Anyone ever opened MIT cables?

Carl & Sol although MIT T2 are very good for the price, MIT 330+ is big step up and well worth the small additional cost. Audio Advisor has 330+ for $150 pair new, and it has CVT coupler RCAs which T2 lacks. I have heard no cable anywhere near this price that is as three dimensional, huge soundstage.

I have the 330 "Highend Series" Shotgun Medium (both an XLR, and an RCA...the balanced is unbeleivably good!). Anyway, I was referring to the T-2 speaker cable. I have the T-2 interconnect as well, and I realize it isn't in the same league as any of the 330 series.

Like all the parts of the audio gear chain, each is just a "system" which would we hope pass on the audio signal as unadulterated as possible to the next stage. MIT sounds coherent and correct to some posters above as intended in the source material (nobody knows exactly what anyway), one shouldn't worry too much about what the cable "messenger" looks like. In the real physical world every bit of conductor matter has inductance(L) and resistance(R) and that of insulator, capacitance(C). So a well designed cable has to be compensated for the LCR by virtue of its length by the various methods possible. The fact is well known to all audio engineers, thats why audio cable companies choose different methods like conductor & insulator materials and all sorts of geometry to address LCR. For hi-end audio this compensation is essential, so that the audio signal is transmitted with the least power loss, echo and phase shift, the latter being more critical for audio fidelity. I don't think MIT intended any "box of secret" with the giveaway name like "Terminator". Personal computer systems been using terminators to compensate for the network devices impedance loading all along. So the whole issue is about engineering design and compromise and sometimes marketing price paid for the appearance of a product, and all that bashing that follows. The above is IMHO and stand to be corrected. Carl... I admire your courage standing up dead firm for what you hear is correct, but not even once try to explain why. BTW I don't work for MIT nor have I owned a MIT product, but am just curious to try one. Carl mind if I borrow your Mit for say....hehe, no just kidding. :)

The box on one of my MIT speaker wires came open. It has a wire leaving the main chain that is wrapped around a spool, (kind'a like fishing line at the bait shop.) This is where all the evil spirits go, I think. Sorry to be so technical in my description, intelligence can be a curse. These are good cables, IMHO. Charlie

Iceraven: Why should I explain why? I didn't design the cable, and you can read it all at the MIT site. I tell you what, I will now. It's what you said, a form of LCR circuit that's in PARALLEL with the signal's path (i.e., across the positive-negative conductors)...Transparent Cable supposedly uses a series resistor, besides some form of LCR circuit, I gather. The ones I've heard from them do sound like something is in series, to me. Lots of things are going on with the design of MIT cables (and it IS patented, for what that's worth), and I'm not an electrical engineer (my brother is, though). I AM a speaker hobbyist, and know that a Zobel filter is used in parallel with woofers, to gently roll off their response BEFORE crossover. Now, as to WHY this works with cable, I can only assume the stated methodology at the MIT website, is somehow working (and that essentially all of the significant rolloff occurs untrasonically...but then, rolloff isn't the only thing the termination networks do, as you observe). I can also say that these won't work for all equipment, but when they DO work, it's better than ALL other cable types. ICERAVEN, YOU CAN DEMO THESE FROM TCC, OR JOE AT OVERTURE IN DELAWARE, AND LIKELY DOZENS OF OTHER PLACES. I recommend you try, if you have a solid state amplifier, or if you otherwise find your music lacks "weight", "slam", and "duration". If it doesn't lack these things, then you might not like what most MIT cables do in such a context.