Similar sound characteractics to MIT cables?

bo1972 you should start an Audioquest thread.  There are others who are as passionate as you about particular brands that have done the same.  There is also another member where it is well know he hates a cable brand and mentions it often.  You begin to lose credibility and would hate to see that with you because you obviously have a ton of experience.  Just my opinion.

Live music is never squished my friends.  Unless you are in a uniquely dead listening inviron!  Ex., the BSO sounds explosive and blooms sweetly as it washes over you with wave after wave of dynamically blissful musical notes. A bassoon alone can fill the hall with burnished golden airwaves of divine musical magic!  If you like constrained, laser etched images with compressed sound then AQ IS your ticket.  Live music is alive, it ebbs and flows and breathes...it expands and contracts and flows all around the soundscape and when it behaves, MIT will dial it in realistically but never stripping away the fullness of notes or dynamic expression.

Audio is all about properties. You need to understand them to use it the right way. This also counts for MIT.

Audio is all about personal preferences.  What to understand, if sounds good, keep it, otherwise move on. 

I have done thousands of tests with cables in almost 18 years of time.

So what?   Number of tests and years of experience don't necessary equate to competence.

First of all I don’t hate MIT. I sold it for over 6 years of time and I even owned it. The world is already full of hate.

I didn’t say that you should not or never use it. This would be the biggest bullshit. I only said; you need to understand how MIT builds the stage and sound.

Because they only use copper, it will never sound harsh. But beside the sound each cable brand owns it’s properties in how the stage is being build.

When you compared many brands like I did in almost 18 years of time you know how big differences are in stage, individual focus, resolution. diversity in sound, differences in height, timing and dynamics.

This is why you need to understand the properties first before you can use them the right way.

For example in the beginning of 2002 I started to test powercabels. At that time MIT was one of the best in powercables. I was iterested in the properties they added to my set at that time.

I really don’t care what the name of a brand is. For me only the properties are important. They can add or change what you would like.

Audio is all about comparing and testing, this way you learn how the properties in sound and stage are. When you use more different brands you often add more properties to your set.

I started to do blind shootouts with different brands in cables. People preferd it all the time compared to the same set with cables of one brand.

It is my personal opinion that MIT is often used the wrong way. When you are more aware of how music sounds and instruments are projected you will get a different perspective.

I use live music by how I want an audio system to sound like. So I collect properties to create this sound. It makes audio so much more effective.

@bo1972. Need your input please regarding Audioquest speaker cables. Budget level. I have particular interest right now in the audioquest type 4. Researching forums for budget speaker cables which have a darkish, warm, full, rich and unetched (HF slightly on the soft side) sound quality has lead me to the type 4. Is this correct? How about the rocket series? Btw...my speakers are biwirable. How would the type 4 compare to the rocket series...eg...44...to what I am seeking?

Thanks so much.