I bought this unit and it was not sent to me by Schiit. If you are in Canada, with the conversion and customs, it is over $200 cdn so keep that in mind.
I brought the Loki before, one thing I notice is if you put its treble too high, you start hearing noise floor. :D And I think pushing my speakers higher or lower than they normally do is "unhealthy" or "unnatural" to them. I would prefer to acquire speakers that meets the range that I want naturally. Therefore I returned it. Also it adds up to additional chain in the system...
Interesting company. I have their magni lll h/a. Runs by a wallwort. It. Sounds okay,sort of like a diet version of the Creek obh 11. When run through my Hafler 75 h/a out, the little magni becomes a beast. If any headphone people out there,here is a little review.www.whathifi.com/us/schiit-audio/magni-3/review
"Cables" is the subject that, more than anything in this arena, shows us the limitations of our scientific model, certainly our engineering model, for why stuff behaves as it does, why we experience things as we do. I think it is a humbling prospect for engineers and others who hold tight to the standard model of science to accept cables matter and that's why it is so controversial. What many people hear just doesn't obey the standard scientific model.....
If you listen to anything other than pristine recordings, tone controls are a great thing to have. I used to work as an audio engineer and one of the audio engineers who trained me used to always stress cutting first. Cutting of frequencies sounds more natural to our ears than boosting. If you have a recording that annoys you (usually something in the mid band), try cutting those frequencies. Sometimes you don't need more bass or treble you actually need less mid.
Audiophiles drive me nuts with this crap. Units, amps, pre amps, DATs, speaker wires, crossovers wired to speakers …. BUT a simple tone control knob is in the pathway of the music ruins it? WTF is wrong with you people? First, if you listen to anything that is not recorded 100% acoustical tone controls were used from the first string or drum struck.
"i believe in...making me feel good when i listen to my system". word. totally agree. sometimes audiophiles miss the whole point of music...to feel it. when folks get so technically minded, they miss the point of why most musicians make music...to make others FEEL something. there is more to be said to audio reproduction than just staying true to the source. you should get a smile on your face when you listen. you should feel the music. feel the lyrics. feel the song. that is all that matters.
100%. One of my favorite album is Chic - C'est Chic. Every track is amazing and funky as hell. But the recording is terrible. Even the original LP release, the highs are barely there. The Schiit Loki will bring magic to my turntable next time I play this record.
I bought one last year to experiment on a secondary system, it certainly allows for tuning to you ears preferences.. It's a very convenient and inexpensive way to tune your sound.
Why are audiophiles OK with changing sound and tone with cables and not an equalizer? Because they are flaming hypocrites, that is why! "Oh I want it to sound like it did in the studio" Well unless you were at the actual recording that is impossible. Also what it sounded like live in the studio, compared to what it sounded like when the engineer mixed it to with the speakers he was using don't always match either.
I think they are aiming for flat response. I have to say having heard some system configured that way, it does sound different than a system with a v curve. I personally like v curve but understand my friends who are searching for the flat curve. (Well nothing is actually flat but you know)
"Why are audiophiles OK with changing sound and tone with cables and not an equalizer? " - that's a psychology topic! Do not try to find a rational explanation...
Rumblestrip.NET I suspect the reason is that with better cables that a "cleaner" more detailed reproduction may be possible, not so much a change in tone. Adding an equalizer will not do this. An equalizer is useful for increasing or decreasing bass, treble or mids ( I am sure you know this already). I suspect they are best used to make poor recordings more palatable but they inevitably will make a revealing system less detailed on great recordings. I have my parametric eq on my preamp tape monitor circuit so I can have it in the audio chain when desired and switch it out of circuit when not desired. You are right, hard to ever know exactly what it sounded like in the studio. I suspect with the speakers being used these days in some studios that I may be getting as good or "better" fidelity from my home system.
Brilliant commentary. You are exactly right in your approach, Thomas. You should build a system to suit your tastes and if you use an equalizer or a microwave (love that line) to get that sound then so be it. You and Steve Guttenberg are really the only two doing audio reviews who seem to understand that this hobby is about engaging with the music in a way that moves you, draws you in and pleases you. The idea that one can build a system to present music the way the artist intended is a fools errand. First of all, the artist intended their music to inspire and entertain. Or, perhaps they intended their music to make you think, or feel or hope. But there is zero chance that any artist worries about anyone listening to their music with a bit of midbass boost. The artists intend for their audience to be moved by their music in much the same way a painting might speak to an art aficionado. If one becomes so preoccupied with the esoteric minutia of audiophilia that they are no longer able to engage with the music itself, then no matter how close to the original sound their system gets, they are not experiencing the music as the artist intended. Also, you raise a very good point and one that not many are willing to admit. So few people have any real world point of reference for how things actually sound. I know more than a few people who have never seen any of their favorite artists live but they think they know how these artists sound. Some think their systems rival a live symphony yet they've never set foot in a symphony hall. In every case these people are simply making up their version of what things should sound like and creating a system that suits their tastes. Which is just as correct as any other way to do it because it makes them want to listen to music and that's the whole point. Where things go awry is when someone decides that their opinion of how something should sound, whether they've heard the thing or not, is the only way it should be enjoyed. Unfortunately, even very experienced reviewers fall into the my way or the highway trap. They feign a lack of bias but if you read or watch enough of their reviews then their preferences become evident and they judge gear against these preferences. Heck, we all do. Unlike yourself, however, they don't admit this. They pretend they are judging products against an accurate sonic reference point when in reality they are simply comparing them to their favorite style of coloration. I used to worry about what these guys thought. But now I have the experience and confidence to filter the valuable information from the biased and often self important garbage. These days, like yourself, I, too will add salt if I feel like it!
Yes. Even turning the volume up or down a notch changes how we hear the EQ curve which is why even equipment like Mcintosh will have a volume/ loudness button for lower set volumes... AND a 3 band EQ!
Unfortunately, this hobby has been taken over by a politically correct brand popularity contest generation. Do what you want. Do what makes you happy. Do what makes your system sound good to you. That would include cables, pro audio gear, audiophile equipment or equalizers. Allot of nuerotic guys over analyzing the hobby, shoving the three letters SVS down everyone's throats and other bullshit garbage. Just do what you want and what sounds good to you. Use the forums and videos as informational guides, not bibles. You're going to be much happier.
Thanks, Thomas! One of the reasons I like your channel is your lack of pretentiousness, and this is a perfect example. I have the Loki in my 10 year old son’s Magni/Modi stack for him to learn about/play with EQ. He loves it!
My Cambridge integrated has tone controls with the ability to bypass. My 1976 Technics receiver also has tone controls. With the Cambridge I have floor standing totems and from time to time I need to decrease the bass. With the Technics I have small ADS speakers and I increase the bass a touch. Tone controls come in handy.
The guy on right is shy of admitting that he pumps up the bass using loki. I get it, I do it too. There's nothing wrong with it. I too have same speakers and Loki for the same reason :D
Who knows what the artist intended! I love my Loki ❤️ My only complaint, I just wish Jason and Mike would make a balanced version. I have found the best place for the Loki is between the preamp and amp and I like to keep that balanced.
They do, maybe it wasn't available a year ago when you posted this though? Its called the Lokius and its twice as much money but it has 6 bands instead of 4 and has balanced or single ended inputs and outputs. Its designed to go with modius and magnius stack of products. The loki was designed to go with the modi and magni products. The lokius will work with any of the products though regardless of if they are balanced or not. Technically the best place to put it I think would be between the dac or switcher and the pre amp. That way the gain running into it is constant and not changing. Or with some sort of tape loop if its available like we used to have. Not sure if that is the thing anymore though. However if that isn't possible putting it between the pre amp and amp really shouldn't cause any issues. I kind of wish it had a gain control so you could correct the gain after adjustments but that seems like a bit much to ask at this price point and size. And from what I understand the adjustments on this are not huge anyway so it might not matter much.
Everyone had an EQ back in the day... I'm going to listen to music the way that I like, not some shit ass producer, so I'll keep on using my damn EQ if I please
I have never understood audiophile aversion to mild use of EQ. Some can spend weeks or even months tube rolling to change sound. This kind of device, when well designed and not overused, is just a more convenient way of similar tube changes. Adding flavor. Helping redefine weaknesses in recording quality and systems. And until all music is recorded perfectly and every system reproduces perfectly, I'll enhance with eq to make a better connection to the music.
But if you use a device like this then your system won't pass the "purity test" and it will "defial the true integrity" of the artist's work. ("Are your eyes rolling yet? Mine are") 🙄 👽🖖"Na-nu"
EQ with xlr connectivity is standard on the pro side. Like consumer aka home audio side variety of quality and functionality levels. Good enough to be in recording, mix and mastering, then good enough for playback signal path. ;)
A common assumption, but its not true. The job of a playback system is different than what's used in a recording studio. Everything used in the recording process is part of the recording itself. Its not altering the recording, it is the recording. The job of the playback system is to reproduce the recording with as much transparency as possible. A good example is cables. People always say, why buy high end cables when they used cheap ones in the studio? The answer is simple. You're trying to reproduce the recording as transparent as possible. That includes the sound of whatever cables were used in the studio. It would be like making a tweeter out of brass because cymbals are made out of brass. You need to produce a tweeter that is transparent in such a way that lets you hear the natural timbre of a cymbal, or some other instrument.
Thanks, Thomas or another great review. I couldn't agree with you more. I added the Schiit Loki into my headphone setup about a year ago. The Loki has been a great help to me, I have a bit of tinnitus so when listening to for example Dave Matthews Band some of the recordings are bit harsh for my poor sensitive ears. I can dial the highs back a bit. It works so well for me I added another Loki into my main listening system. You're also correct in that the Loki stays in bypass most of the time only use it about 5%. but it's there when I need it.
I bought one of these recently and found it to be pretty good and like you use it around 5% of the time, usually to tame bright digital recordings or fatten up bass light vinyl. Fortunately my pre-amp has a spare tape loop so I can have it completely switched out of my system when not needed. I think the unit itself is pretty transparent - I suspect the extra RCA cables I have going to and from the unit are having a bigger impact than the unit itself as I can tell the difference when I have the Loki tape loop selected even when it is in bypass mode, but it is then in series with an extra 2.4m of cable!
I use my eq in Audirvana 100 % of the time. And expect to use the Loki for my analog listening quite a lot. Mostly the upper frequencies which bother me with just any speaker. No shame in saying that...😊
If you want to use an EQ and don't want to run the signal through an analog EQ, you can get a digital EQ. If you have separate components, you can put a digital EQ in between a transport (CD transport, streamer, computer, etc..), and your DAC. If the signal is already digital, EQing in digital does a lot less harm to the signal, then an analog EQ. Having it before the DAC is much less intrusive.
The problem is money. If (for example.) all cables cost $5.00 dollars most people would "settle down" and want to research and learn how different materials can cause different effects. Instead of crying and making jokes every time they see a cable that cost more than their car. Somebody wants to charge $2,000 dollars for a cable, so what, free enterprise and nobody is holding a gun to your head and making you buy them....and no, I don't have $2000 dollars to spend on cables either, but there's plenty of lower cost options out there. (rant over, thank you.)
Thanks for the comment. I buy used myself so I am kind of ok to pay 25% to 35% of retail price, but even then...having said that, there are some not expensive solutions out there.
Yeah I've asked JDS labs to make one... apparently its not possible given a balanced circuit. At least not with a passive one (according to them, I'm not an engineer).
Thomas, I can't preach this enough. When using any eq on any stereo, we automatically increase frequencies we want more of that the speaker is lacking. When doing this, you are going above reference level and therefore increasing distortion. What we should be doing is decreasing the frequencies we don't like, keeping the distortion low. The eq graph will look the same in the end, but it will be below reference level. This way you can listen to your speakers at loud volumes without the added distortion. Distortion is your worst enemy, it damages your ears and even worse it cooks voice coils.
Incremental increases should not pose a problem. Tone controls allow you to shape the sound to your personal taste - sure beats having to suffer through schiity recordings.
I absolutely agree. In my tube preamp there are three bypassable tone controls. Every time I decide to use them (mainly because poor original recordings, as you say), I prefer to do it in substracting way. So; if I find, for example, the bass is lacking, I turn down the mid and treble knobs. If the sound is too muffled, I turn down the other two knobs until I find a properly balanced response. Nice remark.
In practicality, it doesn't really make a difference. If you lower all the bandwidths you perceive as neutral in order to boost the lacking frequency range, you're very likely to increase the overall volume to get the dynamics and loudness level that sounds best for a given song. If the system amplification has even decent headroom, the distortion level is simply a function of driver stresses (excursion and heat). Once you turn up the volume to where you started, driver stress will be the same as had you just boosted a single frequency range.
Dear Thomas, Gus from Boston here. I've just purchased the Loki! Thank you for the review. I've realized that streaming through Audirvana was a much better experience using an eq to tame some of the treble of my Focals 716. And since my vinyl collection comprises solely of albums from 50s, 60s and 70s , I'm excited to do the same with my analog listening. Interesting thing about the Focals is that even if you bring some of the higher frequencies down a bit, my ears don't feel any loss of the spark, yet, adding an extra layer of "smoothness" to the sound! Funny how such a simple measure can make you speaker sound a "step up", isn't it?
Amazing times.. I was going buy the Loki, and other Schiit components, and, watching the Schiit Audio reviews.. I really wanted to hear your opinion and insights Thomas. Good ol' Thomas comes thru, and posted. Unreal yea... Thanks Thomas!!!
I chose the McIntosh C53 Pre-amp largely because it comes with an amazing 8-band Analogue EQ.... I honestly can't imagine why anyone would NOT want an EQ on a hi-fi system... I see no upside, especially a quality EQ like this that is 100% defeat-able.
When you adjust an EQ it alters phase on whatever frequencies you're working with. Not everyone will hear the same difference, if any, but the more resolving your system, the more you hear. Also, it can also be a bottleneck for sound quality. If you have really high level components, putting a low cost component that's not equally good as the rest of your system, you're going to lose a lot of what you paid for. Here's a quick example of what I mean. Its will known that putting potentiometers in the signal path to control things like volume and tone, effect the sound in a negative way, even if you use high end pots like Alps. Instead of using a volume pot in a preamp, most really high end brands design custom volume controls to get around using pots. Its usually done using a stepped ladder of resistors. So, if you want to have a volume that goes from 0 to 99, you need to buy 100 resistors that may cost several dollars each. For assembly, someone has to soldier all 100 resistors into the volume control by hand. Its an extremely labor intensive process. (Quite often you'll see people complaining about the high cost of preamps. They don't see the value. Custom volume controls add a lot to the price.) So, now that you went through all the trouble to eliminate a volume pot in your system, you plug an EQ into the signal path that has 4 or 6. In some systems, it just doesn't make sense to use an EQ. Just to be clear, I'm not telling anyone to not use an EQ. I'm just explaining why you may not want to use one. If you have one, and are getting good results, then you should have it. You're the one that has to listen to the system, so you should do whatever sounds best to you.
Thomas, I know this is an old video, but have you compared the Loki (or Loki Mini+) to the Lokius? I need some "Umph" added to my turntable's output (going into Zu Omen Mk2s w/entry-level sub) and was considering one of these devices to help lift up the low end to see if that can improve my system. Any thoughts? Is one worth double the price of the other? (Comments from "actual" experience from others is welcome) 👽✌️
You nailed it with the salt analogy. Certain audiophiles make certain claims, yet change gear to change tones to their liking? The difference is.....? Very insightful and IMO agreeable overview, like my loki as a (possibly) inferior system/recording equalizer.. Also use vintage Audiocontrol, Yamaha and Marantz eq's from time to time, not ashamed to admit! 😀
I think you miss a couple of points, at least, about tone controls in general, and about this device. The purist's policy of taking control of equalization out of the hands of owners has a noble (sort of) intent: the owner is so willful, capricious, and ignorant that they should be straightjacketed in the presence of the heavenly anointed equipment. There may be some merit to this -- or not. It depends on the owner. Forever, in broadcasting and such equipment, there has been the issue of equipment *chains* that make up a complex system. If most or every device had tone controls, the result could be chaos in the resultant audio. So, no tone controls were built in. At the final delivery end of the chain, there might well be an equalizer inserted to suit the medium and audience, etc. This led audiophiles to emulate such chains, and to think it would be their ticket to heaven. Maybe. The other missing aspect of the Loki discussion is that it is *not* your grandfather's 'tone' control; it is a four band equalizer. This narrows the bandwidth of each control to more suitably adjust, at just one point in your system, the various band gains to accommodate the vagaries of artistic, miking, mixing, mastering, recording, playback, power amplification, speakers, and tonal preferences of the listener. Some owners used to do this with graphic equalizers. Some do it with DSP software loops. These last two introduce phase variations, which is why they are not so favorable. The Loki has been designed to *not* introduce phase variations -- preserving the sound staging and imaging. To compare doing any of this by changing cables is a complete fool's errand. There may be other reasons for changing cables.
Thomas is right. The final, mixed-down recordings are anything but Pure. The instruments and vocals have been processed many times over by the recording studio before the music is released to the public. As an additional note, the many feet of cable which tie all the various studio equipment together is not $400 per foot cryogenically treated oxygen free diamond-encrusted copper. Quite the opposite, actually.
I had it for over 6 months but to be honest, I have so many gears that I can mix and match that I don't really need to use it. I use it for the worst case scenario where usually I really need that bass boost. For example, the speaker could be too flat sounding.
An inexpensive addition. Willsenton R8 supply a pair of Klipsch Belles. The bass has been weak. The Loki allows me to adjust without the aid of a sub. It's a useful tool when audio isn't coming through as clear. Received two weeks ago so still learning, but by tweaking the knobs I can find the sweet spot in everything from music to TH-cam reviews. Thanks for the review.
I agree Thomas. I think if a system has a shortcoming then perhaps you correct with this directionally; set it and forget it. But then the cables to hook the tone control up can add additional influence. Say however you arrive at a sound you want with the tone control... just set it where it sounds best with the majority of music you listen to and leave it. If you are getting up from your seat to correct for different recordings you are not enjoying your music and you are rapidly moving towards that area of audiophile insanity where nothing satisfies.
I am buying this based on your review. Is it possible to have this unit 12 feet away from the AVR it will be connected to with long RCA cables to control tone from my listening position? Thanks for this video
There are several reasons to choose an equalizer for your system. Correction of frequency response may be desired to correct for room issues, issues with your stereo sound, adjusting for personal taste, or to correct for poor recordings. I suspect the Loki is most suitable for the last 2 reasons. My experience owning a 1/3 octave eq and a 5 band parametric eq and a spectrum analyzer has been that the bandwidth of correction required for room issues or stereo system correction is not possible with such wide fixed bandwidths. It would be like a surgeon using a sword and would cut more than needed. I prefer to have my eq's on my preamp tape monitor circuit so that it is only in the signal path when desired. I only use it for poor or objectionable recordings. I have found even really good eq's will add a veil to the sound of good recordings and obscure fine detail. Thanks for the review Thomas. I think quality cables (purity of signal) and eq's (tonal adjustment) are best viewed as a way to improve the sound but in very different ways, like apples and oranges not really comparable.
Only Audiophiles ever worry about "what the artist intended". The artist DOES NOT CARE how you listen to their music, so long as you enjoy it (or more importantly, BUY it!). Most artists have crappy audio systems. I know.... I've worked for them, and they just want it to rock on their car system. They worry about capturing a great performance, but not so much about the sound of the final master. That's someone else's job. I love EQs.... True bypass is a must.. and the Loki has it.
Unlike Thomas and his guest and some of you, I use my Lokis all the time, in one room with wall to wall carpeting to fix distortion I was hearing with piano and vibraphone notes, no matter what speakers I was playing. I made a small adjustment with the 8k treble control and the raggedness of the sound disappeared. In another room, I tamed the bass and brought out more of the treble in some Emotiva T2+ speakers. I love these devices.
I agree you can tell difference but i would not say is better or worse, is just tone control. A cable with the appropriate scientific measures will not add color nor dynamics, imaging etc. Why pay thousands in cables to achieve a specific color, when you can buy an equalizer for 200 bucks.
I am patiently waiting your Ares2 review , haha. I do have the Loki too . I will also add that even before you play around with the frequencies, turning on the Loki alone adds some sauce already as it adds a few dbs already. Too much Schiit on my system 😉 : Aegir and Vidar (horizontal biamp) , Schiit Freya + and of course the Loki .
Thomas , I'm going a bit off topic here , but if you get the chance to listen to the recently released Rotel Michi amps and preamp , could you let us know what you think. They are high-end components (not cheap , but not overly expensive either).
I must say I'm a bit surprised by this discussion as it it was too broad brushed. I bought the Loki to see what people were talking about for myself as I grew up in the era of graphic equalizers. Heck back in 1979 I had a Bi amped Zapco System 150 with the PEQ in my 79 Z-28 so I know what equalizers can add. With that said the Loki overall in my headphone set up was a worthwile path to explore, mid fi 2 channel stereo systems it was a nice benefit but reference class systems, at least mine absolutely not. My main system being composed of the Tannoy Churchill Widebands being driven by a pair of Air Tight ATM 211 SET amps going through a custom built active crossover with a Art Audio PX 25 SET amp dedicated to the super tweeter & custom made open baffle bass system. it was a detriment. If I have a bad record then I play those through a much less capable speaker like my old Dahlquest DQ 20 i's or my JBL 4311b's where I found the Loki a nice addition. i also tried it through a very unique custom try-amped electrostatic / ribbon system & was a negative as well. In the end evaluate your music collection & the quality of the recordings along with your system to determine if the Loki might be worth trying. Thomas I say this with the caveat that I respect & like you & I understood the point you were trying to make but if you or any other audio lover doesn't know what a real piano sound like then you should really invest your time in attending as many live performances as you can, as many different kinds as possible even if it might be music you don't think you would like especially small venues, jazz clubs & classical performances. I think it will really benefit your journey in building better 2 channel systems.
I EQ 100% of the time, digital EQ with Equalizer APO. It's because nothing is perfect, no matter how much money you spend. And even if you're living in a parallel universe where you got the perfect system do you have the perfect recordings?. I understand people who want their system to be as pure as possible or the people who want more reasons to buy and play with more toys instead of using an EQ. And of course EQ can not fix everything but for the tonal balance it sure does a fantastic job!.
I only wish that you had spoken more about the frequency ranges of the Loki's controls and how they each affect the music. Are there other equalizers that might do a better job? All that I know after 12+ minutes is that it is supposedly a good equalizer that does not adversely affect the spatial aspects of the sound. Keep plugging away at it, Thomas (despite my comment, I do enjoy your reviews). I was just looking for a bit more on this one.
Meanwhile I use a free EQ program on my PC that can have almost any kind of frequency and bandwidth. I find that even a 32band graphic EQ doesn't do what I want. If you don't use digital, then having a GEQ can be what you can use.
Pulse Audio Equalizer in Linux is a nice 30 band, but what needs that much EQ? It has to be the system, because that's way too much to fix for each track or even album.
@@BigFarm_ah365 I use Equaliser APO and Peace GUI. I mostly use it to reduce the effects of the room on bass, and to tune a speaker to my tastes if it doesn't have enough overall bass/treble etc. The good thing is that you can vary your filter to whatever you want - something that fixed graphic EQ cannot do. So I can set a sharp notch and use a shallow slope (simulating a tone control) at the same time. Oddly enough I don't usually set an EQ for any particular album/songs, just the speakers.
@@RennieAsh that's what I love about the RME DAC, just a 5 band EQ, but totally adjustable. 1 and 5 can be peak/shelf/hi pass/hi cut, all allow freq. gain and Q, same for the bass/treble tone controls and dual EQ if your room gets really weird(or your hearing for headphones).
Hi Thomas. Thanks for this review. I love that you and Steve G talk about gear in language that makes sense to me - the love of music and the excitement of the listening experince. The thing I find interesting about the “eq” issue that I don’t hear being discussed is that we are making eq choices with every piece of gear we buy. KT88 tubes vs EL84? Big difference. Acoustic Suspension vs ported? Big difference. Ortofon Blue vs Goldring 1042? Big difference. British pressing vs Japanese vs German vs US? BIG differences. There is no absolute “purity” IMHO because every system, source and every room is different. And I’m sorry, unless you were in the room with Lindsay Buckingham when they mixed Rumours, you don’t know the intent - hmmm am I hearing John McVie’s bass cabinet the way he intended? haha. Also, I’d throw in that speakers at different life stages sometimes need a little help. I just picked up a set of KLH Model 5s and they are incredible BUT in my room, with the rest of my gear, the upper mids are too forward and when listening at lower volumes, the bass response can be shy. Do I buy a new amp? No! Adjust the eq a tad and dial these amazing speakers in for my ear and my room. Just bought a Loki + thanks to you and Steve.
Thomas, just watched your review on the model 5s and you mentioned that you liked them better when you switched the Cayin output from 8 to 4 ohm. I have a Muzishare x7 with KT88s, currently running the 8 ohm outputs to the model 5s. Did you feel the 4 ohm smoothed out the upper mids and made them less shout-y to use your word? Appreciate your advice!
There making eq choices at each link in our system, different mastering of a recording, amps, speaker tonality, etc, etc. Schiit Loki solved it for me. Just runs a little too warm for my taste.
Many integrated amps have bass and treble controls and I believe that's the case with the Cambridge Audio 650 amp which was the first one mentioned. Why not just use the tone controls from that?
@@ThomasAndStereo Yeah, that kind of makes sense. I have tone controls on my Arcam amps and I find they satisfy my needs.... although I haven't heard a Loki or anything similar to compare it with. Thanks for replying and all the best for the future. I really enjoy your videos
Thanks Thomas - I get the Loki, I also get why it might be controversial to some audiophiles. For me, I intend on getting one, but not for enhancing my music playback system. I have recordings that I've made with one stereo mic, and although the resulting sound serves the purpose, when playing the recordings for others that might be interested in hearing the band perform live, EQ'ing the sound a bit provides a more "musical" presentation. These recording are not meant for critical listening, if we want to do that, sometimes we go for it with multiple mics and a mixer etc - these simple recordings are for musicianship evaluation. Based on what I've heard from you and others, I'm sure it will be a step up from what I'm using, so thanks again for your review.
Audiophiles are much like road cyclists are with their gear: incredibly snotty, annoying twats who look down their noses at anyone not "wearing" the "right" stuff. If you want a little EQ in your listening room/system, by all means add it. Enjoy it. After all, their your ears, right?
"...but, but - you're ruining the recording when you use an equalizer - it's not what the artist intended! (insert more whine -blahblah here)" - that or something similar is what I always hear from hardcore audiophiles on the topic of equalization. And yet, these are the same people who will spend untold sums of money to get 'the best sound', which really just means equipment that will reproduce frequency ranges that people will find pleasant, which is exactly the same thing as using an equalizer in the first place :)
Exactly... it is strange that every recording is just a chosen option of either what the musicians or sound engineer thought was great or acceptable? It does not mean or guarantee that it is sonically great or even engaging. Therefore I hold the position that the smart move is to build a system that suit what we the listener wants or hopes to hear..and therefore having the capacity to adjust the frequencies is great and for some will save a fortune. $200 for a reasonable equaliser is great value. I'm not knocking the purists approach but that is just one option in this wonderful world of good and bad sound and music.
Plutocracy Now! I think you are being sarcastic but this is a very interesting topic. I can't conclude if risers improve sound or not from a scientific POV (I'm just a CS guy not an electrical engineer)... but I have 2 REL subs in my main stereo system and if I keep their speakon cables touching the floor (without a riser) the woofer of each one of the RELs vibrates during silence passages (It's not audible but I can feel the woofers vibrate if I put my hands on them). OTOH If I use a riser and keep the speakon cables always separated from the floor... then the woofers do not move at all during silence passages and, also, when music is playing bass sounds more clear and defined. Oh and It's not a ground problem, because both subs are perfectly grounded following REL indications... they sound very good without risers, but they sound BETTER using risers. That's my experience. So, from an empirical point of view, I think risers are super important and, in my case, they improve the sound or, at very least, bass performance.
Is this EQ is fully analogue without DSP? I'm looking for a basic analogue EQ to compare with my DSP, to "see" how big the analog/digital difference is when playing AAA vinyl.
A bright silver cable vs a dark copper cable. 2 extremes on purpose because a lot of cables are quite similar sounding. Check out the video I made on ultra high end cable.
@@ThomasAndStereo Sorry, Thomas. Silver is just a little better conductor than copper. Cables are passive devices. If there are not enough different electrical charectristics, there cannot be any difference in sound, beyond the placebo effect. To make assertions like those, one can be able to differenciate between cables under strict double-blind test conditions, with a consistent, undubious statistic sigma in the results. There are manufacturers who sell "directive" cables, but they print arrows on their products in case one, by mistake, connect them in the "wrong" direction and cannot perceive the "dramatic improvement" in sound they claim ( ! ). Others even "cryogenize" first their cables (or say they do so) claiming this re-arrange the metallic crystals and improving, "dramatically" again, the sound ( ! ! ! ). They fully ignore the laws of Physics: whatever the changes induced into the metal at ultra-low temperatures, once the material returns to ambient conditions, the metal behaves EXACTLY as it did before cryogenization. Otherwise, superconductors (null electric resistance) will continue being superconductors after surpassing the phase transition point, normally near the zero Kelvin and it's never the case, of course. There is a good lot of snake-oil in the Hi-End cables topic (the "skin effect" is another of my favourites nonsenses: it only takes place in conductors at extremely high frequencies. A little of basics on Electromagnetism is good for the soul).
@@venturarodriguezvallejo9777 If you did bot hear a difference, then there is no difference in your system. Check out my video on ultra high end cables.i
Can't wait to order one of these. I have Klipsch RF5 which are amazing but certainly bright and I am using the EQ on my amp all the time which works ok but this seems like it has all the answers.
Equalizer is super helpful thing. Sometimes it can make badly mastered recording sound better. Sometimes when you want to listen to music quietly the extreme frequencies may be lost and you can bring them back. If you know how to use it it can do magic. Of course boosting frequencies like crazy breaks the sound so you need to be careful. When watching a movie or playing music on a party tweaking the eq may give some oomph or make sound more present without being too loud so people can talk. It's good when eq has a bypass/direct switch so you can eliminate it completely from the loop without unplugging it.
@@ThomasAndStereo They're good period. When you qualify your characterization of a piece of equipment by stating "for the money" it devalues the product. I own a pass labs amp and never say "for the money" when comparing it to a $20,000 airtight amp. It's just good period. I'm not criticizing you but it's a qualifier that's unneccessary. Keep up the good work.
Artists are not stupid they know most systems of the people that buy their albums have EQ or U Shape systems and try to mix so things sound good in Mono. 90s to mid 2000's they mixed alot for radio...
subscribed! - great video.....besides everything that you mentioned isn't it true that the volume of the audio playback affects way frequencies are perceived? I will often set an eq differently for the same recording depending on how loud or soft I am listening to the recording.
I'm curious Thomas, on the earlier part of your audio journey you had stated you didn't hear much difference in various cabling and resisted speaking about them too much. I realize its a contentious subject, but do you pay any attention to cabling in your system or do you just use some decent inexpensive cabling and not worry about it?
I don't hear a lot of difference with power cable but I do with interconnects and speaker cables. I have many cables as I use it to fine tune my system. Currently, I am using DIY speaker cables.
Cable is so sensitive to some people here it will trigger their nerves to fight to attack........ I can see this is also happens in most of the audiophile forums. Too sad : (
@@mphkltd Yeah, I know that it's probably a good idea for Thomas to avoid the topic but I was just curious if he was experimenting and where he stood these days.
You're 100% correct....we can't recreate what the artist intended. We don't even know what that was. As for cables (inc power cables), whether you think you can or can't hear any difference in sound, I think that's prime component where proper blind testing is worthwhile. The results may truly surprise and there will be no doubt one way or the other, that what you're hearing is exactly that & not what you think you're hearing. 😎 This 'purity' jargon is just that. It's hung around in the industry for way too long. It doesn't make sense. The gear that each of us buy is for our pleasure...no more no less. ***No edit, but I can't seem to cut and paste on my phone. Seems 8 started texting in the wrong place. The last paragraph (bit about the jargon), should be the 2nd para. Doesn't make a huge difference, just a bit out of order/disjointed. Sorry about that
as all recordings are recorded differently these things and tone controls and equalizers using them would drive me mad keep getting up to changing it for every song even a Album by the same Artist will sound inconsistent it's the way it was recorded if you pick the right hifi gear you don't need any controls one of the biggest problems is ported speakers that's why I use sealed speakers it doesn't matter what i play i never get bloated bass .
My system is all Schiit components including the Loki. After years of being around diesel engine noise the Loki is the difference between enjoying my music or cringing. 80% of the time the first three bands are flat at their detent but the forth is added to usually around the 1 to 2 o'clock position. Not a lot but just a pinch. For me, perfect.
I tried Salt & Pepper too but found with the tubed Yaqin mc-13s by adding Parsley, Sage, Rosemary & Thyme to my music mix thru the Chord Mojo USB’ed from my Puter, it sounds much better by 22%😂 And if I shut off the music there’s no difference if the Mojo stays in line or not... Enjoy the Music❤️
Thomas I'm not sure if your a a true believer in the cable religion or if you just enjoy driving people like me who think "monoprice and Amazon basics cables are all you'll ever need as long as they are 99% OFC", crazy.
All recordings are fake, and never sound as they do in the studio! Even the great "Bernie Grundman" said ALL formats (CD, LP, etc.) Add there own sound to the music! He called them "little equalizers"! Look up the video series "wax 2015"!
I bought this unit and it was not sent to me by Schiit. If you are in Canada, with the conversion and customs, it is over $200 cdn so keep that in mind.
I brought the Loki before, one thing I notice is if you put its treble too high, you start hearing noise floor. :D And I think pushing my speakers higher or lower than they normally do is "unhealthy" or "unnatural" to them. I would prefer to acquire speakers that meets the range that I want naturally. Therefore I returned it. Also it adds up to additional chain in the system...
Interesting company. I have their magni lll h/a. Runs by a wallwort. It. Sounds okay,sort of like a diet version of the Creek obh 11. When run through my Hafler 75 h/a out, the little magni becomes a beast. If any headphone people out there,here is a little review.www.whathifi.com/us/schiit-audio/magni-3/review
Please check your spam folder left you link
"Cables" is the subject that, more than anything in this arena, shows us the limitations of our scientific model, certainly our engineering model, for why stuff behaves as it does, why we experience things as we do. I think it is a humbling prospect for engineers and others who hold tight to the standard model of science to accept cables matter and that's why it is so controversial. What many people hear just doesn't obey the standard scientific model.....
@@mfr58 Then how are cables designed, if not through science and engineering? Wild guessing and/or trial and error?
If you listen to anything other than pristine recordings, tone controls are a great thing to have. I used to work as an audio engineer and one of the audio engineers who trained me used to always stress cutting first. Cutting of frequencies sounds more natural to our ears than boosting. If you have a recording that annoys you (usually something in the mid band), try cutting those frequencies. Sometimes you don't need more bass or treble you actually need less mid.
Audiophiles “rediscovering” EQ is sort of funny. Most high-end systems can benefit from some level of careful EQ.
Also a lot of poorly engineered recordings can benefit from an eq tweak.
Audiophiles drive me nuts with this crap. Units, amps, pre amps, DATs, speaker wires, crossovers wired to speakers …. BUT a simple tone control knob is in the pathway of the music ruins it? WTF is wrong with you people? First, if you listen to anything that is not recorded 100% acoustical tone controls were used from the first string or drum struck.
"i believe in...making me feel good when i listen to my system". word. totally agree. sometimes audiophiles miss the whole point of music...to feel it. when folks get so technically minded, they miss the point of why most musicians make music...to make others FEEL something. there is more to be said to audio reproduction than just staying true to the source. you should get a smile on your face when you listen. you should feel the music. feel the lyrics. feel the song. that is all that matters.
100%. One of my favorite album is Chic - C'est Chic. Every track is amazing and funky as hell. But the recording is terrible. Even the original LP release, the highs are barely there. The Schiit Loki will bring magic to my turntable next time I play this record.
I bought one last year to experiment on a secondary system, it certainly allows for tuning to you ears preferences.. It's a very convenient and inexpensive way to tune your sound.
Why are audiophiles OK with changing sound and tone with cables and not an equalizer? Because they are flaming hypocrites, that is why! "Oh I want it to sound like it did in the studio" Well unless you were at the actual recording that is impossible. Also what it sounded like live in the studio, compared to what it sounded like when the engineer mixed it to with the speakers he was using don't always match either.
I think they are aiming for flat response. I have to say having heard some system configured that way, it does sound different than a system with a v curve. I personally like v curve but understand my friends who are searching for the flat curve. (Well nothing is actually flat but you know)
"Why are audiophiles OK with changing sound and tone with cables and not an equalizer? " - that's a psychology topic! Do not try to find a rational explanation...
Rumblestrip.NET I suspect the reason is that with better cables that a "cleaner" more detailed reproduction may be possible, not so much a change in tone. Adding an equalizer will not do this. An equalizer is useful for increasing or decreasing bass, treble or mids ( I am sure you know this already). I suspect they are best used to make poor recordings more palatable but they inevitably will make a revealing system less detailed on great recordings. I have my parametric eq on my preamp tape monitor circuit so I can have it in the audio chain when desired and switch it out of circuit when not desired. You are right, hard to ever know exactly what it sounded like in the studio. I suspect with the speakers being used these days in some studios that I may be getting as good or "better" fidelity from my home system.
Brilliant commentary. You are exactly right in your approach, Thomas. You should build a system to suit your tastes and if you use an equalizer or a microwave (love that line) to get that sound then so be it. You and Steve Guttenberg are really the only two doing audio reviews who seem to understand that this hobby is about engaging with the music in a way that moves you, draws you in and pleases you. The idea that one can build a system to present music the way the artist intended is a fools errand. First of all, the artist intended their music to inspire and entertain. Or, perhaps they intended their music to make you think, or feel or hope. But there is zero chance that any artist worries about anyone listening to their music with a bit of midbass boost. The artists intend for their audience to be moved by their music in much the same way a painting might speak to an art aficionado. If one becomes so preoccupied with the esoteric minutia of audiophilia that they are no longer able to engage with the music itself, then no matter how close to the original sound their system gets, they are not experiencing the music as the artist intended.
Also, you raise a very good point and one that not many are willing to admit. So few people have any real world point of reference for how things actually sound. I know more than a few people who have never seen any of their favorite artists live but they think they know how these artists sound. Some think their systems rival a live symphony yet they've never set foot in a symphony hall. In every case these people are simply making up their version of what things should sound like and creating a system that suits their tastes. Which is just as correct as any other way to do it because it makes them want to listen to music and that's the whole point. Where things go awry is when someone decides that their opinion of how something should sound, whether they've heard the thing or not, is the only way it should be enjoyed. Unfortunately, even very experienced reviewers fall into the my way or the highway trap. They feign a lack of bias but if you read or watch enough of their reviews then their preferences become evident and they judge gear against these preferences. Heck, we all do. Unlike yourself, however, they don't admit this. They pretend they are judging products against an accurate sonic reference point when in reality they are simply comparing them to their favorite style of coloration. I used to worry about what these guys thought. But now I have the experience and confidence to filter the valuable information from the biased and often self important garbage. These days, like yourself, I, too will add salt if I feel like it!
isnt everything you put in your system a tone control of some degree?
I guess everything does affect the tone.
Yes.
Even turning the volume up or down a notch changes how we hear the EQ curve which is why
even equipment like Mcintosh will have a volume/ loudness button for lower set volumes...
AND a 3 band EQ!
Unfortunately, this hobby has been taken over by a politically correct brand popularity contest generation. Do what you want. Do what makes you happy. Do what makes your system sound good to you. That would include cables, pro audio gear, audiophile equipment or equalizers. Allot of nuerotic guys over analyzing the hobby, shoving the three letters SVS down everyone's throats and other bullshit garbage. Just do what you want and what sounds good to you. Use the forums and videos as informational guides, not bibles. You're going to be much happier.
Kirk Cunningham 👌🙃✅
Yes I think doing what makes you happy for your system is the first rule of getting into this hobby.
Kirk Cunningham, well put sir!
Thanks, Thomas! One of the reasons I like your channel is your lack of pretentiousness, and this is a perfect example. I have the Loki in my 10 year old son’s Magni/Modi stack for him to learn about/play with EQ. He loves it!
Thanks, I am pretty down to earth in real life.
@@ThomasAndStereo Thomas, they call that 'Being Practical".. LOL That's why we love you Thomas!!!
Damn... lucky son you have I'd say!
My Cambridge integrated has tone controls with the ability to bypass. My 1976 Technics receiver also has tone controls. With the Cambridge I have floor standing totems and from time to time I need to decrease the bass. With the Technics I have small
ADS speakers and I increase the bass a touch. Tone controls come in handy.
My current Yamaha A-S2100 has bypass-able tone controls, my DAC has tone controls and 5 band eq and loudness. Be prepared.
The guy on right is shy of admitting that he pumps up the bass using loki. I get it, I do it too. There's nothing wrong with it. I too have same speakers and Loki for the same reason :D
Who knows what the artist intended! I love my Loki ❤️ My only complaint, I just wish Jason and Mike would make a balanced version. I have found the best place for the Loki is between the preamp and amp and I like to keep that balanced.
They do, maybe it wasn't available a year ago when you posted this though? Its called the Lokius and its twice as much money but it has 6 bands instead of 4 and has balanced or single ended inputs and outputs. Its designed to go with modius and magnius stack of products. The loki was designed to go with the modi and magni products. The lokius will work with any of the products though regardless of if they are balanced or not. Technically the best place to put it I think would be between the dac or switcher and the pre amp. That way the gain running into it is constant and not changing. Or with some sort of tape loop if its available like we used to have. Not sure if that is the thing anymore though. However if that isn't possible putting it between the pre amp and amp really shouldn't cause any issues. I kind of wish it had a gain control so you could correct the gain after adjustments but that seems like a bit much to ask at this price point and size. And from what I understand the adjustments on this are not huge anyway so it might not matter much.
Im definitely getting it. Cause as much as audiophiles hate tone controls me being a musician I do like it just for those really bad recordings. 👌
Everyone had an EQ back in the day... I'm going to listen to music the way that I like, not some shit ass producer, so I'll keep on using my damn EQ if I please
I have never understood audiophile aversion to mild use of EQ. Some can spend weeks or even months tube rolling to change sound. This kind of device, when well designed and not overused, is just a more convenient way of similar tube changes. Adding flavor. Helping redefine weaknesses in recording quality and systems. And until all music is recorded perfectly and every system reproduces perfectly, I'll enhance with eq to make a better connection to the music.
They'd rather spend thousands on cables to accomplish the same thing.
But if you use a device like this then your system won't pass the "purity test" and it will "defial the true integrity" of the artist's work.
("Are your eyes rolling yet? Mine are") 🙄
👽🖖"Na-nu"
EQ is necessary for compensating the room too. Most people don't want to spoil the beauty of a room with ugly room correction panels.
EQ with xlr connectivity is standard on the pro side. Like consumer aka home audio side variety of quality and functionality levels. Good enough to be in recording, mix and mastering, then good enough for playback signal path. ;)
A common assumption, but its not true. The job of a playback system is different than what's used in a recording studio. Everything used in the recording process is part of the recording itself. Its not altering the recording, it is the recording. The job of the playback system is to reproduce the recording with as much transparency as possible. A good example is cables. People always say, why buy high end cables when they used cheap ones in the studio? The answer is simple. You're trying to reproduce the recording as transparent as possible. That includes the sound of whatever cables were used in the studio. It would be like making a tweeter out of brass because cymbals are made out of brass. You need to produce a tweeter that is transparent in such a way that lets you hear the natural timbre of a cymbal, or some other instrument.
Thanks, Thomas or another great review. I couldn't agree with you more. I added the Schiit Loki into my headphone setup about a year ago. The Loki has been a great help to me, I have a bit of tinnitus so when listening to for example Dave Matthews Band some of the recordings are bit harsh for my poor sensitive ears. I can dial the highs back a bit. It works so well for me I added another Loki into my main listening system. You're also correct in that the Loki stays in bypass most of the time only use it about 5%. but it's there when I need it.
I bought one of these recently and found it to be pretty good and like you use it around 5% of the time, usually to tame bright digital recordings or fatten up bass light vinyl. Fortunately my pre-amp has a spare tape loop so I can have it completely switched out of my system when not needed. I think the unit itself is pretty transparent - I suspect the extra RCA cables I have going to and from the unit are having a bigger impact than the unit itself as I can tell the difference when I have the Loki tape loop selected even when it is in bypass mode, but it is then in series with an extra 2.4m of cable!
Yup, good point about the cable,
Bravo, as a chef your salt reference convinced me to buy the Lokius
I use my eq in Audirvana 100 % of the time. And expect to use the Loki for my analog listening quite a lot. Mostly the upper frequencies which bother me with just any speaker. No shame in saying that...😊
You have SAID IT so well about adding some soul to your listening sense. VERY sensible logic. Victor
If you want to use an EQ and don't want to run the signal through an analog EQ, you can get a digital EQ. If you have separate components, you can put a digital EQ in between a transport (CD transport, streamer, computer, etc..), and your DAC. If the signal is already digital, EQing in digital does a lot less harm to the signal, then an analog EQ. Having it before the DAC is much less intrusive.
The problem is money. If (for example.) all cables cost $5.00 dollars most people would "settle down" and want to research and learn how different materials can cause different effects. Instead of crying and making jokes every time they see a cable that cost more than their car. Somebody wants to charge $2,000 dollars for a cable, so what, free enterprise and nobody is holding a gun to your head and making you buy them....and no, I don't have $2000 dollars to spend on cables either, but there's plenty of lower cost options out there. (rant over, thank you.)
Thanks for the comment. I buy used myself so I am kind of ok to pay 25% to 35% of retail price, but even then...having said that, there are some not expensive solutions out there.
I just wish it had balanced in and outputs.
Yeah I've asked JDS labs to make one... apparently its not possible given a balanced circuit. At least not with a passive one (according to them, I'm not an engineer).
@@intoitreviews Interesting, I did not know that.
@@scottyo64 feel free to subscribe to my channel. I have lots of interesting tidbits and knowledge to share.
Thomas, I can't preach this enough. When using any eq on any stereo, we automatically increase frequencies we want more of that the speaker is lacking. When doing this, you are going above reference level and therefore increasing distortion. What we should be doing is decreasing the frequencies we don't like, keeping the distortion low. The eq graph will look the same in the end, but it will be below reference level. This way you can listen to your speakers at loud volumes without the added distortion. Distortion is your worst enemy, it damages your ears and even worse it cooks voice coils.
Oh nice, Never thought about using it this way. I think partially because I play with gear that has a lot of headroom but what you say makes sense.
Incremental increases should not pose a problem. Tone controls allow you to shape the sound to your personal taste - sure beats having to suffer through schiity recordings.
Richard McCoy, please science me how distortion “damages your ears”. Please show your work.
I absolutely agree.
In my tube preamp there are three bypassable tone controls. Every time I decide to use them (mainly because poor original recordings, as you say), I prefer to do it in substracting way. So; if I find, for example, the bass is lacking, I turn down the mid and treble knobs. If the sound is too muffled, I turn down the other two knobs until I find a properly balanced response.
Nice remark.
In practicality, it doesn't really make a difference. If you lower all the bandwidths you perceive as neutral in order to boost the lacking frequency range, you're very likely to increase the overall volume to get the dynamics and loudness level that sounds best for a given song. If the system amplification has even decent headroom, the distortion level is simply a function of driver stresses (excursion and heat). Once you turn up the volume to where you started, driver stress will be the same as had you just boosted a single frequency range.
I'm definitely getting one my music my way🎼🎙👌
Dear Thomas, Gus from Boston here. I've just purchased the Loki! Thank you for the review. I've realized that streaming through Audirvana was a much better experience using an eq to tame some of the treble of my Focals 716. And since my vinyl collection comprises solely of albums from 50s, 60s and 70s , I'm excited to do the same with my analog listening. Interesting thing about the Focals is that even if you bring some of the higher frequencies down a bit, my ears don't feel any loss of the spark, yet, adding an extra layer of "smoothness" to the sound! Funny how such a simple measure can make you speaker sound a "step up", isn't it?
Nice, glad a simple tweak can make a signficant difference.
Amazing times.. I was going buy the Loki, and other Schiit components, and, watching the Schiit Audio reviews..
I really wanted to hear your opinion and insights Thomas.
Good ol' Thomas comes thru, and posted. Unreal yea... Thanks Thomas!!!
Hope it helps.
the loki is a must have for headphone enthusiasts
I chose the McIntosh C53 Pre-amp largely because it comes with an amazing 8-band Analogue EQ.... I honestly can't imagine why anyone would NOT want an EQ on a hi-fi system... I see no upside, especially a quality EQ like this that is 100% defeat-able.
When you adjust an EQ it alters phase on whatever frequencies you're working with. Not everyone will hear the same difference, if any, but the more resolving your system, the more you hear. Also, it can also be a bottleneck for sound quality. If you have really high level components, putting a low cost component that's not equally good as the rest of your system, you're going to lose a lot of what you paid for.
Here's a quick example of what I mean. Its will known that putting potentiometers in the signal path to control things like volume and tone, effect the sound in a negative way, even if you use high end pots like Alps. Instead of using a volume pot in a preamp, most really high end brands design custom volume controls to get around using pots. Its usually done using a stepped ladder of resistors. So, if you want to have a volume that goes from 0 to 99, you need to buy 100 resistors that may cost several dollars each. For assembly, someone has to soldier all 100 resistors into the volume control by hand. Its an extremely labor intensive process. (Quite often you'll see people complaining about the high cost of preamps. They don't see the value. Custom volume controls add a lot to the price.)
So, now that you went through all the trouble to eliminate a volume pot in your system, you plug an EQ into the signal path that has 4 or 6. In some systems, it just doesn't make sense to use an EQ. Just to be clear, I'm not telling anyone to not use an EQ. I'm just explaining why you may not want to use one. If you have one, and are getting good results, then you should have it. You're the one that has to listen to the system, so you should do whatever sounds best to you.
Loki works I have one. Yes it has its limitations but is like the salt analogy Thomas used.
Thomas, I know this is an old video, but have you compared the Loki (or Loki Mini+) to the Lokius? I need some "Umph" added to my turntable's output (going into Zu Omen Mk2s w/entry-level sub) and was considering one of these devices to help lift up the low end to see if that can improve my system. Any thoughts? Is one worth double the price of the other?
(Comments from "actual" experience from others is welcome) 👽✌️
Very sensible guy. I subscribed.
Oh my gosh, do cable haters need a trigger warning now?
lmfao
No no, it is just I lost subscribers in the past and out of respect for the diverse viewers I have, I put a little warning.
Pls do an a-b test with a set of kettle cables and HIFI grade cables on a same set of gear in your upcoming vids.
You nailed it with the salt analogy. Certain audiophiles make certain claims, yet change gear to change tones to their liking? The difference is.....?
Very insightful and IMO agreeable overview, like my loki as a (possibly) inferior system/recording equalizer.. Also use vintage Audiocontrol, Yamaha and Marantz eq's from time to time, not ashamed to admit! 😀
Great review, was thinking about buying a Loki , love tone controls too.😄 we are the new hifi era 😘
Yes, great thing it is transparent enough and that was important to me.
I don’t know if I’d be able to justify getting this, since it costs more than my speakers and turntable combined.
Equalizer is the devil when you would prefer to adjust your tone by changing cables.
I think you miss a couple of points, at least, about tone controls in general, and about this device.
The purist's policy of taking control of equalization out of the hands of owners has a noble (sort of) intent: the owner is so willful, capricious, and ignorant that they should be straightjacketed in the presence of the heavenly anointed equipment. There may be some merit to this -- or not. It depends on the owner. Forever, in broadcasting and such equipment, there has been the issue of equipment *chains* that make up a complex system. If most or every device had tone controls, the result could be chaos in the resultant audio. So, no tone controls were built in. At the final delivery end of the chain, there might well be an equalizer inserted to suit the medium and audience, etc. This led audiophiles to emulate such chains, and to think it would be their ticket to heaven. Maybe.
The other missing aspect of the Loki discussion is that it is *not* your grandfather's 'tone' control; it is a four band equalizer. This narrows the bandwidth of each control to more suitably adjust, at just one point in your system, the various band gains to accommodate the vagaries of artistic, miking, mixing, mastering, recording, playback, power amplification, speakers, and tonal preferences of the listener. Some owners used to do this with graphic equalizers. Some do it with DSP software loops. These last two introduce phase variations, which is why they are not so favorable. The Loki has been designed to *not* introduce phase variations -- preserving the sound staging and imaging.
To compare doing any of this by changing cables is a complete fool's errand. There may be other reasons for changing cables.
Thanks, I did not know that.
Thomas is right. The final, mixed-down recordings are anything but Pure. The instruments and vocals have been processed many times over by the recording studio before the music is released to the public. As an additional note, the many feet of cable which tie all the various studio equipment together is not $400 per foot cryogenically treated oxygen free diamond-encrusted copper. Quite the opposite, actually.
Thomas, your salt analogy with the master chef's spaghetti......excellent !
You finally took the plunge with the Loki. It is a nice little piece of kit.
I had it for over 6 months but to be honest, I have so many gears that I can mix and match that I don't really need to use it. I use it for the worst case scenario where usually I really need that bass boost. For example, the speaker could be too flat sounding.
Yes great tone controls on my 80s technics receivers!
I wish they kept it in modern gear.
Why did they remove them? Save $.? Grest Reviews!!!
An inexpensive addition. Willsenton R8 supply a pair of Klipsch Belles. The bass has been weak. The Loki allows me to adjust without the aid of a sub. It's a useful tool when audio isn't coming through as clear. Received two weeks ago so still learning, but by tweaking the knobs I can find the sweet spot in everything from music to TH-cam reviews. Thanks for the review.
I agree Thomas. I think if a system has a shortcoming then perhaps you correct with this directionally; set it and forget it. But then the cables to hook the tone control up can add additional influence. Say however you arrive at a sound you want with the tone control... just set it where it sounds best with the majority of music you listen to and leave it. If you are getting up from your seat to correct for different recordings you are not enjoying your music and you are rapidly moving towards that area of audiophile insanity where nothing satisfies.
lol, love it. Audiophile insanity :)
I am buying this based on your review. Is it possible to have this unit 12 feet away from the AVR it will
be connected to with long RCA cables to control tone from my listening position? Thanks for this video
There are several reasons to choose an equalizer for your system. Correction of frequency response may be desired to correct for room issues, issues with your stereo sound, adjusting for personal taste, or to correct for poor recordings. I suspect the Loki is most suitable for the last 2 reasons. My experience owning a 1/3 octave eq and a 5 band parametric eq and a spectrum analyzer has been that the bandwidth of correction required for room issues or stereo system correction is not possible with such wide fixed bandwidths. It would be like a surgeon using a sword and would cut more than needed. I prefer to have my eq's on my preamp tape monitor circuit so that it is only in the signal path when desired. I only use it for poor or objectionable recordings. I have found even really good eq's will add a veil to the sound of good recordings and obscure fine detail. Thanks for the review Thomas. I think quality cables (purity of signal) and eq's (tonal adjustment) are best viewed as a way to improve the sound but in very different ways, like apples and oranges not really comparable.
True. The artists intent is always altered by the audio engineer based upon marketing and the labels discretion.
As far as cables are concerned, I listen to "Mr. Cable" at www.roger-russell.com
Hi Thomas,
Do you know if changing the power supply to a LPS or a very good SMPS the Loki improves?
Great videos :-D
Filipe
I don't know, sorry.
Only Audiophiles ever worry about "what the artist intended". The artist DOES NOT CARE how you listen to their music, so long as you enjoy it (or more importantly, BUY it!). Most artists have crappy audio systems. I know.... I've worked for them, and they just want it to rock on their car system. They worry about capturing a great performance, but not so much about the sound of the final master. That's someone else's job. I love EQs.... True bypass is a must.. and the Loki has it.
Unlike Thomas and his guest and some of you, I use my Lokis all the time, in one room with wall to wall carpeting to fix distortion I was hearing with piano and vibraphone notes, no matter what speakers I was playing. I made a small adjustment with the 8k treble control and the raggedness of the sound disappeared. In another room, I tamed the bass and brought out more of the treble in some Emotiva T2+ speakers. I love these devices.
I love my Loki, but it running a little warm. Would that cause a problem to my integrated amp?
@@gokhanersan8561 I doubt it. Mine runs a little warm, too. Check with the manufacturer if you have concerns.
@@willisbush956 ok. Manufacturer says it is normal for it to run warm. I really want to continue to use this Loki.
I agree you can tell difference but i would not say is better or worse, is just tone control. A cable with the appropriate scientific measures will not add color nor dynamics, imaging etc. Why pay thousands in cables to achieve a specific color, when you can buy an equalizer for 200 bucks.
I am patiently waiting your Ares2 review , haha. I do have the Loki too . I will also add that even before you play around with the frequencies, turning on the Loki alone adds some sauce already as it adds a few dbs already. Too much Schiit on my system 😉 : Aegir and Vidar (horizontal biamp) , Schiit Freya + and of course the Loki .
I'm expecting too 😁
tell your friend with the pricey system to try the ifi dc purifier or a better power supply with the loki i think that's the problem
Thomas , I'm going a bit off topic here , but if you get the chance to listen to the recently released Rotel Michi amps and preamp , could you let us know what you think. They are high-end components (not cheap , but not overly expensive either).
I remember hearing them at the Toronto audio show and it was really good.
Hi Thomas. Sure tone control is the devil. It is the Devil of HIFI business profits.
I must say I'm a bit surprised by this discussion as it it was too broad brushed. I bought the Loki to see what people were talking about for myself as I grew up in the era of graphic equalizers. Heck back in 1979 I had a Bi amped Zapco System 150 with the PEQ in my 79 Z-28 so I know what equalizers can add. With that said the Loki overall in my headphone set up was a worthwile path to explore, mid fi 2 channel stereo systems it was a nice benefit but reference class systems, at least mine absolutely not. My main system being composed of the Tannoy Churchill Widebands being driven by a pair of Air Tight ATM 211 SET amps going through a custom built active crossover with a Art Audio PX 25 SET amp dedicated to the super tweeter & custom made open baffle bass system. it was a detriment. If I have a bad record then I play those through a much less capable speaker like my old Dahlquest DQ 20 i's or my JBL 4311b's where I found the Loki a nice addition. i also tried it through a very unique custom try-amped electrostatic / ribbon system & was a negative as well. In the end evaluate your music collection & the quality of the recordings along with your system to determine if the Loki might be worth trying. Thomas I say this with the caveat that I respect & like you & I understood the point you were trying to make but if you or any other audio lover doesn't know what a real piano sound like then you should really invest your time in attending as many live performances as you can, as many different kinds as possible even if it might be music you don't think you would like especially small venues, jazz clubs & classical performances. I think it will really benefit your journey in building better 2 channel systems.
Yup, thanks for the advice, I should go listen to more live performance. I am missing out if I don't.
I EQ 100% of the time, digital EQ with Equalizer APO.
It's because nothing is perfect, no matter how much money you spend. And even if you're living in a parallel universe where you got the perfect system do you have the perfect recordings?.
I understand people who want their system to be as pure as possible or the people who want more reasons to buy and play with more toys instead of using an EQ.
And of course EQ can not fix everything but for the tonal balance it sure does a fantastic job!.
Yeah, I understand both side and I think it is fine if you want to add and prefer not to. Ultimately, it is what works for your system.
Schiit now have a high end EQ with remote. It pricey but it might be a good one. I can’t see any review of it which is unfortunate.
I only wish that you had spoken more about the frequency ranges of the Loki's controls and how they each affect the music. Are there other equalizers that might do a better job? All that I know after 12+ minutes is that it is supposedly a good equalizer that does not adversely affect the spatial aspects of the sound.
Keep plugging away at it, Thomas (despite my comment, I do enjoy your reviews). I was just looking for a bit more on this one.
Thanks, yeah the equalizer is very straight forward since it is 4 band. Maybe there is something in the manual?
I use my arctis nova pro teck that comes with headphones 😀
Some records suck and some are super nice, but this will help balance that input.
Salt & sugar! Makes bitter sweet and bitter sweet is good 👍 just as good tone is good to personalize our taste.
its a great eq just got one a week ago I also have the Schiit magni and modi I recommend this eq.
YUP, on my next purchase list. Thank you.
%90 percent of the music lacks trebble to my ears because i am old. I use eq all the time.
Meanwhile I use a free EQ program on my PC that can have almost any kind of frequency and bandwidth. I find that even a 32band graphic EQ doesn't do what I want. If you don't use digital, then having a GEQ can be what you can use.
Pulse Audio Equalizer in Linux is a nice 30 band, but what needs that much EQ? It has to be the system, because that's way too much to fix for each track or even album.
@@BigFarm_ah365 I use Equaliser APO and Peace GUI. I mostly use it to reduce the effects of the room on bass, and to tune a speaker to my tastes if it doesn't have enough overall bass/treble etc. The good thing is that you can vary your filter to whatever you want - something that fixed graphic EQ cannot do.
So I can set a sharp notch and use a shallow slope (simulating a tone control) at the same time.
Oddly enough I don't usually set an EQ for any particular album/songs, just the speakers.
@@RennieAsh that's what I love about the RME DAC, just a 5 band EQ, but totally adjustable. 1 and 5 can be peak/shelf/hi pass/hi cut, all allow freq. gain and Q, same for the bass/treble tone controls and dual EQ if your room gets really weird(or your hearing for headphones).
Also, what the artist intended is not often what is represented in the final mix.
Hi Thomas. Thanks for this review. I love that you and Steve G talk about gear in language that makes sense to me - the love of music and the excitement of the listening experince. The thing I find interesting about the “eq” issue that I don’t hear being discussed is that we are making eq choices with every piece of gear we buy. KT88 tubes vs EL84? Big difference. Acoustic Suspension vs ported? Big difference. Ortofon Blue vs Goldring 1042? Big difference. British pressing vs Japanese vs German vs US? BIG differences. There is no absolute “purity” IMHO because every system, source and every room is different. And I’m sorry, unless you were in the room with Lindsay Buckingham when they mixed Rumours, you don’t know the intent - hmmm am I hearing John McVie’s bass cabinet the way he intended? haha. Also, I’d throw in that speakers at different life stages sometimes need a little help. I just picked up a set of KLH Model 5s and they are incredible BUT in my room, with the rest of my gear, the upper mids are too forward and when listening at lower volumes, the bass response can be shy. Do I buy a new amp? No! Adjust the eq a tad and dial these amazing speakers in for my ear and my room. Just bought a Loki + thanks to you and Steve.
Thomas, just watched your review on the model 5s and you mentioned that you liked them better when you switched the Cayin output from 8 to 4 ohm. I have a Muzishare x7 with KT88s, currently running the 8 ohm outputs to the model 5s. Did you feel the 4 ohm smoothed out the upper mids and made them less shout-y to use your word? Appreciate your advice!
There making eq choices at each link in our system, different mastering of a recording, amps, speaker tonality, etc, etc. Schiit Loki solved it for me. Just runs a little too warm for my taste.
Many integrated amps have bass and treble controls and I believe that's the case with the Cambridge Audio 650 amp which was the first one mentioned. Why not just use the tone controls from that?
Sure, if you have it built in BUT not all tone control work as well. It all depends on how far you can push your amp before it distorts.
@@ThomasAndStereo Yeah, that kind of makes sense. I have tone controls on my Arcam amps and I find they satisfy my needs.... although I haven't heard a Loki or anything similar to compare it with. Thanks for replying and all the best for the future. I really enjoy your videos
Thanks Thomas - I get the Loki, I also get why it might be controversial to some audiophiles. For me, I intend on getting one, but not for enhancing my music playback system. I have recordings that I've made with one stereo mic, and although the resulting sound serves the purpose, when playing the recordings for others that might be interested in hearing the band perform live, EQ'ing the sound a bit provides a more "musical" presentation. These recording are not meant for critical listening, if we want to do that, sometimes we go for it with multiple mics and a mixer etc - these simple recordings are for musicianship evaluation. Based on what I've heard from you and others, I'm sure it will be a step up from what I'm using, so thanks again for your review.
Yup, that thing can do wonders. Thanks.
Audiophiles are much like road cyclists are with their gear: incredibly snotty, annoying twats who look down their noses at anyone not "wearing" the "right" stuff. If you want a little EQ in your listening room/system, by all means add it. Enjoy it. After all, their your ears, right?
"...but, but - you're ruining the recording when you use an equalizer - it's not what the artist intended! (insert more whine -blahblah here)" - that or something similar is what I always hear from hardcore audiophiles on the topic of equalization. And yet, these are the same people who will spend untold sums of money to get 'the best sound', which really just means equipment that will reproduce frequency ranges that people will find pleasant, which is exactly the same thing as using an equalizer in the first place :)
I use an EQ on my PC, because that room bass peak is "not what the artist intended" lol
Exactly... it is strange that every recording is just a chosen option of either what the musicians or sound engineer thought was great or acceptable? It does not mean or guarantee that it is sonically great or even engaging. Therefore I hold the position that the smart move is to build a system that suit what we the listener wants or hopes to hear..and therefore having the capacity to adjust the frequencies is great and for some will save a fortune. $200 for a reasonable equaliser is great value.
I'm not knocking the purists approach but that is just one option in this wonderful world of good and bad sound and music.
Cable risers are the most important part of a system. My solid gold cable risers make everything sound better.
Be sure to place the risers such that the sound runs downhill from the amp to the speakers. That way you can overcome the gravity effect.
Plutocracy Now! I think you are being sarcastic but this is a very interesting topic. I can't conclude if risers improve sound or not from a scientific POV (I'm just a CS guy not an electrical engineer)... but I have 2 REL subs in my main stereo system and if I keep their speakon cables touching the floor (without a riser) the woofer of each one of the RELs vibrates during silence passages (It's not audible but I can feel the woofers vibrate if I put my hands on them).
OTOH If I use a riser and keep the speakon cables always separated from the floor... then the woofers do not move at all during silence passages and, also, when music is playing bass sounds more clear and defined. Oh and It's not a ground problem, because both subs are perfectly grounded following REL indications... they sound very good without risers, but they sound BETTER using risers. That's my experience.
So, from an empirical point of view, I think risers are super important and, in my case, they improve the sound or, at very least, bass performance.
@Rile Stream no, just wood risers made by me.
@@stevescudder1507 Great! 😂😂😂
@@net_news Sorry, my friend. You're confussing an ACOUSTIC (mechanical) isolation with an impossible electrical effect.
I have two Lokis, one in my turntable path and one in my digital path. Love!
I have one Loki for the digital path and the turntable too. Thanks to y-cable.
it work well with hifi system not just earphone
Is this EQ is fully analogue without DSP?
I'm looking for a basic analogue EQ to compare with my DSP, to "see" how big the analog/digital difference is when playing AAA vinyl.
Yeah, I think it is analog. Email them to confirm.
@@ThomasAndStereo Thanks, will do.
The whole cable thing ... which 2 cables do you let people “listen” to that changes their mind?
Try Van den Hul vs Nordost. Dark vs bright.
A bright silver cable vs a dark copper cable. 2 extremes on purpose because a lot of cables are quite similar sounding. Check out the video I made on ultra high end cable.
@@wildcat1065 I've tryed both (and Monster, Cardas and Audioquest) of the SAME lenght and section.
No difference of any type.
@@ThomasAndStereo Sorry, Thomas.
Silver is just a little better conductor than copper. Cables are passive devices. If there are not enough different electrical charectristics, there cannot be any difference in sound, beyond the placebo effect.
To make assertions like those, one can be able to differenciate between cables under strict double-blind test conditions, with a consistent, undubious statistic sigma in the results.
There are manufacturers who sell "directive" cables, but they print arrows on their products in case one, by mistake, connect them in the "wrong" direction and cannot perceive the "dramatic improvement" in sound they claim ( ! ).
Others even "cryogenize" first their cables (or say they do so) claiming this re-arrange the metallic crystals and improving, "dramatically" again, the sound ( ! ! ! ). They fully ignore the laws of Physics: whatever the changes induced into the metal at ultra-low temperatures, once the material returns to ambient conditions, the metal behaves EXACTLY as it did before cryogenization. Otherwise, superconductors (null electric resistance) will continue being superconductors after surpassing the phase transition point, normally near the zero Kelvin and it's never the case, of course.
There is a good lot of snake-oil in the Hi-End cables topic (the "skin effect" is another of my favourites nonsenses: it only takes place in conductors at extremely high frequencies. A little of basics on Electromagnetism is good for the soul).
@@venturarodriguezvallejo9777 If you did bot hear a difference, then there is no difference in your system. Check out my video on ultra high end cables.i
Can't wait to order one of these. I have Klipsch RF5 which are amazing but certainly bright and I am using the EQ on my amp all the time which works ok but this seems like it has all the answers.
Equalizer is super helpful thing. Sometimes it can make badly mastered recording sound better. Sometimes when you want to listen to music quietly the extreme frequencies may be lost and you can bring them back. If you know how to use it it can do magic. Of course boosting frequencies like crazy breaks the sound so you need to be careful. When watching a movie or playing music on a party tweaking the eq may give some oomph or make sound more present without being too loud so people can talk. It's good when eq has a bypass/direct switch so you can eliminate it completely from the loop without unplugging it.
Right don't laugh as it's all i have. 😊 Would this be worth buying and adding to a Technics HD301? No laughing at the back of the class. 😊
Loki Is a demon's name, so possibly this equalizer is the devil.
💀🤓
Nice one!
I own 2 pieces of schiit and I will add a 3rd. Thanks for reviewing.
Yeah, they are good value for the money.
@@ThomasAndStereo They're good period. When you qualify your characterization of a piece of equipment by stating "for the money" it devalues the product. I own a pass labs amp and never say "for the money" when comparing it to a $20,000 airtight amp. It's just good period. I'm not criticizing you but it's a qualifier that's unneccessary. Keep up the good work.
Artists are not stupid they know most systems of the people that buy their albums have EQ or U Shape systems and try to mix so things sound good in Mono. 90s to mid 2000's they mixed alot for radio...
subscribed! - great video.....besides everything that you mentioned isn't it true that the volume of the audio playback affects way frequencies are perceived? I will often set an eq differently for the same recording depending on how loud or soft I am listening to the recording.
I'm curious Thomas, on the earlier part of your audio journey you had stated you didn't hear much difference in various cabling and resisted speaking about them too much. I realize its a contentious subject, but do you pay any attention to cabling in your system or do you just use some decent inexpensive cabling and not worry about it?
I don't hear a lot of difference with power cable but I do with interconnects and speaker cables. I have many cables as I use it to fine tune my system. Currently, I am using DIY speaker cables.
Cable is so sensitive to some people here it will trigger their nerves to fight to attack........ I can see this is also happens in most of the audiophile forums. Too sad : (
@@mphkltd Yeah, I know that it's probably a good idea for Thomas to avoid the topic but I was just curious if he was experimenting and where he stood these days.
did you compare with pre dac FIR minidsp instead? I think it's better value!
I'll believe you can tell the Loki is in your system if you can prove it with a blind test
Well just buy one and test it, who cares if someone else passes a blind test, most important is you.
Which shipping method did you choose to ship to Canada? Also, how is the unit holding up so far? Any scratchy sounding knobs when turning them?
There is now a 6 band version of this with balanced inputs. Maybe you could review this.
You're 100% correct....we can't recreate what the artist intended. We don't even know what that was.
As for cables (inc power cables), whether you think you can or can't hear any difference in sound, I think that's prime component where proper blind testing is worthwhile. The results may truly surprise and there will be no doubt one way or the other, that what you're hearing is exactly that & not what you think you're hearing.
😎
This 'purity' jargon is just that. It's hung around in the industry for way too long. It doesn't make sense. The gear that each of us buy is for our pleasure...no more no less.
***No edit, but I can't seem to cut and paste on my phone. Seems 8 started texting in the wrong place.
The last paragraph (bit about the jargon), should be the 2nd para. Doesn't make a huge difference, just a bit out of order/disjointed. Sorry about that
as all recordings are recorded differently these things and tone controls and equalizers using them would drive me mad keep getting up to changing it for every song even a Album by the same Artist will sound inconsistent it's the way it was recorded if you pick the right hifi gear you don't need any controls one of the biggest problems is ported speakers that's why I use sealed speakers it doesn't matter what i play i never get bloated bass .
My system is all Schiit components including the Loki. After years of being around diesel engine noise the Loki is the difference between enjoying my music or cringing. 80% of the time the first three bands are flat at their detent but the forth is added to usually around the 1 to 2 o'clock position. Not a lot but just a pinch. For me, perfect.
Yup 100% agree. It can be the difference between enjoying and cringing that little unit can do.
I tried Salt & Pepper too but found with the tubed Yaqin mc-13s by adding Parsley, Sage, Rosemary & Thyme to my music mix thru the Chord Mojo USB’ed from my Puter, it sounds much better by 22%😂 And if I shut off the music there’s no difference if the Mojo stays in line or not... Enjoy the Music❤️
Thomas I'm not sure if your a a true believer in the cable religion or if you just enjoy driving people like me who think "monoprice and Amazon basics cables are all you'll ever need as long as they are 99% OFC", crazy.
th-cam.com/video/ItFctnwSmDU/w-d-xo.html
@@ThomasAndStereo bahahahahahah
All recordings are fake, and never sound as they do in the studio! Even the great "Bernie Grundman" said ALL formats (CD, LP, etc.) Add there own sound to the music! He called them "little equalizers"! Look up the video series "wax 2015"!
Cool. I do understand both sides because even though all recording are fake, it is fake to how the artist or recording engineer wanted it to be.
The Loki is a gem.