How do MIT and Transparent cables differ?

These are both "networked" cables.
How do these two differ or are they more alike than different?
How does the sound of network cables differ from conventional cables?
No information on Transparent, but lots on MIT.

The network in the cbale is designed to prevent frequency roll off and keep phase consistent. Check out the technical white papers #1 and #2 at

Real world effect: extended highs, deep, low well defined bass, 3 dimmensional imaging and large well placed soundstage.

I began using MIT years ago after a long cable search through many high profile brands, use and sell their interconnect and speaker cables almost exclusively.
"Real world effect: extended highs, deep, low well defined bass, 3 dimmensional imaging and large well placed soundstage."

I've found this to be the case even with some of their older, lower end products, like the Terminator Series ICs.
If you search the forums back far enough, you might find the actual post from which I derived this information; it was posted a long time ago.

if I recall correctly (?) someone from Transparent broke away & founded MIT; might even be Bruce Brisson himself? If you call their factory they are very accessible and helpful; I once had quite an extended conversation with Bruce when no one else was available to take questions.

The major difference between the two labels is probably pricing; MIT being the preferred consumer value. Regarding which is actually the better cable; as in all cables - this is purely subjective, depending upon how the specific cable performs in your particular rig. Transparent makes some great cables too. One of our esteemed longtime members recommended Transparent AC cords as a great combo to be used with Accuphase products but I never tried it.

I've always preferred a networked design when I need a long length cable. I have very long 25' speaker cables & am on my 2nd MIT upgrade there. Also use one pair of their very long 25' interconnects.

If you do a member search on Joeabrams he's a great source of MIT info here; advertises regularly & you won't find a nicer guy to deal with.
Any other comments on the benefits (or lack of) of the networked cables?
Hiya Wpines-

as above, the advantage of networked cable(s) are much better resolution, detail, extended highs/lows, depth and soundstage. Find a local dealer and audition soon! The Transparent Cable is outstanding, but you will pay for it...
>the advantage of networked cable(s) are much better resolution, detail, extended highs/lows, depth and soundstage.<

This is an opinion not a fact.

Cables are system and listener dependent.
Audiofeil is correct. Transparent uses a very simple in line filter approach, while MIT uses a more complex patented "out of the signal path" group of technologies. I heard some $100/pair cables that sound as good or better than some $6k plus cables...system matching and personal listening preferences dictate alot!
Actually the founders of Transparent Audio broke away from MIT.

Their networks differ mainly in bandwidth. TA believes in limiting it, largely to the audible range including some overtones, while MIT believes in extending it as far as possible. Both are careful with component impedance matching and despite their diametrically opposed philosophies can perform beautifully. In the right system.

So I must agree with Audiofeil.

That said, I also found that several non-networked cables worked better in my system with my ears. So networks, like materials, geometry, dielectrics, shielding, terminations etc. of the same caliber are not necessarily an inherent advantage but must be evaluated with the gestalt of the cable.

And any component is best evaluated with the gestalt of your system.
Transparent used to manufacture MIT cables. At some point in early 90s, they decided to launch their own line of cables.
Brisson took his toys and went out on his own. Transparent had invested in cable manufacturing so they had to come up with a cable design to market. They chose a simpler, in line low pass tuneable filter approach which rejects UHF interference and lowers the noise floor substantialy. MIT or Transparent will of course give results that are influenced by the system their in:O) I have a pair of Monster M2.2s spkr cables and SP1000M5 proline IC's patched in right now in place of my favorite Transparent and MIT stuff...pretty damn sweet! Cost for the Monsters is around $500 vs $20K for my other rig.