Hope no one minds I am reviving an old thread. I have used many variants of MIT off and on for many years and for a while have been using a loom of EVO 2’s.
Based on my experience I believe Neil Gader’s review of the EVO’s one’s is really well done. Sonically I believe he is spot on about a slight coolness which rings true with my 2’s, even to the point of a VERY slight leaness in my system.
To counter that sonic signature I have substituted a 350SG EVO between my preamp and amp, which to my ears is still an outstanding cable and was MIT’s reference in 1997. It adds a degree of body to the presentation and refinement without giving up any of the 2’s transparancy. That is the difficult task for a cable IMO transparency and focus without leanness. The 350 SG EVO is one cable that nearly does it all.
Which brings me to my next conundrum, the current variants of MIT. I always heard and thought that the better MIT cables were the ones with machined aluminum networks. That has proven to be the case for me as I have owned the 350SG EVO for years - it has been a keeper for me. And for a while Oracle V3 speaker cables. Mistakenly sold them. Conversely I went through the Magnum line and always thought they underperformed based on price and rank in the line. And had plastic network boxes.
None of the heritage series or Matrix series are machined CNC aluminum. Don’t know if my theory still hold true. But the aluminum networks only come in the reference series and the ultimate series, which are for obvious cost no object systems, hence the ultimate tagline.
The reason for posting was twofold - acknowledge the review on the EVO one as what I hear and second what direction to go if I want to do better than EVO 2’s - reference or Matrix which I have never heard, or further up the heritage line to 2C3D. And for me, not to get over my skiis with regard to cables for my components.
Any feedback will be apprecaited as this thread looks like a good MIT experienced group.
