• 05-22-2004, 12:41 AM
    JohnGalt
    How are MIT speaker cables supposed to work?
    What is in those boxes?

    I have heard all the cable arguments and I am an objectivist. I admit anything that a DBT devotee wants to claim. I admit that I'm altering the sound from the true definition of "hi fi" and I've made peace with God about that. I expect that whatever MIT does, it is "adding distortion" by definition... OK?

    So with all that out of the way, I have a very lively room and MIT speaker cables have improved my enjoyment of the system.

    Can anyone tell me objectively/factually what is the deal with the boxes? In layperson terms can someone say what they purport to do?

    Thanks.
  • 05-22-2004, 01:00 PM
    mtrycraft
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by JohnGalt
    What is in those boxes?

    I have heard all the cable arguments and I am an objectivist. I admit anything that a DBT devotee wants to claim. I admit that I'm altering the sound from the true definition of "hi fi" and I've made peace with God about that. I expect that whatever MIT does, it is "adding distortion" by definition... OK?

    So with all that out of the way, I have a very lively room and MIT speaker cables have improved my enjoyment of the system.

    Can anyone tell me objectively/factually what is the deal with the boxes? In layperson terms can someone say what they purport to do?

    Thanks.

    Not a problem :) MIT has two patents on them that may be worthless as it is basic electronics circuitry, nothing new.
    Patent no4954787, 'Audio Signal Transmission system with noise suppression network
    Patent 5142252, "Audio Signal transmission line with low pass filter

    All for not to limit RF noise.
  • 05-22-2004, 03:47 PM
    Tony_Montana
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mtrycraft
    Patent no4954787, 'Audio Signal Transmission system with noise suppression network
    Patent 5142252, "Audio Signal transmission line with low pass filter.
    Since when designing a low or high pass filter require a patent? :D
  • 05-22-2004, 07:01 PM
    mtrycraft
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tony_Montana
    Since when designing a low or high pass filter require a patent? :D

    I guess when you want to sell it for a lot of $$$$.

    Some time back, there was an expert witness to a trial posting on this that would lead me to believe that MIT tried to sue someone for patent infringement. I doubt MIT won.
  • 05-23-2004, 11:02 AM
    pctower
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mtrycraft
    Not a problem :) MIT has two patents on them that may be worthless as it is basic electronics circuitry, nothing new.
    Patent no4954787, 'Audio Signal Transmission system with noise suppression network
    Patent 5142252, "Audio Signal transmission line with low pass filter

    All for not to limit RF noise.
    Not a problem MIT has two patents on them that may be worthless as it is basic electronics circuitry, nothing new.
    Patent no4954787, 'Audio Signal Transmission system with noise suppression network
    Patent 5142252, "Audio Signal transmission line with low pass filter

    Please tell us all more about your ESP powers than enable you to know that either or both of those patents were used in the cables that JohnGalt is using.
  • 05-23-2004, 09:47 PM
    mtrycraft
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by pctower
    Not a problem MIT has two patents on them that may be worthless as it is basic electronics circuitry, nothing new.
    Patent no4954787, 'Audio Signal Transmission system with noise suppression network
    Patent 5142252, "Audio Signal transmission line with low pass filter

    Please tell us all more about your ESP powers than enable you to know that either or both of those patents were used in the cables that JohnGalt is using.

    Why wouldn't they use it? They own it, or they think it is legal patent. Perhaps they are using another patented box? Or not patented?
    Doesn't matter really, they are nothing of interest, unless it really screws up the frequency response but that would be an obvious defect in design.
  • 05-25-2004, 08:12 PM
    AudioAlleyCat
    Someone should saw half way in the middle of one of those boxes to see. Lots of gimmicks out there to get more money out of us. I used to have MIT cables. The Digital 3 cable and MIT 2 interconnects. Not bad for the money, but after awhile I dropped them and went with Cardas cables. MIT in my opinion makes the music sound fake. Artificial.
  • 05-25-2004, 09:10 PM
    mtrycraft
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AudioAlleyCat
    Someone should saw half way in the middle of one of those boxes to see. Lots of gimmicks out there to get more money out of us. I used to have MIT cables. The Digital 3 cable and MIT 2 interconnects. Not bad for the money, but after awhile I dropped them and went with Cardas cables. MIT in my opinion makes the music sound fake. Artificial.

    Someone has cut it up. There is a 100 ohm resitor in there if I remember correctly.
  • 05-26-2004, 05:55 PM
    JohnGalt
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mtrycraft
    Someone has cut it up. There is a 100 ohm resitor in there if I remember correctly.
    Maybe the guy who cut it up, or someone else who cut one up, can post a reply. I hope so.

    I don't want to get in a philosophical debate (certainly not Marty who makes mincemeat of anyone who is silly enough to take him on imo). I just want to know.

    For the used price I got, I'll accept the placebo effect as a bargain - although it does seem as if it is a lowpass filter and frequency response tweaker (which I think is perfectly all right). I don't have tone controls on my main amp. My receiver (Denon) has tone controls, and I notch down the treble by 4 db to get sound I like in my room... I don't see any reason to be a purist on that issue and I wish my amp had tone controls.. but oh well. These wires are cheaper than an equalizer, are passive components, and don't take extra shelf space.

    I did try Zu Varial interconnects and all I got was cool looking wire so I sold them to another seeker - I'm not a wire believer but I do think MIT does "something" in that box.

    I basically just want to know what's the deal with the MIT (and presumably the same with Transparent) boxes... just so I can know.
  • 05-26-2004, 10:21 PM
    mtrycraft
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by JohnGalt
    Maybe the guy who cut it up, or someone else who cut one up, can post a reply. I hope so.

    I don't want to get in a philosophical debate (certainly not Marty who makes mincemeat of anyone who is silly enough to take him on imo). I just want to know..
    He never reads this site :)
    I went through my library, no small task but didn't find the article but am sure I read about this. So, no mincing today :)
    Perhaps someone can dig in the patent web site for those 2 patents and see if the guts are revealed?

    Yes, they are low pass filters, but low is relative if they are filtering RF noise :)
  • 07-23-2004, 02:25 PM
    JohnGalt
    Well here's a pic of the inside of a certain Transparent cable...

    http://www.faktiskt.se/modules.php?n...er=asc&start=0
  • 07-23-2004, 04:56 PM
    mtrycraft
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by JohnGalt
    Well here's a pic of the inside of a certain Transparent cable...

    http://www.faktiskt.se/modules.php?n...er=asc&start=0

    OK :) they have two parts in there to filter RF :)
    A hell of a lot to pay for those parts.
  • 07-23-2004, 07:12 PM
    trollgirl
    So that's the innards??
    Looks like a gyp to me. "Transparently" so!

    Laz
  • 07-23-2004, 07:47 PM
    mtrycraft
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by trollgirl
    Looks like a gyp to me. "Transparently" so!

    Laz

    LOL :D