Why Palladium in cables, wiring, etc. . .?


There seems to be a growing aura around Palladium. A perfectly good noble metal, Palladium came to popular fame during the now very dubious episode of cold fusion, proposed by Martin Fleischmann and Stanley Ponse. But the word Palladium itself has a much older and classical origin. A Palladium was originally a statue bearing the likeness of the goddes Pallas, and only much later it referred to buildings inspired by the neo-classical style of Andrea Palladio. Today the word bears both connotations of classical understated elegance as well as hinting at quasi esoteric neo-science and mysteries. Hence it is easy to understand why savvy marketing consultants may warmly recommend that products and brands aspiring to prestige may be named after the metal.

Yet, when it comes to discovering a physical reason why engineers may opt to actually employing this fine metallic element as a conductor in interconnects, chords, wires and electrical contacts, things become rather murky and unclear. For example, SilverSmith Audio now advertises some of its products as containing Palladium. And the newest iteration of the Dodson 218 DAC, by virtue of the company having been purchased by SilverSmith, now sports internal Palladium-alloy wiring.

What is it, besides its resistance to tarnish and corrosion, and the obvious aura in the name, that is causing such engineering choices? Palladium's disconcertingly high index of resistivity does not seem to justify its selection. Per the list below, Palladium is 6.65 times as resistive as
Silver, 6.28 times as resistive as copper, almost 4 times as resistive as Aluminum, and
approximately 10% more resistive than Iron. The good news is that Palladium appears
to be a little bit more conductive than Tin, and almost twice as conductive as Lead.

Resistivity:
Silver: (20 °C) 15.87 nO·m
Copper: (20 °C) 16.78 nO·m
Gold: (20 °C) 22.14 nO·m
Aluminum: (20 °C) 26.50 nO·m
Rhodium: (0 °C) 43.3 nO·m
Zinc: (20 °C) 59.0 nO·m
Nickel: (20 °C) 69.3 nO·m
Iron: (20 °C) 96.1 nO·m
Platinum: (20 °C) 105 nO·m
Palladium: (20 °C) 105.4 nO·m
Tin: (0 °C) 115 nO·m
Lead: (20 °C) 208 nO·m

Any ideas?
guidocorona
Titanium & palladium together offer many advantages; one is the happy combination of low flammability point and toxicity.
Serus, you might have something going there. . . from Wickipedia:

Titanium burns when heated in air 610 °C (1,130 °F) or higher, forming titanium dioxide.[6] It is also one of the few elements that burns in pure nitrogen gas (it burns at 800 °C or 1,472 °F and forms titanium nitride, which causes embrittlement).

I guess that if Titanium starts burning in Nitrogen, embrittlement of my cable jacket may end up being the least of my concerns. True about low toxicity of Titanium. . . its dioxide is used as a whitening agent even in toothpaste. Haveing said all of this, we still do not have any idea if Titanium has any sonic benefits when braided into cable jackets.

As for Palladium-Silver alloys, it would be interesting to find out more about its preported benefits in conductor design and construction.
I think Palladium's not oxidizing is its attraction. I have heard two different Palladium ics and find they have a soft and overly midrangy. I guess I just prefer silver or copper. I think it draws easily also.
Man, this thread is way off in left field. Let's get back to the basics. Palladium is over 6 times more resistive than copper or silver. It makes no sense whatsoever to use it in audio cables except for the following reasons: (1) greed; (2) marketing hype; (3) audiophile neurosis.
Kevziek, I am afraid you are being too simplistic. There is the fact that copper oxide is very resistive and silver much less so. I don't like palladium's sound and for that matter gold's sound, but neither oxidizes.

There are substantial differences in the sounds of various interconnects and no one has a handle on what material, what gauge, what geometry, what conductivity of the connectors, what termination, what dielectric, what length etc. are needed for the best sounding.

You may be making the usual non-sensical argument that wire is wire. Since few would agree with you, I wonder why you would be posting this.