MIT bashed, not Transparent, why?

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'll tell you Pops it can do plenty more. I tried those 750 S3 tube cables which got me on the MIT bandwagon in the first place. Came across the 770 Reference tube cables at a good deal and even a money back from the seller if I wasn't completely satisfied. The first listen I didn't hear much difference maybe because the cables were cold. The second listen dropped my jaw. Better soundstaging, better bass, more palpability. More of everything that the 750's do. I'm a Believer but not a Monkee. Don't ya just love all this hi-end accolading and dismissing? Go to your room MIT you roll off the highs. HA.