New MIT cables, adjustable articulation!

befuddle

Here's a thought, Perhaps he is a cable advocate. Maybe he just likes to gauge the responses

motorhead43026

befuddle wrote: »

Gold has no real value from a practical worth except for its use in circuit boards in space exploration and its ability to maintain its polished shine in artwork and yet it provides the basis for world economy

"Gold is the basis for the world economy", boy could you never be more wrong. Gold is money but not the standard for any nations currency. Although the Chinese are looking to go to a gold standard.

lightman1

I heard the finished set up.
There were moments that the music was so real that I had goosebumps. It was a rig that actually brought out emotion from me.
There was a song that Ron played, Bang Bang....(?)..the lone cello opening part damn near brought me to tears.
It wasn't the "sit down and find fault" process that a lot of us do, but a song that I have never heard had me had me emotionally entwined with it from the first 20 seconds.
Removing the perceived expectations of the gear helped me appreciate what it could do after the song ended.
You could FEEL the bow being drawn across the strings and hear them being manipulated by the fingers of the artist along the neck.
Music is a conduit for human emotion.
Emotion can't be measured and placed in a category.
If we have come to the point of categorized music....we have lost emotion.
To us who understand that it takes a little science and a little individual perception to help that artist express to us what they feel....I raise my glass and say thanks.
Ron, Russ, Doug and all others...thanks.

txcoastal1

2Cellos - Bang Bang (ft. Sky Ferreira)
https://youtu.be/vvyW96akH6U

befuddle

motorhead43026- lightman beat me to the placement But your right I thought I might catch hell for that! Good throw!
Txcoastal good song choice for a cable showcase as its tempo allows for the slow decaying of notes [Nancy Sinatra's version is good for that too]

leftwinger57

Ray, I loved your analogy of the diamond ring, it was spot on. Truth be told they are NOT AS RARE or valuable as they seem. They are All controlled by Debeers and they decide on how much mark up there is, how many stones are allowed on the market and believe it or not the whole engagement ring thing was all a marketing ploy from Debeers that worked so well to this day. Of course there are other sources like blood or conflict diamonds but for the most part Debeers this one house controls the worlds supply of finished stones. As you beautifully pointed out people don't blink to shell $100k and more for all that glitters, so why not except the free market idea and choose to buy or not to buy for yourself. Same goes for anything that is so expensive for the 99%s that it bothers us when they do buy this stuff.

lightman1

I don't give a rats A$$ who buys these cables.
I'm twice divorced and the only thing I use a diamond for is cutting concrete when attached to a saw blade.

befuddle

Its not that the diamonds are rare its that the purity of clarity is.And the point being is its value will remain where as the cable will depreciate.
Another point on high end cables using network boxes is what warranty to they come with? Since they are made using electronics components and may be prone to failure IF they have problems do you ship them back and pay a inflated amount for repair or do they offer a warranty such as Bryston's 20 year deal where prior to selling they test all components and do a burn in to statically remove the possibility of failure

lightman1

Yes

Nightfall

DarqueKnight wrote: »

OK. Here is a quote from Emotiva's website:

"At the same time, Emotiva’s audiophile credentials mean we show up in the best audio systems as well—frequently replacing “megadollar” audio brands in the process. Emotiva delivers the emotion of live music, with all of the amazing range, detail, and delicacy you’re looking for."

1. What megadollar audio brands have been replaced by Emotiva components?
2. What performance metrics did the consumers use to decide that Emotiva components
outperformed their megadollar brands?
3. How was it determined that Emotiva delivers the emotion of live music? How was that measured? What competing audiophile brands was Emotiva gear quantitatively compared to with regard to delivering emotion?

Did xcrapri ignore this? I bet he did. He knows this falls under the same scrutiny he's been giving MIT and he's embarassed.

befuddle

As for cable value I look at that argument like this IF I make coffee tables and sell them for 10000ea and if a numerous amount of people buy them and feel that it was worth it I ain't gonna drop the price anytime soon.However if my sales were near nil at that level perhaps it would be wise of me to narrow my expected profit margin,,,,,,Capitalism while it may be none to pretty at times it sure can prove profitable

lightman1

I have $30 IC cables and I have $2000 IC cables. Guess which ones sounds good and which ones sounds even better? Am I worried about diminishing return on money invested ? Not one bit. Do I care about signal transmission? Every day.

11tsteve

do I care how you spend your audio dollars, as long as you are happy?

No.

befuddle

Curious why do you care about signal transmission every day when in you already have decent cable and are content in your purchase?

DarqueKnight

befuddle wrote: »

And not it insult Darqueknight as i agree with your intent But using a 100000 diamond ring for an analogy in comparison to a 80g cable is flawed in the fact that the ring will hold a large percent of its value and may be worth more as time goes by, Same can be said of other collectables such as cars, art etc.Gold has no real value from a practical worth except for its use in circuit boards in space exploration and its ability to maintain its polished shine in artwork and yet it provides the basis for world economy

But you know full and well that the vast majority diamonds are not of the "rare" quality and most diamonds, like most automobiles, are not collectables that appreciate in value. Accordingly, my analogy was very appropriate.

http://www.financialnut.com/do-diamonds-depreciate/

https://smartasset.com/personal-finance/why-a-diamond-engagement-ring-is-not-a-good-investment

"When you buy a diamond, you buy it at retail, which is a 100 percent to 200 percent markup. If you want to resell it, you have to pay less than wholesale to incent a diamond buyer to risk their own capital on the purchase. Given the large markup, this will mean a substantial loss on your part. The same article puts some numbers around the dilemma:

Because of the steep markup on diamonds, individuals who buy retail and in effect sell wholesale often suffer enormous losses. For example, Brod estimates that a half-carat diamond ring, which might cost $2,000 at a retail jewelry store, could be sold for only $600 at Empire."

Reference: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rohin-dhar/diamonds-are-****_b_3708562.html

befuddle wrote: »

Its not that the diamonds are rare its that the purity of clarity is. And the point being is its value will remain where as the cable will depreciate.

But you know full and well that the vast majority of diamonds are not flawless, and the ones that are flawless, or nearly flawless, are not affordable by most people.

DarqueKnight

xcapri79 wrote: »

Wouldn't you agree that spatial audio effects to the listener including stereophonic presentation are really better achieved at the source end through recording techniques, or at the listener end through signal processing, (DSP for example), speaker design and arrangement, room design and treatments, and of course listener position and their training?

I will address this question after you stop ignoring my question about the marketing nonsense I pointed to on the Emotiva website.

ZLTFUL

Don't bother Ray...we know X only addresses anything he can twist and purloin into some attempt to justify his (confused, dare I say delusional?) particular stance.

He still hasn't answered my or Jesse's questions. In fact, he flat out ignores them. He also selectively quoted your post to focus on something he *could* debate regardless of how blatantly transparent his rantings were.

befuddle

Darqueknight- I dont want to make issue of what is obviously a very trivial thing Especially after relating to you that I totally agreed with the point you were making
But to reply to your post I did say [collectable] cars Which usually means it has taken some time to reach that status for the investment to mature
Although it could be argued that inflation bears a part in its matured current value But never the less the point being it has yielded profit over the purchase price,
As for the 100,000 diamond I'll admit I'm not experienced enough to say if or how much value one of that caliber would lose. So since it seems of some relative importance to you to hold on to that analogy I'll concede to your judgement for the sake of your contentment!
As for my statement relating gold to world economy [well my bad] as its been pointed out. I should've said something more along the lines of yet its highly financially coveted

nooshinjohn

Deleted

BlueFox

xcapri79 wrote: »

Having the heat sinks inside versus outside shows they are interested in cost savings, not sound quality.

txcoastal1

@xcapri79
I see a lot of MC gear, and still quite the collection of other audio gear in your signature. You could have spent or acquired more cost effective gear for listening. So, why the investment of your inventory? The inventory in your signature to most outside of the audiophile realm would look ludicrous.

May I ask, what cables you are using to produce audio signal?

F1nut

F1nut wrote: »

F1nut wrote: »

The always attacked Emo at least doesn't produce such nonsense, so there is no need to justify them.

And yet you do justify them, time and time again.

In fact, they have produced detailed specs, tests and photos of their many products so it shows significant ignorance of the facts to even suggest asking for proof from them.

So, where are the scope measurements? Where are the properly conducted repeatable listening tests? I mean, YOU are the one always asking for proof, so produce it.

Still waiting.......

Still nothing.

Nightfall

F1nut wrote: »

Still nothing.

befuddle

just my rescinded response

F1nut

You finally found some pretty graphs, congrats! Too bad they don't tell you how....ummmm, shall we say average they sound. Do you have anything on paper that tells us how their CDP transport can be heard clunking away across the room?

So, have you found the repeatable listening tests yet?

F1nut

So, how many times are you going to change your post....been at least 3 times now. Keep whacking away at it, you'll get it the way you want sooner or later.

tonyb

I for one would certainly want to know what justifies a 60-70k increase in price, but like they say, it's how they sound that counts. Some will pay that price even if they only sound twice as good as their other TOTL cables.

.....and so what, who cares really ? Are any of us going to be buying them ? I doubt anyone who is in the market for these cables hang out on the Polk forum.

Once again though, like I keep saying, peoples wallets dictate opinions. Scientific graphs are judge and jury of which everything is held to. If that's the case, your in the wrong hobby. Nothing in audio is as black and white as some wish them to be.

Toolfan66

Great read on a Sunday morning...

I see X does what he does best, piecing together things he finds on the internet to sweep his garbage under the rug....

tonyb

That's the thing Larry, you can find anything on the internet both for or against pretty much anything. Some tend to find stuff that supports their opinions, not their experiences. That's the whole crux of the matter. Audio is a participation game, not an armchair QB game. Not a spectator sport as they say. If you have no will to learn, you learn nothing. How far would that attitude have taken us in our careers ?

We obviously all will have different experiences and opinions, but that's what audio forums are about, sharing those experiences and opinions, meeting good people, having a laugh and a listen. Why some insist one set of experiences should apply to all is beyond me.

DarqueKnight

xcapri79 wrote: »

Yes, MIT has produced nothing with respect to test results.

Actually, MIT's website has an entire section devoted to technical information and test results:

http://www.mitcables.com/publications.html

http://www.mitcables.com/publications/articles/mit-cables-technical-whitepapers.html

Here are links to two MIT technical papers, one analyzing some of their cables' energy transfer characteristics and the other analyzing their cables' noise characteristics. Perhaps you can examine the graphs and tell us if MIT is trying to pull the wool over our eyes:

http://www.mitcables.com/pdf/output_term_series2_wp.pdf

http://www.mitcables.com/pdf/wp101.pdf

xcapri79 wrote: »

And we can't even see what's inside the $80K MIT. Probably too embarrassing as we've seen with their other products. DK wants those answers too, by the way.

Sure, I'd like to know what's inside the box that justifies an $80,000 asking price. The only thing that could be in the box are passive filters and impedance matching networks. Unlike a power amplifier, passive filters are easy to duplicate. Therefore I can understand MIT's reluctance to provide a lot of photographs of what's inside the boxes.

xcapri79 wrote: »

Why is it that MIT can't even get to Emotiva's level of testing?
If I'm wrong, please show us. We are eager to know.

Obviously, you weren't eager enough to go to MIT's website and look for yourself.

xcapri79 wrote: »

Sure many manufacturers sometimes make lofty claims without footnote references, however they usually provide some decent information and test results of their products.

Emotiva claimed that people are replacing "megadollar" systems with their mid-fi products. It's like saying people are realizing performance benefits after replacing their six figure MB and BMW automobiles with Fords.

xcapri79 wrote: »

MIT takes lofty claims to a whole other level and can't even provide the basics in testing to back anything up, so it seems.

What could be loftier, and more misleading and dishonest, than claiming that people are replacing "megadollar" systems with your products, yet you offer no comparative test results or other details or data?

Would you care to explain to us why you rushed to claim MIT has not provided any technical information and test data on their cables and didn't bother to take two minutes to go to their website and look around?