MIT cables vs. Synergistic Research cables?

Cable hunting again. Has anyone ever compared MIT to Synergistic Research interconnects and speaker cable? Whats the difference in sound? Is one more laid back then the other? I was told MIT doesn't have the detail that SR has. Any comments?
Whoever told you that shares my impressions. I find that SR cbles are true to the source, and dead quiet.
I was a fan of MIT for 10+ years but found out after extensive test that they were choking my system. They are a Hi-fi sounding cable in my opinion.
I've owned a TON of cables, including SR stuff (even Tesla series). I found the Synergistic cables to be one of the few cables that overtly influenced the sound of my system(s)...and not in a good way. The sonic signature was unnaturally smooth, slightly devoid of color and lacking the energy and "aliveness" (or presence if you will) of other cables, like MIT. MIT cables are so far beyond conventional cabling technology, that a comparison is almost laughable. MIT will allow an in home trial for YOU to decide for yourself. Even MIT's entry level AVT series destroys most of the competition. MIT's are dynamic, open, textured, holographic and full of energy and presence...the music comes alive in your room! SR is more cult than science. You can bake it, fry it, purify it or even pray over it, but wire is still wire...unless you address the real world issues a musical signal confronts when passing from one component to another. MIT has the Patents and the experience and the home be the judge:O)
I'm going to give MIT one more try. Have some S1.3 coming next week to compare with my Morrow MA4/SP4. I'll let you know which one I keep!
Dear Wig...I already know which cables you will keep:O) If you got them from Joe, say high for me:O) MIT...where the music comes alive!
Wig, I will be very curious to hear your take in your system because I agree with your statement above. I own and have owned many variants of both IC's and speaker cables for years and I just don't quite get what Dave hears. Although, I have no experience with more recent models he is referring to. Over the years I spent the most time with 350 series - reference and EVO Shotgun IC's and several models of SC including Oracle V3 and Magnum M2.

My complaint is the lack of midrange texture in the old reference series, the 330's had that but lacked the dynamics and detail.

The other problem for me at least is the expense of MIT - for the same money depending on the level of entry, I can upgrade a tonearm and/or cartridge.
I'm hoping the shotgun series has improved in two years. My S3 were blown away by the Goertz MI2 and Dynamic Design cables. The S3 had an upper tilted midrange that sounded strange when I done a side by side comparison and this was on my Belles and Vandersteen system. I'm trying them again since the majority of Avalon guys are using MIT.
Remember the obvious, the cables are passing on what's before and after plus the room is 75% of what you hear. I have had several reference systems made up of state of the art components, in rooms I thought were excellent acoustically, that turned out to still have challenges beyond the wires. In other words, a cable change (or more)is not going to solve problems or anomalies inherent to the system. Some cables will lessen the extent to which said anomalies are intruding, but the problem remains. Music should be dynamic, bold and palpable with clarity and accurate tonality. MIT allows this and does it in a 3 dimensional soundscape with a neutral yet musical flare. The older stuff could sound a little fuzzy or lacking in air, but as for a midrange bump or aggressiveness? Methinks that is a system thing.
The anomalies were I believe the MIT cables since removing them solved the problem. I believe, now that MIT has no critical circuits in the path that can add to these strange anomalies but we'll see.
For the level of equipment you own you should be looking at least at Shotgun MA or Magnum range. Try all MIT to assess it properly ie both interconnect and speaker cable.
Good luck.
I never did mention the equipment I have and perhaps that will make a difference, so here goes:
Martin Logan SL3's with new planners (for lack of a better word)
Rouge Audio 18o monoblocks
Rouge Audio Athena Preamp
Rel Strata 2 subwolfer
Sony XA5400ES SACD/CD great bargin
Pro-ject RPM 9 TT
George Wright WPP200 phono amp
Dynavector DV 20 high output MC

I have mostly Synergistic cables. I hope this helps.

My S1.3 have about 28 hours on them and to be fair have many more hours to go but I can say that they do have a forward presentation that's not to my liking but will see if that goes away with time, if not will try the magnum since I hear things happens behind the speaker which I prefer. How would you describe the sound of the Magnum 1.3?
Sorry Dave,

I lost you at S1.3, what are you referring to?
Shotgun S1.3 interconnects and speaker cable.
MIT performance goes up as stated, in other words the sound becomes more realistic, palpable, tonality improves, bass becomes devastatingly realistic and the soundscape becomes so huge you can swim in it. I will say again, I have owned many 6 figure systems with various cables and the fact that you are hearing a midrange prominance with the MIT cables points to a system issue, as the cables themselves are the most natural and musical cables I have ever experienced.