Hello, we’re still here. Some don’t mind when manufacturers post, some do. So we try to tread lightly in matters that pertain to us.
Paraphrasing from a thread at Canuckaudiomart, when someone asked about construction:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
They look almost the same..but internally are quite different.
The
GCII is slightly more expensive due to the use of different materials
and a more complex assembly protocol, .....that being said we feel the
improvement in sound quality far exceeds the rise in price.
|
Not burned in at all. Long way to go and they are probably at their worst, right now. :)
But, They have a specific form of a precondition burn in, before they leave our shop.
You are about ..oh....100-150 hrs of ’line level’ (full cd levels, to a preamp) signal way from peak performance.
Do not use cable cookers on Teo Audio cables -just a note for everyone.
Play music to break them in -only.
|
I try to use a usb input on an older ’internet capable’ dvd player. You can load some tunes onto a usb stick and use that..so you don’t wear out the DVD drive mechanism.
|
......and another new cable has arrived....
|
The Liquid Metal cables are like that, aren't they? :)
|
@C I see Teo Audio has been busy of late. A new digital cable dropped into their cache of offerings.
Hello Celander, The digital cable has always been there, It’s just that we’re advertising it for the first time. :) |
Anyone want to comment on this?
Odd that no one has....
potentially... two $500 cables....sonically outstripping a $5k cable.
|
For clarity’s sake, the GC jr, is a more open and clear, slightly faster version of the GC. But still retaining the GC’s balances across the frequency spectrum.
That is why the GC has been gently moved to the past tense, to make way for a GCII.
The Teo cables and the mentioned brand have been compared before and the results of those comparisons can be easily found....
|
When the description for this article is looked at closely, this is why the ’two cables with splitters’ is not recommended in a preamp to power amp scenario. It’s the varied impedance of when a volume control or output of the preamp is involved... the varied impedance of the signal, on the transmission line proper, that has more potential to erupt into some resonance that is not easily predictable. AES E-Library Audio Cable Distortion is Not a Myth! |
We have three new cables on the way...one single ended, two balanced. (not in the same price ranges at the GCII, so no real effect on that used price.)
And a note: the GC cable are direct sale models and do not have ’retail’ prices, so the used prices tend to be commensurate with that aspect, ie, they tend to sell high - and quickly.
|
@celander
A partial explanation of what you are looking for:
We (the world) went to fiber optic as the ’carrier’ so to speak, is capable of much higher levels of signal carrying than ’wire’..... Multiplexing, and so on.
In glass fiber, it is still a metal, but it is an amorphous metal.... and the signal applied is slightly different, even though it is considered technically the same. Both electromagnetic, in this case, light.... not ’electricity’.
In the case of the liquid metal, we’ve stepped beyond the amorphous aspect, to full liquid. We are apparently, at the least, well beyond the signal carrying capacity of solidus ’wire’, thus we can (in a proper design), apparently... easily achieve GHz ranges in signal transmission.
With commensurate levels of potential multiplexing (akin to the optical scenario), with low to no interference issues. Thus those rich harmonics of the signal, all in proper context. Without the falsified emphasis in them (distortion/phase smear), which wire will -- and does have.
Hence the impression of some, "darker, but incredibly rich".
|
Yes, some have some small experience...most have little experience in this.
Wire can have reflections and potential resonances, careful when doing this with wire....., which is why it has been avoided for the past 30-40 years in audio (the audiophile 'high end' years of audio systems) and is considered a no-no across the entire electronic spectrum of systems coupling.
amorphous.. notably less likely to have issue...(amorphous wire is a new thing)
Liquid metal alloy...less likely again than amorphous. (an even newer thing)
(culled from experience at the multi billion dollar ’transmission line concerned’ major telecommunications company ---level of testing)
|
It’s important to understand that we urged Doug to call it the Schroeder method, it was not a case of ego on his part.
Just so folks know this...and this point -- is in print. |
IMO, the hard metal splitter is preferred, sonically. Even with the awkward angles.
|
We complete a pre-burn (Conditioning) for each cable before it goes out, and then state that no burn in (no cable cookers!!) of any kind be done on our cables.
Just listen to them and let it burn in naturally, via playing the cable in an audio system.... |
Someone asked about ’balanced’ cables, and this is the reply I gave. I made a spelling mistake in my reply, tried to erase it and add it in again...and the audiogon system erased the question they asked as well! So I can’t reply....
I’d like to answer inquiries, of course. Since it was lost to the ether, I thought I’d put my reply here, instead. I’m sure some are interested in our potential issuance of balanced cables:
Hello, we don’t have any XLR versions of our RCA cables.
Our XLR versions are unique and unto themselves, just as the RCA versions are of their own type only.
We feel that our analysis of the fluid metal conductor technology shows that the properties of the fluid metal, are likely to be the one of the best conduits (’conduit’ applies literally in this case-first time for everything!) for effective balanced signal transfer that has yet to exist.
This conclusion is due to the nature of what a balanced signal is designed to do, what it’s reason for existence is. The assessment is that the fluid metal technology favours those desired aspects, likely more than any wire cable can.
We’ve been re-designing our balanced cables, which is why they’ve been absent from our line up for quite some time. Another issue to deal with is how the fluid metal requires a different XLR connector design and implementation than that of wire based conductor systems.
Both issues are being tackled, and are nearing completion. The conductor or ’balanced transmission line’ design aspects are completed, regarding initial products to be released, all that remains is the final bits of the XLR connector design to match them up with, which should be completed in the near future.
|
I thought you might do that.
I did reply. Three times and more. But, you were confrontational, pressured, and demanding - right from the get go.
I said to myself, ’I don’t need this’, and let it sit for a few days.
I was going to reply to you again, today,and specifically not be apologetic in that reply, just even tempered.
~~~~~~~
You wanted me to give you all prices in all cables in all lengths, is what the indication was. A rundown and price scale on every product we make.Tell me all your prices, was your initial demand.
I asked you to be more specific. At which point you said you’ve asked for prices twice now, and I’ve failed to respond. I said a phone call might work better, but in the meantime, what specifically are you looking for?
~~~
I gave you the names of each of the cables, separated into types/termination as well. 7 RCA types, two digital types and two speaker cables. "All in various lengths," I said. So which one, which area?, I again asked.
Then I was accused of being non responsive for a third time.
That’s when I gave up and walked away.
We can still try again, but this......is even more in the wrong direction. It's a two way street.
|
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.
|
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.
|
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.
|
