MIT oracle cables pros and cons

John, your detailed description is very much appreciated. I have Kubala-Sosna speaker cables and do like them very much. It is very difficult to get used XLR cables so I was thinking of going the MIT route.

Jafox - john, that is indeed excellent insight into your experience with MIT. I have been a long time MIT user with several different systems. I have several types of MIT. I currently use 350 shotgun EVO, 330 shotgun, and Magnum M2 speaker wire. I had an oracle v3 speaker cable for a while but sold it, it made my Classe amp oscillate and we could never figure out why.

I also have 350 reference, Magnum M1, and several other types down the line. My current system consists of Meridian front end, CJ premier 14, and Mcintosh 501 mono blocks driving Thiel 3.6's. The combination of the CJ and the Mac are very lush, plus I use Mullard tubes which accentutes that midrange lushness even more. I think the MIT's play into that perfectly and bring an astonishing presence I haven't experienced with other cables.

I will say the 350 reference is the leanest MIT ic in terms of lower midrange, it is also very extended at the frequency extremes. I don't know your system context but obviously that is the most important factor when considering how to wire it.

Just wanted to offer my experience, Jafox you have an big time system, would love to hear it. Maybe you could bring it over....

Bryanhod: I have often had to wait a fair amount of time to get a good deal on a long IC, whether RCA or XLR, in 20-30' lengths. But there are so many people with balanced components today that XLR cables are in abundance on the used market in the typical 1-2m lengths.

Pops: Geez, it's been awhile since I called anybody by that title. Hmmm, maybe you can adopt me. 8-) Oh yes on the Mullards, I love these things. I just heard this week from another CAT amp owner who tried Mullards and he too liked their result. They are magic in the CAT preamp, amps and the Aesthetix line and phono stages.

Concerning the MIT cables, when I had the 350 Ref Proline, I also had a 30' XLR M1 on loan. I had this for over a month as the dealer told me I had to break it in. A month later, I still much prefered the 350 Ref Proline as this had more dimensionality and body to the music. The M1 was closer to the analytical zone for me. But I do not recall much difference in tonality. My system then (to evaluate these MIT cables) was BAT 31SE and Wolcott monos driving Magnepan 3.5s.

Last year, I re-arranged my room and thus needed a longer cable than the 20' 350 Ref Proline so I changed to the Evo when I found one that was 25'. And the CAT amps that I had by then are single-ended only so I got rid of using the XLR-RCA adaptors as this Evo was RCA terminated.

It was just a couple months ago that I removed the 350 Evo to be replaced by the Dominus and this change was huge. It will be in my system for a long long time. If you think the MIT extends well into the frequency extremes, there will be a huge smile on your face when you hear the Kubala-Sosna Emotion or Purist Dominus or even Venustas for that matter, directly against the MIT. The Dominus is so very impressive in the lowest octave.

If you are ever in the Minneapolis area, send me a note and you're more than welcome to stop by.

John

Hi Jafox,
When you comment on the improvement in the frequency extremes of the Venustas over the MIT are you referring to the bass and treble or just the bass?
Thanks!
bill

Mr_bill: Both. The instant I tried the Dominus in my system, there was so much more low-end extension and power. And when I then tried the Venustas, it was very close to the performance of the Dominus. The Dominus gives that last little bit of power to the bottom octave like no other cable I have tried in my home.

The issue of treble is as dramatic with the Evo softening the trebles much more so than the Purist models above. But when it comes to the ultimate openness on the top with much air, the Kubala-Sosna Emotion so far is the champ of all I have tried.