One of the things confronted when making these cables, is that they are not wire. They are room temperature fluid metal in hollow tubes. An intricate and carefully designed application of a wholly different technology to something that appears to look like and behave like 'wire'.
As such..they require design and build techniques that exist no where else in the world of audio or any other application of a given nominal 'transmission line'.
Our contention and that of the industry itself (long story), is that wire is inadequate for the transmission of complex signals like audio. Analog audio signals being what is likely the most complex signal ever sent down a run of copper or conductor.
I'm being careful in that statement as if one actually looks at what an analog electrical audio signal is, and compares it to all other known systems of electrical signal intelligence transference (nominally considered by most people in the field to be transmission lines of various types and lengths) (considering their lengths they are more a jumper than a transmission line)..where wire is inadequate as it cannot easily deal with high levels of complex intertwined +11 octave near infinite and non repeating harmonic structures that run from essentially DC to near low RF.
A solid piece of wire pressed into such service as a intelligence carrier, will generate distortions between those complex harmonics and their transient functions... an those distortions are not subtle. What i mean, is distortions in those small complex signal intermixing and expression areas as micro and macro transients - as individual and mixed components.
This is important as the entire intelligence that humans hear via, are in those micro and macro transients.
Any forms of distortion in this area, and the ear will hear it. The known and applied electrical and technical measurement criteria gives those signal aspects only minimal weighting.
This is the point where the mistake in measurement vs hearing takes place. The reason the two don't jibe with one another. the electrical engineering measurement criteria gives this area of the signal, only 10% and less 'importance' or 'weighting'. The ear, as a listening and interpretation device, is crammed wholly into that small area of the signal's expression. the engineering criteria is not singling out and dealing with what the ear is hearing. That is the core of the mistake.
Think of it as audio engineering's most long term enduring fundamental error.
My point is, that this is where the fluid metal utilized as well as can be -as a transmission line in an audio cable design and build manner- the metal alloy fluid excels in transferring such delicate small details of the signal in a very low harm and low distortion manner, as compared to any solid conductor material or design.
Since this an entirely new area of transmission line design and application, each case of a new cables design is literally a new scenario. The recipes are not well known and well traveled, as they are with wire.
It's all new. All untraveled lands of unknowns, to at least some degree in the build/design ..and importantly - unknown in the mechanical physics of it. The raw aspects of the actual electron and atomic function of the fluid metal in an electrical flow sytem..these subjects areas barely have names and only posses minimal mathematics at this time. Almost wholly unexplored due to extreme complexity.
The physicists and the people who know the fundamentals of actual electron flow and function for such application..they 'get it', right away (when we talk about audio signals and this fluid metal). They are generally excited by this new technology. The average person who knows little to nothing about such things? Not so much. (not really understanding that there is a fundamentally new thing going on here)
For most...it is the hearing of it - where it makes a difference.
As such..they require design and build techniques that exist no where else in the world of audio or any other application of a given nominal 'transmission line'.
Our contention and that of the industry itself (long story), is that wire is inadequate for the transmission of complex signals like audio. Analog audio signals being what is likely the most complex signal ever sent down a run of copper or conductor.
I'm being careful in that statement as if one actually looks at what an analog electrical audio signal is, and compares it to all other known systems of electrical signal intelligence transference (nominally considered by most people in the field to be transmission lines of various types and lengths) (considering their lengths they are more a jumper than a transmission line)..where wire is inadequate as it cannot easily deal with high levels of complex intertwined +11 octave near infinite and non repeating harmonic structures that run from essentially DC to near low RF.
A solid piece of wire pressed into such service as a intelligence carrier, will generate distortions between those complex harmonics and their transient functions... an those distortions are not subtle. What i mean, is distortions in those small complex signal intermixing and expression areas as micro and macro transients - as individual and mixed components.
This is important as the entire intelligence that humans hear via, are in those micro and macro transients.
Any forms of distortion in this area, and the ear will hear it. The known and applied electrical and technical measurement criteria gives those signal aspects only minimal weighting.
This is the point where the mistake in measurement vs hearing takes place. The reason the two don't jibe with one another. the electrical engineering measurement criteria gives this area of the signal, only 10% and less 'importance' or 'weighting'. The ear, as a listening and interpretation device, is crammed wholly into that small area of the signal's expression. the engineering criteria is not singling out and dealing with what the ear is hearing. That is the core of the mistake.
Think of it as audio engineering's most long term enduring fundamental error.
My point is, that this is where the fluid metal utilized as well as can be -as a transmission line in an audio cable design and build manner- the metal alloy fluid excels in transferring such delicate small details of the signal in a very low harm and low distortion manner, as compared to any solid conductor material or design.
Since this an entirely new area of transmission line design and application, each case of a new cables design is literally a new scenario. The recipes are not well known and well traveled, as they are with wire.
It's all new. All untraveled lands of unknowns, to at least some degree in the build/design ..and importantly - unknown in the mechanical physics of it. The raw aspects of the actual electron and atomic function of the fluid metal in an electrical flow sytem..these subjects areas barely have names and only posses minimal mathematics at this time. Almost wholly unexplored due to extreme complexity.
The physicists and the people who know the fundamentals of actual electron flow and function for such application..they 'get it', right away (when we talk about audio signals and this fluid metal). They are generally excited by this new technology. The average person who knows little to nothing about such things? Not so much. (not really understanding that there is a fundamentally new thing going on here)
For most...it is the hearing of it - where it makes a difference.