New TEO Audio ICs, who has them?

I only use and require 1 interconnect  pair in my system (Exemplar LSA Statement integrated amp to EVS modded OPPO 205) but it is a really good one. A double double Ultra RCA 1 Meter. I was told that this is better than a single Kronos. I've had it for three years and it has inspired me to upgrade all of my cabling quite a bit. Cabling makes a really big difference in a system. The Ultras aren't going anywhere for awhile. Taras and Ken are both great guys!

Have on order a double ultra XLR 1.5M used and a new 2M XLR from Teo with no name LOL.

These two owners are true gentleman and a pleasure to talk to. I met Taras in Atlanta some 15 years ago and he’s a brilliant thinker.

He owns the Teo Audio Splash and GC2 interconnects.
You can see his system here and you can ask him any questions about it. 
https://systems.audiogon.com/systems/9230

For me that time came 3 years ago when I hopped off the grid. No more speaker cables, no more power cords, no more interconnects. No more fuses, no more transformers, no more big honking capacitors. No more pencils, no more books, no more teacher’s dirty looks. 🧐

The time is coming when there will be no need for cables....everything will be BluToothe delivered

@gme109

Ooooh....tough question. It kinda veers into the apples oranges territory because there is no absolute way to make the comparison ( as an example strictly speaking a single ended amp is a different design from a balanced amp ). That being said we have listened to both extensively and both of those cables share the TEO voicing and sound pretty darn good and folks who have bought them are very happy with them.

Best idea might be just to give it a try, after-all there is a money back guarantee so if it doesn’t agree with you or your system you can simply return it.

Would anyone know if the $600 GCII RCA's would be a better cable than the $650 GC Balanced. keeping in mind my preamp and amp sound much better running in balanced mode. 

Thanks

Yes they do. In fact I have the Silnote Anniversary speaker cables which Doug Schroeder, the Dagogo Audio reviewer and discover of the Schroeder Method for doubling interconnects, said were great speaker cables and only bettered by the Teo Audio speaker cable in his experience  as of the review! I think the review is about four years old. I would love to try them. I am very happy with my Teo Audio Double Double Ultra. 

does teo make speaker cables?

Damn !....!....!....been there a couple of times...understand...

Thanks for the help guys. Sorry, but my dog (more like my son) died Friday 5/17/19 of a sudden heart attack and I'm not into audio at the moment. Be back in a while.  Again my thanks for the time and effort you took to respond to my questions...

@tcscata The best way is to contact Teo Audio directly via their website contact page regarding your particular cables of interest. Teo_Audio (Ken) usually responds promptly. 

Taras or Teo Audio,

Since your GC ---Game Changer--- line is your entry-level line of ICs and now the Solfeggio, the Ref J, and the Ne Plus Ultra lines of ICs are above them, not to mention all the ICs in the Game Changer line can be ordered as a "double" further increasing their sonic qualities! Why do you only present and sell your regular GC line on Audiogon?

I just did a search of Teo Audio here on Audiogon and this is all that shows up: https://www.audiogon.com/listings?q=teo+audio Then I checked over at the Teo Audio website and there’s no mention of these other lines either. So if I wanted to move up the line I wouldn’t know where to locate these other lines of Teo Audio ICs and learn what they cost. I wouldn’t mind being able to check out your speaker wires either...

Thanks, Thetubeguy1954 (Tom)

There are a whole lot of changes as one moves between the GC series and the Kronon, and the change of connectors is one, and a pretty important part of those changes ...( which btw are somewhat inter-related ). That being said there are also a lots of changes moving from a GC Jr to a GC2 or to a GC Ultra, all of which share the same basic plug ( and as above inter-related much like a food recipe has several ingredients which in combination define the taste of the final product , or in the case of a cable, the voicing ) .

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?

Well....that interface produces mechanical and electrical impedance mismatches that each negatively affect cable performance. Dealing with connector as a mechanical issue reduces the micro-phony, and we have devoted considerable effort to deal with that issue. And in our case the electrical issue has been dealt with by virtue of the liquid conductor's very wide band-width, which btw is mainly what cable doubling with normal solid cable adds to the audio buffet table ( see Bob Smith's excellent comments on this ). What that does is help reduce cable generated noise that is a function of reflection from the conductor/connector impedance mismatch . An analogy might be akin to removing room generated noise, echo, to produce an acoustically correct room. And I think the initial shock that listening to doubling produces is the removal of that noise which is something most folks have had to live with all their audiophile lives, it was almost like the air we breathed as a community ( except of course those who have been enjoying those benefits with our broad-band capable cables...and btw in our doubled cables the doubling effect is even more pronounced than in other doubled cables that rely on solid metal for conducting because we enjoy a significant head start having an already broad bandwidth ).

Teo_Audio, what gets me in an ironic way is the extent to which the connector, arguably a solid state interface, affects the quality of the overall Teo Audio cable design. 

All the of GC family is available as Double Double variants. We are hoping for a Kronon version to join the team soon. So as the saying goes stayed tuned for developments because that could be one wickedly great cable.

And on the balanced end of things we have balanced equivalents of all the current GC models.

Taras22 and Teo_Audio: so the current line up of IC’s are the following:

GC-Jr
GC2
GC-Ultra
Kronon
Solfeggio
Ref J
Ne Plus Ultra 

What is considered as part of the Double Double series?

How about the balanced IC’s?

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.

Yes indeed our line-up has changed and we will continue to change that line-up in our quest to provide consumers with the best possible product for their budget.

We will not keep products in the line-up if better options are available and better options do keep popping up because are always pushing the envelop. We will also ( and this is a biggee ) will not keep products in the lineup if key components in that product have shown to have their performance deteriorate as production of that component moved to low labour, low quality locations. In fact this was the main reason behind the development of the GC series to replace our Splash series. It was also the reason behind the appearance of a Mk 2, then Mk 3 versions of some of our earlier models. The problem in both cases was a key component turned awful as production was moved by manufacturers to maximize profits.

We decided to keep "running to daylight" and revamped our lineup to keep building around good sounding materials.

And yes we realize this causes some distress in the used market but we can’t control the manufacture of many of the components of our cables and we are not going to stop innovating ( because as much as anything that just doesn’t seem to be in either our personal DNA or that of our wee enterprise...read we started this to bring new ideas forward and we are going to keep heading down that road ).

Moving to accommodate market changes and innovation is a sort of a damned if you do and damned if you don't scenario. And frankly we would love to keep building those old models are they were simply great cables. The quality of those products was, and critically, is still high, and as mentioned we changed things (and names ) to as much as anything keep that quality high. So when you buy an older TEO cable you still get much the same voicing and much the same benefits that a liquid metal conductor brings to the cable. 

I find the whole Teo Audio product offering very confusing.  Although I applaud their efforts for constant product evolution, it does create market confusion and significantly devalues their prior efforts on the secondary market. 

Well....first, the Kronon is a single conductor assembly....and as for the comparison between the Double Double cables and the Kronon ?....that is a tougher question to answer because we are really talking apples and oranges. Its sort of like saying a big block Mustang, which is loads of wild fun, is better than the precise handling Miata because it has a vastly better 0-60 time....or.... a Klipschorn is better than a planar speaker because it really kicks out the jams. 

The Kronon, while admittedly not as spectacular as our Double Doubles ( and gawd they are spectacular...as an aside methinks the special sauce in any double configuration is bandwidth extension which btw given our liquid metal conductor we were already at a very marked advantage in regard hard metal but in a double configuration , ooo-weee-baby,  the joint is really really rocking ), is still the more precise instrument. A more definitive and fair comparison will probably have to wait until we finally get around to figure out how to build a Double Double Kronon.

Sorry not a complete answer as this was done in some haste...dinner was calling and my blood sugar was dropping.

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?

Thanks Mr. Celander for jumping in the breach and mapping out the lower end of our line. From there the line extends to include the Solfeggio, the Ref J, and the Ne Plus Ultra which are all based on what we call a three conductor assembly and use a WBT plug ( all the other cables are based on a single conductor assembly, and with the exception of the Kronon, which uses a WBT plug, use a KLE plug ).

Ascribing qualitative value to each cable is difficult as everyone weights various sonic factors differently but to our ears the GC group of cable have a familial sound that becomes increasing better as you move from the Jr to the Ultra. The Kronon however takes takes the significant changes that exist within the GC family, and adds dramatic to the significant change. Its a really stellar cable, and my particular fave in the line. 

The 3 conductor cables take the Kronon strengths and add a robustness to the presentation ( the analogy I use is like going from a great 2-way speaker to a great 3-way...I happen to like 2-ways which is why I have a preference for the Kronon, Ken prefers the three wire assemblies ). The only other strength the three conductor assemblies have is they are better suited for longer runs beyond two meters.  

And btw there are also Double Double versions of the single wire assemblies available and they have the particular charm that defines that sort of design ( in addition to that special voicing that TEO design brings to the table ).

Hope that helps.

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.

To Taras22 or Teo_Audio, Guys you really have me confused. I own a somewhat high-end system that consists of a YBA Genesis CD4 CD player used as a transport, a Musical Paradise MP-D2 Tube DAC, a 135lb, 40W/ch, Mastersound Reference 845 Integrated, SET amp and a pair of Beauhorn Virtuoso speakers w/Lowther PM5A drivers that have Ticonal magnets.

I replaced my ICs with your Teo Ultra ICs, which I love, 2+ months ago now. I have considered even moving farther up the Teo line, but your offerings here on Audiogon are the GC Jr., GCII, Ultra, and Kronon ICs. Yet when I go to Teo’s own webpage the analog ICs are listed as the ApheHelios, Splash, Splash Rs and Splash Rc and to make things even more confusing above that it lists the liquid ICs as Reference, Splash, and Standard!

Can one of you two clear things up for me?  Please tell me plainly... 

• what is your present line of analog ICs these days from top to bottom?
• where is the Ultra IC in this line?
  
• what improvements would I hear moving up to Kronos or higher?
  
• also is my Teo Ultra ICs a single or 3 conductor cable?

Thanks, Thetubeguy1954 (Tom)

Maybe not so much better overall in all situations ( as I mentioned the Kronon is my fave, especially when cost is considered...and it works in most applications ) but having applications in which they are the best. Or put another way, just like speakers, cables, ours included, all have strengths and weaknesses....the trick is to match solutions to problems and produce the least remainder.

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

Sorry if my description caused some confusion..... to clarify, the Kronon cables are based on a single ( as in one ) conductor assembly whereas the cables that perform better in that particular placement are cables that have three conductors in the assembly. ( where assembly refers to part of the cable that make up the bit btwn the two plugs ). This would include the Standard, and the Reference ( which are no longer produced ), and the currently produced Solfeggio, Ref J, and the Ne Plus Ultra.

@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.”

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. But in other applications where the output is significantly less, the Kronon, a single conductor assembly, is my absolute fave cable in our lineup ( because, as Jeff said, it delineates tone and nuance beautifully...whereas the three conductor assemblies provide a more robust presentation...which btw is what Ken tends to gravitate to ).

Now this may well be a simplistic conclusion drawn from a very small sample size but we have similar feedback from several clients.  

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?

@celander 

To clarify....we have found that the single conductor cables sound best in situations where there isn't a huge voltage or current swing such as a real fire-breathing pre-amp feeding a robust power amp. Such a situation is better dealt with using our 3 conductor cables. Now Jeff's experience with our cables over the last year or so confirmed this, which is the reason he runs a Kronon between a phono or digital stage and  a Reference or a Ne Plus Ultra between the pre and power. Or put another its not so much what the speaker is but more what a speaker requires in term of voltage/current swing that determines what cable is ideal where. Its not the bandwidth its the power handling that is the issue.

Bottom line Jeff is absolutely bang on with his assessment and we at TEO whole heartedly concur.

Hope that clears things up.

He was probably speaking about the bass.

The bass is a hair soft and a hair light on the bottom few Hz....in the lower priced cables.

Others have noted this too. Especially with the last few bottom Hz of subsonic spectaculars off lets say... an organ recording.

Jeff of High Water preferred the higher reaches of our product line, for the larger speakers in the given systems that he may display with at shows...

The fluid really is different than wire. Wire would have the least problems here and trouble everywhere else.

Part of what our higher lines of IC’s (IN RCA format) deal with, is that last bit of power at the bottom ..and they are better in all the other desired areas.

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!

My name is Tom and I’m from Orlando, FL. Recently my friend Steve came over my home with a pair of Teo Audio’s entry-level $379 GC Jr. ICs he wanted to compare against a pair of $1695 ICs (I won’t name the manufacturer) I had bought just 4 months earlier,

My system consists of a YBA Genesis CD4 CD player used as a transport, a Musical Paradise MP-D2 Tube DAC, a 135lb, 40W/ch, Mastersound Reference 845 Integrated, SET amp and a pair of Beauhorn Virtuoso speakers w/Lowther PM5A drivers that have Ticonal magnets.

I was extremely impressed when these $379 Teo GC Jr ICs were actually sonically superior to my $1695 ICs. But I was shocked when a few weeks later Steve returned with a $655 pair of Teo GC ICs that smoked my new $1695 ICs! These Teo GC ICs cost 1/3 of what my ICs cost and they actually sonically embarrassed my ICs. After that Steve really blew me away when he told me our mutual friend Phil purchased the next step up Teo’s line of ICs the $1099 GC Ultras! Then Steve says "And they are significantly better sonically than those Teo GC ICs that just totally amazed you with their sonic presentation."

Guys I’m being completely serious when I tell you that putting the Teo $655 GC ICs in my system didn’t sound like I switched one pair of ICs with another pair of ICs at all! Oh no, it sounded like I just added a $10K tube preamp to my system and then Steve tells me, Phil’s, $1099 Teo ICs are significantly better?!?!?!? Well, I have to tell everyone after much searching I found a used pair of Teo GC Ultra ICs that I immediately purchased and should be on their way to my home as you read this!

I’m 65 and I’ve been an avid audiophile/music lover for 55 years back when I was only 10 and first heard the Beatles in 1964. After hearing the Beatles I started to ride my bike around and tearing apart the audio consoles to get their tube amps and tube tuner/preamp. I just couldn’t believe what the people in the rich neighborhood thought was trash and would throw away! In a few months, I had a better sounding audio system than most adults did! I’m telling you this to hopefully add some weight to my statement about how great these Teo ICs are sonically. From what I heard of the Teo the ICs in my system I honestly believe you’ll most likely have to spend 2x and maybe even 3x Teo’s price to obtain better sonics. I remind you the Teo’s $379 IC equaled my $1695 ICs and Teo’s $655 GC ICs smoked my $1695 ICs. I’ve never heard ICs do what these Teo’s sonically did in my system. In fact, the Teo GC ICs were sonically better (IMHO) than my friends NBS Signature III, ICs were! Buy them while you can still afford them, they’re really that good!

Oh yeah, my audio system: https://www.facebook.com/groups/229798201295731/

..not belittling the product, but there are way too many posts declaring the second coming on these pages.

Bought a used pair of Skogrand cable recently. It is better than my GC II and GC Jr. Better separation and feel a lot more 3D.

The problem with the GC balanced is that it ended up way way over-performing. Kinda embarrassing.

And then a couple of the first customers tried it as an AES/EBU 110 ohm balanced digital cable. They thought it excellent. For one, It equaled or exceeded their world class reference, the one considered around the globe to be the best..the, er, clear ’see through’ one. Against one half of a $650 pair.

Whoops.

New technology has a way of doing that.

taras22, good to know. Having said that, what’s the 2019 snapshot of the Teo Audio IC product line? I know the GC balanced is making a big splash now. And I see the GC Junior is still alive and kicking. What else is being offered now? Double double GC Juniors and Double double Ultras? Others?

Yes, "continuous stream of development" pretty well nails it. Ken and I are both unrepentant tinkerers who are always finding new ways to do things, and finding new materials to improve product. We have a literal mountain of cables that were part of some idea to move performance forward but kinda missed the mark ( read there is a very real tangible cost attached to development unlike some folks who just combine long time catalog items to produce product ).

The problem with that is we don't have a product list that stays constant. Its sort of like the restaurant that doesn't  have a set menu because the chef always wants to make the best meal with the best currently available ingredients. 

So while we don't have a cast in stone product list we will provide the very best product that we can produce at that time. And if a model has been superceded by a superior sounding cable at any given price point it gets dropped. 

Hope that helps understand where we are coming from.....sorry done in haste.

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.

+1 celander
I have had requests and they responded quick and considerately.

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.