Well I joined the Silversmith FIDELIUM Speaker cable club today

I have been using solid state amplifiers exclusively for years. I also have a new SS amp coming this week. Class A for first 18 watts. So, I don't have much memory for anything in the way of tube amplification.

Someone seemed to imply we were buying high resistance cables but as you point out, we were not paying attention to that. We were paying attention to our ears. Now, at the time of purchase the Fideliums were a huge change in sound compared to the graphene-heavy Cerious speaker cables I was using. A no-brainer.

I tend to think that flat cables carry the signals in a preferential manner as opposed to the very heavily studied round wire science. Can't explain it right now, but between the SC's and PC's it seems to be pleasing these old ears. 

What deludedaudiophhile points out about the resistance of these cables is informative. Does anyone know what the resistance of their speaker cables is…and if this aspect influences their awareness of the SQ? 
One thing that Nordost specifies is the speed of their cables,.. or what they call the ‘propagation’.. and they relate this to the speed of light. So, for instance with my Red Dawn cables, they are supposedly able to propagate at 94% the speed of light. How they come about with this information is anybody’s guess, but there you have it. Also, Nordost specifies capacitance and inductance, in the case of the same cables…capacitance at 8.7pf/ft and inductance at 0.13uh/ft. To be clear, I find these cables to be very resolving and quick in my system, and they are a great match with both tube and ss amps.

My cables are equivalent to about 11 awg. That mean's their resistance (about 8 ft) is 0.02 ohms in total based on an online calculator.

I assure you bugredmachine, there is no magic in flat or round, the same electromagnetic equations still apply. Some manufacturers of audio products would like you to believe that is not true. If they proved anything, they would publish in a respected journal.

@deludedaudiophile If they proved anything, they would publish in a respected journal.

A dude by the name of Malcolm Omar Hawksford has generated a bunch of words on the subject. I understand that this current obsession is to do with something like wave theory (??), which is totally applicable to things like microwave ovens.

The earliest reference to his thoughts that I can find are from 1985 where he found that high guage solid core is the secret to audio cabling. Another time, I guess. The folk over at the always erudite Stereophile enjoy publishing his words from time to time. I digress.

If science is about developing models of the real world, and the adage that ’all models are wrong, but some are useful’ then I reckon there is nothing wrong with a model that may lack the correct details, provided it usefully describe key concepts and ideas to the intended audience.

Where it can go wrong is when people extrapolate or extend the model beyond its domain of validity.

I think he is a bit of a strange quark, having read some of his words while he was relaxing in Morocco.

@noske  That is what I normally see is lots of impressive sounding words, but they never talk about audio. A cable with 94% of the speed of light? That sounds very impressive. How does that matter for what gets to my speakers? I think that is a case of extrapolating well beyond a domain of validity.