MIT bashed, not Transparent, why?

Transparent originally distributed MIT until they figured that they could make a better product (or was it high profit?). Since MIT started out the use of "tuning networks", they are perceived as the primary company utilizing this concept. If Transparent were larger, I think you'd find similar opinions expressed about them. Through trial and error, we find what charateristics of an audio system are most important to us. Don't get caught up into the circus of who (magazine or individual) is saying what about a particular product. There will always be a better product, whether for more or less money, that will eventually replace the "preferred" component. Regrettably, we usually have to buy and live with products to determine their worth to us within the context of our system and room. Then again, especially with audio, the real joy is in the journey (for most of us), not the final destination. This forum is intended to assist other audiophiles through recommendations based on personal experience. Ultimately, use your own ears to find what you like. Sorry for the rambling.

Is MIT bashed so much because of their sound quality or because of what the cables do? Personnaly I love MIT.

Perfectimage You ask a question that is curious to me also. I really try to stay away from controversial issues concerning components since synergy is much more important than trying to ascertain whether a particular product on its own is worth its salt or not. I have commented on the effects of MIT speaker cables in my system and can only say that they offer by far the biggest improvement I have heard in speaker cables to date. That appreciation is greater with each passing day when listening to familiar recordings. I really think that there may be a sonic characteristic (relaxed and smooth)and maybe on the part of some that don't like MIT, that is not something their system needs. Maybe it is the fact that they have network boxes that some feel add unwanted colorations. All I can say is that those that have a system that lends itself towards a bright balance, particularly in the high frequencies, may find these cables to be the best solution and along the way may find out about other aspects of MIT that to my ears sets them apart, image placement, firmer bass and greater resolution of inner harmonic detail. The sound is more palpable, dynamic contrasts more real with a great jump factor without becoming edgy. That is what I hear and it is unmistakable in my system.

I think it is because of the market presence of MIT(all the way down to mass - fi stores). Familiarity breeding contempt. On a smaller scale, a similar thing happened with StraightWire and WireWorld. The market being saturated with the original brand will eventually produce people who hate the brand. The smaller company does not engender the same emotions, as similar as the products may be.

Maybe people have tried both and just prefer Transparent. It has been known to happen before. Even after breaking them in MIT just didn't work for me, they always seemed to put in some haze and smooth things out too much.