Which Teo Audio cables include the tuned ABH apertures in the RCA connectors?
New TEO Audio ICs, who has them?
TEO has been busy, they recently introduced the KRONOS ICs:
https://www.dagogo.com/audio-blast-three-new-cables-two-cable-makers/
I see they also have an upgraded version of the Game Changer (GC II):
https://www.audiogon.com/listings/lis8e6gg-teo-audio-gcii-1m-different-physics-math-different-result...
https://www.dagogo.com/audio-blast-three-new-cables-two-cable-makers/
I see they also have an upgraded version of the Game Changer (GC II):
https://www.audiogon.com/listings/lis8e6gg-teo-audio-gcii-1m-different-physics-math-different-result...
Showing 43 responses by celander
@ teo_audio My GC2 cables are at 175-hr+ burn-in. Sound fabulous, being the best IC in my audio system by far with incredible dynamics, speed, space and timbre. Need to dial in the correct length for a run from my preamp to my powered ATC monitors for a follow up order. I’m a set and forget kind of guy for at least 5 years (not switching products every month). Thanks! |
Their patent on the liquid metal fluid cables includes additional embodiments having either solid wire or solid particles in the fluid for the purpose of affecting electrical phase coherence properties. The tube geometry holding these goodies (fluid alone or fluid with solid wire or solid particles) also appears important to their performance. Obviously, a lot is going on with their technology. |
The Ultra is very similar to the Game Changer II. I have both in my system now, with the GC-II as a source interconnect and the Ultra as the interconnect between my preamp and powered ATC monitors. I am making further adjustments with the system and planning to replace all solid wire interconnects in my system with Teo Audio cables--they are that dramatic of an improvement. But I really cannot comment about the audible differences between the two interconnects until I get a few more adjustments completed with respect to power cabling conditioning and installation. |
I recently swapped into my system the Teo Audio Liquid Pre passive line stage in place of my active tube preamp. Tho I am still tweaking the system, the system is definitely of a different sonic character. The connectivity is a 1M run of GC II between my Oppo DVD player and the Liquid Pre, and a 2M run of GC Ultra from the Liquid Pre to my powered ATC monitors (fitted with Cardas CLEAR adaptors). So the system is fully Teo Audio liquid metal fluid conductor from source to transducer. I can discern a dramatic change in the acoustic envelope than found with my system configured with an active tube preamp. The music seems even more relaxed in character; the music just flows with greater ease than before. Paradoxically, the bass music seems better defined. And that incredible tonality expressed from the liquid cables seems even more evident with the Pre in the signal path. On one recording, I’m hearing from more defined triangles, with their tonality being better resolved than before. And I have not yet dialed in the unit’s optimal isolation parameters as of now. So more to report. But it’s clear to me that this conductor tech is a paradigm changer. |
I read with some interest the piece Douglas Schroeder wrote about his experience with the "Schroeder Method" of interconnect cable combinations in parallel. Like Douglas, I also have the Teo Audio "The Pre" passive preamp and a few sets of Teo Audio liquid metal signal transmission cables. In my set-up, I am running the Teo Audio interconnects from my source(s) to The Pre and then from The Pre to a pair of self-powered ATC monitors. Glorious sound, indeed, but how does the audio possibly sound better by implementing the Schroeder Method for those Teo Audio cables running between the sources and The Pre? At the outset, I was somewhat surprised to learn that the Teo Audio cables would benefit from this method. Their bandwidth is said to be huge (1GHz+), and the nature of internal reflections of signal propagation reduced owing to the fluid transmission medium. My excitement was tapped down by my confusion about the theory. I then read a reply to Douglas’ piece from Bob Smith. Mr. Smith suggests that cables can be modeled as inductors and suggests that running 2 sets of cables in parallel extends their bandwidth by nearly 2-fold while reducing their characteristic impedance by 2-fold. Mr. Smith suggests that the benefit is the potential reduction in reflected energy and/or standing waves within the cable, which might translate into reduced phase distortion artifacts within the audible range. (Mr. Smith’s piece is long and well worth a detailed read; I apologize for the Cliff Notes’ summary here, which might not be entirely faithful to the original text.) Presumably, these effects would affect both the signal and ground legs of the interconnect. From my limited understanding of the composition of my particular Teo Audio cables, only the signal conductor includes liquid metal medium, with the ground conductor being solid wire. So perhaps the ground conductor being solid wire explains why Teo Audio cables benefit from this method, per Mr. Smith’s explanation. But to hell with theory, trying is the pudding of life! |
@tuffy72561 I inserted my recently-obtained second set of Teo Audio GC2’s into my system in parallel with a previous set of GC2’s using 4 prs. of “Monster” Y-splitters (China) between my Oppo DVD player and my Teo Audio Liquid Pre passive preamp. My preliminary impressions follow. (These preliminary impressions were based on listening to the first four tracks from the second disc of Radiohead’s OKNOTOK double audio CD album tonight —I’m heading out on a week-long holiday tomorrow as I write this. That gives me time to burn in the new set of GC2’s while we are away.) First, I noticed an apparent increase in background quietness or silence. This is different from a decrease in the apparent noise floor, as the system already had low or non-existent noise. I don’t know how else to characterize this. Second, I noticed an apparent increase in the overall resolution of the presented sound reproduction. Soundstage space seemed to increase, as well as the reproduced musical content within that space. I heard more musical information with the parallel interconnect configuration than before using single interconnects—I said to myself more than a couple times, “where did that (musical info) come from?”, having to repeatedly replay the passage several times to confirm what I heard was actually there. About the Y-splitters... I am not terribly thrilled with my EBay purchase of “Monster” Y-splitters from China. The Y-splitters’ male connectors are loose and readily rotate on my Oppo’s female outputs. (The Y-splitters’ male connectors are tight on the female inputs of my Liquid Pre, so no problem with that connection.) The Y-splitters‘ female connectors are adequate and tight when coupled to my Teo Audio cable male connectors. I likely could gently crimp the single male connectors on the Y-splitters with some pliers to resolve that looseness, but I wanted to point it out at the outset. I should try Y-splitters from a different source, such as those from Audioquest. (I initially chose the Monster-styled Y-splitter over the Audioquest product due to the Monster product being more compact and having less apparent “wire.”) |
@t_ramey Good question. I think the answer to your question might depend on whether both signal and ground legs of each cable are composed of the liquid metal fluid. The publicly available details of their cable configuration is scant at best. The cost of the liquid metal fluid is expensive, so they may use a solid type of wire for the ground leg of their less expensive cables. |
The typical Y-splitter is wire-based, so it should benefit from a burn-in conditioning using a Cable Cooker. Just daisy chain them together and use an extra conventional interconnect (if needed) to complete the connection between the Cable Cooker’s input and output. Please remember to heed Teo Audio’s warning about NOT conditioning their interconnects with a Cable Cooker. |
Alan Kafton said 2 to 2-1/2 days should be adequate for burning in conventional Y-splitters with his Cable Cooker. After thinking about my last post a bit more, I was incorrect about daisy-chaining Y-splitters without using the full complement of interconnects. One must use a complete set of interconnect cables at all relevant connectors of each Y-splitter to ensure that all of the Y-splitter connections are burned in. |
As for the @taras22 recommendation regarding that Statement SE OCC Silver RCA Splitter Cable by Audio Sensibility, they offer a sweet splitter called the Impact SE RCA Splitter Cable having a balanced arrangement of 4 Teflon-coated OCC copper conductors arranged in a Star Quad configuration and terminated with the same high quality plug and jacks as the above Statement product for nearly one-half the price (CA$69/ea). See: https://audiosensibility.com/blog/products-2/specialty-cables-occ-copper-and-occ-silver/#!/Impact-SE... It’s still a bit expensive for a set of 4 splitters when one adds up the costs. As for customer responsiveness, though, I also give these guys top hat tips as well. They responded to my email query today (Saturday) in less than 10 minutes. (All splitters are subjected to a cryogenic treatment, like their other cables.) |
Just an FYI PSA, @jayctoy started a new thread about the Schroeder Merhod. It is here: https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/doug-schroeder-method-double-ic |
Just caught up on cable cryo treatment threads here in the Forum. Probably not a good idea to cryo-treat the Teo Audio liquid metal fluid conductors. Just a reminder about the novel materials in play with the Teo Audio conductors vs solid wire conductors and how they are being conditioned (the latter routinely being burned in with cable cookers or being cryo-treated in liquid N2). |
Toyo18 (and others): This is a forum thread, not a complaint center or even a manufacturer’s website forum. If you want specific info about Teo Audio cable prices, then straight communication is always best. I own numerous Teo Audio products, including a variety and lengths of their IC products. I own one of their glorious The Liquid Pre passive line stages that implement their liquid metal fluid interconnects. All were obtained from their portal here on the market side of the Audiogon site. I’ve communicated with both Teo_Audio and Taras22 in their forum threads, via private messenger (via the forum’s pm link under their user name) and via their website communication link. Both are responsive more often than not. And both care about selling their products to those who want them. It’s a 2-man operation, and yes, sometimes communications get lost in the weeds. And then there is the phone, which I’m sure works quite well but which I never really needed to try. My point is that if one persists with polite attempts with communication, then one will be rewarded in kind. But I’m not sure if a lot of what has been said here fosters that objective. |
Teo Audio folks would admit their products reflect a continuous stream of ongoing development. I can’t keep up with their varied products. What’s listed on their website undoubtedly reflects some of those products. But then came GC, GC2, Ultra, Kronon and others, followed by the GC-JR and the double double series. And now their XLR balanced IC’s, which are surely a bargain, given their new 3-D printed connectors. The point is that these guys don’t really answer to a Board of Directors or a Marketing Czar. Contact them and ask them what you want for IC’s, in terms of materials, connectors, length and implementation. They will undoubtedly try their best to give you an abbreviated matrix of prices for your objectives. |
My acoustic experience with Teo Audio IC’s (and their Liquid Pre passive preamp) is via ATC SCM20-2A active 2-way monitors. No bottom end to comment about, where the bottom end being maybe 50 Hz at maybe -3dB. So I’m not going to hear what you’re saying until I get my Dunlavy SC-IVa’s in da house. But confusion is rife, at least in my mind. How much “power” is truly being transmitted in an interconnect—regardless of design? |
@taras22 wrote: 04-12-2019 7:53pm “As an example my pre-amp swings 60 volts and a Kronon doesn’t work as well on the output as a three conductor assembly.” Taras, did you mean to write the following: “As an example my pre-amp swings 60 volts and a Kronon doesn’t work as well on the output as a SINGLE (that is, ONE) conductor assembly.” |
So I went to AXPONA 2019 Friday morning. I visited several exhibitors, including Teo Audio. This is my impression from the High Water Sound Room: TEO AUDIO (Room 594): This was the last room I went to before leaving, as I discovered Teo Audio was not a main exhibitor this year but was nevertheless present. Teo Audio IC’s and speaker cables were showcased in the High Water Sound Room (Room 594), along with TW-Acustic Phono gear ($22,000 setup featuring the $10,000 GT2 Turntable along with 2x12” Tonearms at $6,000 each) with each tonearm tipped with either an Ortofon Winfeld Ti cartridge ($4,390) or a Miyajima Labs Zero Mono cartridge ($2,150), New Audio Frontiers electronics (Stradivari Phono Stage ($12,000), Stradivari Evolution Line Stage ($12,000) and Ultimate 211 SE Monoblocks ($34,000)) Horning Hybrid Systems Eufrodite Ellipse MK.III speakers ($28,000). While the sound was clean and listenable, I was shocked by some of the comments from the exhibitor regarding the Teo Audio cables. He said that Taras of Teo Audio liked their lower priced IC’s for their tonality but felt that those cables did not fair well in systems having multiple driver loudspeakers. I asked him to clarify whether he was referring to Teo Audio speaker cables rather than Teo Audio IC’s. My understanding is that Teo Audio IC’s have a rather broad bandwidth, that is, in the GigaHz range. How then could it be that the IC’s having such a broad bandwidth can be so limited on multi-driver loudspeaker systems? The exhibitor maintained his story. Clearly something was garbled in the CA-US English translation! |
Taras, thanks for this explanation. TBH, I seem to recall from the recesses of my mind you having mentioned at AXPONA 2018 that the Teo Audio IC’s with multiple fluid conductors as having better sonics than the corresponding single fluid conductor IC’s. I might not have appreciated what you meant at the time, tho. Lol |
Tcscata, here is another thread on the Forum about “current” Teo Audio cable’s: https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/anyone-try-teo-gc-jr-interconnects-yet I don’t know the relationship between the cables on their website and their current offerings. I believe the (GC) Ultra includes a single liquid metal conductor. But with respect to the 4 Teo Audio IC’s you’ve listed in your post, their quality increases as follows: GC, GC-Jr, GC2, GC-Ultra and Kronon. |
Taras22: So all GC-labeled offerings below the Kronon is a single liquid metal conductor IC; the Kronon is a two liquid metal conductor IC and everything above the Kronon is a three liquid metal conductor IC. And then one has the Double-Double series, which doubles the number of liquid metal conductors of the original IC, which I gather applies only to the GC-labeled series (GC-Jr, GC2 and GC-Ultra). So the Kronon will be better than any of the GC series and the Double-Double versions of the GC series, owing to the connector being different. Is that a fair characterization? |
Taras22: So switching from a KLE connector in the GC series to a WBT connector in the Kronon yielded a technically advanced IC having superior sound qualities? One might argue that connector switch to be trivial, without fully knowing and/or appreciating the design aspects and attendant difficulties. Are there changes in the fluid conductor design as one moves between the GC series and the Kronon? |