and achievements on their website. Then, those commenting on the MB sound have been extremely passionate about what they are hearing. That, plus the original questionable marketing language, caused other passionate folks to debate on and on about what they thought was wrong with what they saw and read.
All of that is might be OK, except when things get out of hand and threads are derailed; unfortunately, this MB discussion was yet another one of those derailed threads, and it shouldn't have been. To the credit of MB owners, none of them ever claimed their cables are the best all around (just the best some/most have heard), therefore, that alone should have drawn overall less criticism from the dissenters. The dissenters, on the other hand, have raised some significant concerns, which are in fact being addressed, so less criticism would have been more appropriate. In the end, over-zeal may have driven both sides to perceived extremes. As such, the debate should have really ended weeks, if not months, ago. If nothing else, the topic of the MB thread was around listening impressions, and we should all have adhered to that.
Warm thanks and kudos go out to Steve for running such a wonderful site, which has in fact created many new friendships - that alone is cause for celebration. In the end, diplomacy always wins.