MIT cables and super tweeters

It's mostly about time-amignment, not low-pass. High frequency information travels electrically through the cable at a different speed than low-frequencies. Therefore, depending on the length of cable needed, each MIT cable is calibrated to re-align the audio signal electrically before it exits the cable. Typically, the result does improve bass because less low-frequency information is lost to cancellation due to mis-alignment. Now MIT has refined this philosophy to what they call poles of articulation, which finds the "sweet-spot" electrically for many frequency points. The higher the price of MIT cables the more poles of articulation.

"A good example would be his manufacturer's response in the current TAS (no. 190, page 105) to Robert Harley's review of his $25K 8-foot speaker cables and $8K 1-meter interconnect. Just absolute techno-babble, at least as applied to audio frequencies."

TEchno babble helps sell outrageously priced stuff to some. You have to convince perfectionists that spending lots of money is worth it to achieve their goals.

Fact is though based on my comparisons with other products in my system, the reasonably priced (used) Terminator cables clearly do without doubt deliver a sound consistent with the technoblather. Its a good $30-50 investment that delivers very good sound in a well matched system.

I suspect MIT uses the virtues of its affordable products to suck people into upgrading to its expanded and way more costly versions. What cable company wouldn't want to make anice high profit big ticket sale on occasion for not too much more investment in R&D or marketing costs?

I resist the urge to get carried away with enthusiasm for these uber-products. The diminishing returns only have value for relatively few.

As many here have pointed out already, it is often easier to sell the same luxury product to its target audience for more money than it is if the price is lower. After all, anybody can buy products for low cost.

Also, if you try a $50 used cable and don't like it, its not hard to sell it to someone else to try without taking a big hit (unless you overpay)

1)Mapman -- I agree with your well put comments and perspective.

2)

High frequency information travels electrically through the cable at a different speed than low-frequencies.

Nonsense. And even if it weren't nonsense (which it is), considering that the information propagates through the cable at a substantial fraction of the speed of light in a vacuum, the arrival time differences would be an utterly infinitesimal fraction of a single period of the highest audio frequency.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signal_velocity
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Velocity_of_propagation

Regards,
-- Al

I am wondering, how much listening time have Mapman and Almarg
spent with any Mit cables much less top of the line products.
Joe

I am wondering, how much listening time have Mapman and Almarg spent with any Mit cables much less top of the line products.

In my case, none. But as I said above:

I don't doubt that MIT cables will sound very good on some systems

-- Al