MIT Term 2 speaker cables...Am I nuts???

John I suspect they are at least as much speaker as amp dependent. I am using mine with an ARC D-115 Mk2 (iec connector and JPS power cord, a major improvement over stock) which I guess is a bit less transparent and revealing than your VT-100mk2. The 770 Reference 2 tube cables are a revelation with the Merlin VSM-SE speakers. Certainly more relaxed but no loss of sparkle or inner harmonic detail and a greater increase in air and dynamic contrasts and no sloppy bass here. I just put in my analysis plus last night to see if I was going crazy and although transparent and detailed, the sound was more 2 dimensional and once again made me realize why I didn't stop looking after I bought them, they are too bright on top on too many recordings.

I experienced the EXACT same thing. I borrowed a friends $2000 mit 750 reference cables to hook up my new vandersteen 5's and my arc vt100m2. (He just got the $6000 ones!) Anyway, I didn't think they sounded that great. I was really disappointed. Anyway, a couple days later he calls and says he sold the cable. So I pull the mit cable out, and put in a $30 set of esoteric audio copper cables. Screwed up, multi-adapted terminators on them. Major major improvement in sound! It sounded like somebody just removed a towel from the speakers.

I'm thinking this is an amp matching problem, so I go to my other system which as a set of aleph 2's and audio physic virgo's. I remove the $1000 nordost red dawn cable, and put in the MIT. Same thing. Even more dramatic. The whole thing just lost all its life and sparkle. Those cables were flat out terrible in either system.

Do these cables stink ? Not at all. I had heard this same pair in his ultra-hirez all Spectral system and I thought they sounded incredible. They are just very picky about what system you put them in.

I just went back to Kimber 8TC from MIT 750 Series 3 on my Thiel 3.6's and the sound is great. I have a warm system though, CJ pre and Classe CA200 amp with MIT shotgun ic's. The MIT's were biwire and it was too messy to run as a single to the Thiels. I wish I had heard the 750's to compare. I might have to get another pair in a single run - pain in the ass!

Gjrad descibes the MIT sound very well, they sound "warmer" because the treble region has less emphasis than other cables, somewhat recessed instead of forward sounding, but still detailed. This would be very different sounding than say Kimber 8TC. They may not be the best match for tube systems, but for nuetral SS systems produces very natural sound. I would also spend a little more for MIT 750 over T2 speaker cables from Audio Advisor.

I'm using MIT T2s biwire with PSB Stratus Goldi, B&K AV-5000II. Performance all across the board has provided a dificult to beat cost performance act.

I believe that in certain systems, like everthing else, MIT cables are a good match. I was having trouble with my Thiel 2.3s, they sounded much too bright, and the instruments not at all natural. I am using a Krell amp that I only wanted to replace as a last resort. I worked with placement but it didn't help much. Then I went to a VTL 2.5 tube preamp which was a major improvement but still not quite right. Then I replaced my Kimber 8TC cable with MIT 750s, I burned them in for 3 days on another system. When I hooked them up the results were great, the highs were detailed but not harsh and the bottom end was as good or better than before. Now the system sounds very natural, the MITs worked extremely on my system which was very bright to begin with. In this case it was the right match.

I guess I should add that I also have a pair of T2 BiWire. I was very pleased with what they did to the speakers I am using them on. However, I guess that were light in the bass before, so more bass was an improvement. The bass is NOT overly warm or bloated and I am using a CJ Amp which are definitely on the warm side. Have you played with speaker placement?? Maybe it is your room??

I have these, and they sound warm with my Rogue 88, and even warmer (somehow) with my Krell KAV-250a (Made the Krell sound "closed in" by comparison, but there are other cable factors at play, also). I do notice that the treble and bass are softer, with less attack transient snap, and less detail at the extremes (especially when compared to Harmonic Technology Pro-9). I also notice that there is more dynamic weight to everything in between, which is a good thing. I also have Terminator 3 speaker cable (both 2 and 3 are full range, non-biwire), and have been using these in parallel (the T2 WITH the T3) with the Krell, to good effect. Any drawbacks in performance have been reduced by about 75%, and dynamics have increased. I should add that this is all with small 8 ohm monitor speakers, the Norwex Nisse B-2. I will try this with other speakers, as well, in a few days/weeks.

I had similar problems with T2 bi-wire cables. The mids and mid base were oddly recessed at a variety of frequencies, while the highs and deep bass were highly accentuated, making the system virtually unlistenable. I replaced these cables with simple 12 gauge speaker cable from Home Depot and everything cleaned up perfectly. I'm assuming that the problem was either bad internal assembly that caused it to provide a strange load to the amp, or simply poorly designed terminator boxes. Either way, I'm a bit gun shy about giving the T2's another try. If it provides any insights into the cable's behavior, I am using tube amps, although I did try it out with my old Adcom SS amp and found the same set of problems. Ken

Hmbrwd: If the T2's have the terminator boxes(newer versions), possibly your amp doesn't like the more complex load. MIT does make cables that are tube specific. That's my two cents! Tim

Do you have dirty AC Power? Do you use a conditioner? They help with muddy bass if caused by the power. A better power cord on the amp will help to if possible?