Serious Question About Silver vs Copper Conductivity for Power


Yes, I realize that this topic is going to bring out the sharks, but if I get at least one serious response, it will all be worth it.

I understand that silver conducts 7% faster than copper.  I also understand that using a dielectric insulation like Teflon is best at keeping the wire from overheating, stopping signals entering and stopping signals from leaving the conductor. I understand that a certain amount of math is involved in selected gauge of wire depending largely on how much power the component is going to take, and how much the amperage is (20 or 15).

My question is regarding certain features applied to either silver or copper conductors that may or may not have an advantage over one or the other.

I have the Kimber Kable P14 Palladian.  This uses 14awg copper conductors insulated in Teflon.  Then it adds a massive filter that attempts to mitigate the standing wave ratio to as close to 1:1 as possible. I had Kimber’s Ascent power cable prior.  It’s identical to the Palladian, except the filter. I have heard the difference between using those two cables.  Apparently, mitigating the standing wave ratio lowers the noise floor significantly. However, any filter that chokes the signal and will slow the electrical current.

As I understand it, the amplifier works by opening the rectifier to allow the capacitors to fill with energy that the system will draw from.  Being able to keep the rectifier open and fill the capacitors as fast as possible, reducing lag time, has the effect of creating more realistic and detailed sound.

With that said, changing to a power cable that uses pure silver insulated in Teflon, will ensure that power is delivered potentially faster.  Although, the silver power cable will NOT have a filter.  Therefore the standing wave ratio will not be mitigated and the electrical signal will not be choked either.

So, would the amplifier benefit from faster electrical current or slower, but cleaner electric current?  Since this signal isn’t directly applied to sound, the concepts of “colder” or “warmer” sound should not apply.

Can someone help me out without poking fun at the question?  Additionally, I am not interested in having a cable-theory debate.  If you don’t believe cables make any difference, I will not debate or have discourse on that topic.


 

128x128guakus

@grannyring 

I have owned numerous sound systems.  This system is not my only rig. I have a full system with traditional amps, pre-amps, floor speakers, subs, etc. I don't need to upgrade or tweak that system. 

Yes, I do experiment. In 30 years I have never once made a "dangerous" decision that ruined or destroyed equipment.  And this cable is no different. All your warnings and "math" have proven incorrect.  The cable not only powers the speakers just fine, there were no sparks, no blown fuses.  The cable and its plugs are cold to the touch.  So, no over heated wires either. Now, why is it your very careful and well thought out suggestions failed to come true?  It isn't that your math is wrong.  Your application *OF* the math was wrong.  Sorry, it happens.

But, I am getting ahead of myself.  When the cable has completed its 150 hour break in period, I will post the results of whether this cable bested the Kimber Kable. Stay tuned....or tune out. :D

Post removed 

"When the cable has completed its 150 hour break in period"

cables don’t improve electrical characteristics much, they degrade overtime due to oxidation. thats why replacing old oxidized cables/connectors, with fresh proven-good ones sometimes can be “heard”. semiconductors are affected by aging most in initial ~100hrs, depending on stress conditions. good equipment manufactures have burnin step before releasing product for sale. tubes are the winner in aging/burnin process.