Dielectric?

I believe that the dielectric strength is related to the amount of voltage that it takes to force a charge thru the thickness. If air is 20 V/mil that is 20 volts per millimeter. (I don't think the value is right because it takes a few thousand volts of static charge just to jump a 1/4 inch). Dielectric constant (Ke) "is a direct measure of its ability to store electrons as compared to air". Teflon has a Ke of 2.0 and Poylpropylene is 2.1 while air is 1.0001. The more electrons that can be stored, the higher the capacitor value will be for a given physical size. The higher the 'K' factor the more the electric field is distorted in the space around the capacitor. For best sound one need to use the lowest 'K'. So with this in mind we should take bare copper/silver wire and let it hang out in the dry air. There are a few designs that use small spacers and for the most part the dielectric IS air. I hope this helps to lead you to sonic bliss!

To clarify my above post ... An IC could be made with bare wire and spacers. Air is a better dielectric than any other insulator.

Would it make sence that a high K or larger potential storage would be benifitial to a power cord, allowing for a greater discharge potential during extreme current demands?

Jadem6, It is doubtful that the dielectric could make much of a difference in the power delivery of a cable. A farad can deliver one ampere for one second. If a cable is highly capacitive it might muster up 1 uF of capacitance. This is not much current compared to what the power company delivers. Instantaneous current from the power company is determined by wiring and transformers out on the pole and the wiring going to and inside your house. Every connection is a potential source for degrading that current delivery. If you want to improve peak energy storage, the place to do that is in the DC power supply inside your gear.

The other half of the dielectric story has a negative side. It is true that the higher the 'K' the more energy it can store. It also means that the field is non-linear and it will not return 100% of the stored field when requested. In a capacitor this is called dielectric absorption. It is mechanism responsible for producing a small portion of a signal delayed in time. In a power cable this would have very little effect but in a coupling capacitor it is quite detrimental.

A couple of comments.
First, Jadem6 says to have experienced a difference in the sound mainly by running his hands over the cables. This is believed to be the main difference since the cables, although in different positions (right vs. left), are elevated from the floor. Right? Did he run his hand over both, right and left, cables? If everything is correct, then we can safely assume that the biggest change was the discharge of the built up electrostatic field around the cables. This can be quickly done by hand or over a period of time just by resting.
Although Jadem6's amplifier is always on, we could safely assume that there is no voltage across the conductors when music is not being played. Voltage is what creates electrostatic fields. If one shorts the positive and negative poles of a capacitor, then both plates are mostly at the same voltage potential all the time. In such instance the capacitor would have zero capacitance. This is easy to check with a meter.
So could we be suspicious that the constant "good sound" is due, not to the electrostatic field but, to the thermal state of the amps devices? A good test would be to disconnect the cables from the amp while leaving it on. Then, after many hours, plug the cable back in and listening to see if the sound remained "good". If it does, then thermal state is the reason. If it doesn't then we could continue analyzing capacitance. I would only suggest that the cable be connected and disconnected with as little mechanical change to the conductors as possible. In other words, do not bend it. This is only because we would not be able to safely quantify the amount of difference, if any, that would be due to a change in the physical state of the conductors.
Second, Bmpnyc said to hear an improvement on the sound when the cable was disconnected. Well, assuming that what Jadem6 and Bmpnyc call "better sound" is the same, then they experienced contradicting results. But for the results to be contradictory one must also assume that the "biggest" change that Bmpnyc's cables experienced between original state and reconnection is the change of the electrostatic fields. Notice that I am highlighting the word "biggest". This is because I believe that we naturally tend to focus on the "bigger" things. Only once those "bigger" things are removed can we focus on the next "bigger" thing.
So, electrostatic state may or may not have been the "biggest" difference. Bmpnyc talks about a "chaotic" connection. For which I understand that no two connection qualities would be the same. This could be the biggest reason for the change in sound. But, the fact that the cables were disconnected also suggests that there was the possibility that the electrostatic fields around the cables stabilized.
If Bmpnyc's experience was mainly influenced by electrostatic changes on the cable, the a cable would "sound better" after the electrostatic charges have dissipated. I would tend to disagree with this. Even though I believe in the chaos theory, I simply think that what Bmpnyc called more "detailed sound" isn't what Jadem6 calls "better sound". Some times harshness and forwardness is confused with detail.
Bmpnyc, I believe that you are on to something. It is just that I feel that it may have to do with thermal state.
As far as making a cable with glass, I have an idea for you. There are hollow-tube shaped fiberglass insulators available. These are used for insulating pipes. While these would not be purely glass (they also would have air), they are very flexible and would also help separate the conductors from other things in the proximity. I will have to remind you that glass can easily be electrostaticly charged. Simply run your hand over a TV screen when it is turned off. Also notice that the field is much stronger at the glass than a couple of millimeters away. In other words, the charge on the air is much lower that the charge on the glass.
If you feel that "better sound" comes from having a higher electrostatic field build up, you may need to consider the following: This field build up is caused by voltage (potential differences). In other words, the cable's electrons are being excited by changes in voltage between positive and negative poles (at the amp). Since the surrounding bodies to the conductors are at some voltage state (perhaps their own floating ground stage), the fields around the cables are caused by the different in voltage between the conductor's energy and the bodies' state. This could be represented in an schematic with two capacitors, one between the positive cable and a floating ground and the other between the negative cable and another floating ground. If you analyze the effect of these two capacitors on the signal, you will see that they would in fact work as low pass filters. What this whole paragraph means is that the "quantity" of electrostatic field that is giving you your "desired sound" may be rolling off the top end of the music. Subjectively, this could be considered "smoother sound". But if your cables use Teflon or PE as dielectric and are separated from the floor, you do not have a large "quantity" of electrostatic field. So, I am suggesting that glass may not be what you are looking for but. Glass may give you a large field (quantity). What you may be looking for is field stability. After all, by dissipating the electrostatic field with your hands, you changed the "quantity" and the stability of the field. I am assuming that after many hours of operation, the electrostatic fields are stabilized.
PVC may give you a larger electrostatic field potential around a cable but most audiophiles feel that it does not sound good enough.
Also, thicker Teflon will have the ability to create larger electrostatic fields that thinner Teflon. This is because the thinner Teflon has air around it. So, if we use the above mentioned schematic representations, the thicker Teflon would sound more "dull" or "smoother", depending of who is listening to it.
Please e-mail me to let me know what you may find out from further experiments. I am doing experiments of my own about the same topic but have never been in this forum. I only came to it because Sqjudge pointed me to it.

AL