• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Schiit Loki Mini+ Equalizer Review

Rate this Equalizer:

  • 1. Poor (headless panther)

    Votes: 61 32.8%
  • 2. Not terrible (postman panther)

    Votes: 82 44.1%
  • 3. Fine (happy panther)

    Votes: 33 17.7%
  • 4. Great (golfing panther)

    Votes: 10 5.4%

  • Total voters
    186

Robbo99999

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
6,875
Likes
6,672
Location
UK
I don't disagree with you there. My speakers are mostly decent stuff now and I try to keep music pretty neutral out of them (but experimenting with the lokius is fun sometimes). I just meant that I don't see any MiniDSP as a substitute for the loki, where one would use a loki.
And the lomi is certainly more usable to make some YouTube videos tolerable. Sometimes people have useful content with poor audio mastering. (This happened to me last night with a teardown video for some tablet)

And perfect is good. But for gaming, I can do better than perfect with a loki (or now my lokius). I just have to turn up the volume in a band where I might otherwise miss an audio cue. The very wide bandwidths on each knob makes this useful and less harmful to audio fidelity, I think.
Yeah, I can see what you mean for your use case.
 
Joined
Sep 6, 2022
Messages
39
Likes
63
I think I'd prefer them to effect just the frequency areas on which they're focused rather than skewing the whole frequency response

I'm fairly confident that Amirs graphs are making it seem... worse than it is, on that front. How do you feel about the version I posted on the first page of the thread?
Purple line in the middle is what you get with all knobs centered, the other lines are one knob maxed out one way or the other.

As for having all knobs maxed out at the same time... I can't actually think of a good reason that it should be flat at that point, but there's not much reason for it to be wavy either.
It makes some sense to me that the extremes would have more range since those are more likely to need bigger tweaking, I would think.
 

mhardy6647

Grand Contributor
Joined
Dec 12, 2019
Messages
11,217
Likes
24,180
Oh.
Like the ruby slippers* -- we've apparently had the answer all along. We just didn't know it.
From a very current tone control discussion @ AA.


from the link above:
And if you want an audio celebrity endorsement, Bob Ludwig has three of 'em.

https://www.manley.com/pro/msmp

well, twist me timbre, matey! :cool:

msmp-ft-2020.jpg


_______________________
*
i.e., these ruby slippers...
wizard-of-oz-slippers.jpg
 

KR500

Active Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2019
Messages
134
Likes
107
The knobs on the Loki that control the lowest and highest frequencies 40 and 8 are 12 db cut/boost and the middle two knobs are 6 db.
I use minimal adjustments of 1 to 1.5db’s , the only exception is for my Beyerdynamic headphones to notch the spike out at 7 k where I cut 4 or 5db
 

Robbo99999

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
6,875
Likes
6,672
Location
UK
I'm fairly confident that Amirs graphs are making it seem... worse than it is, on that front. How do you feel about the version I posted on the first page of the thread?
Purple line in the middle is what you get with all knobs centered, the other lines are one knob maxed out one way or the other.

As for having all knobs maxed out at the same time... I can't actually think of a good reason that it should be flat at that point, but there's not much reason for it to be wavy either.
It makes some sense to me that the extremes would have more range since those are more likely to need bigger tweaking, I would think.
Yes, your graph shows more clearly what each of the knobs do. That makes the tone controls look better than I originally thought. For the bass tone control it could have been useful to have had one that mimicked a 105Hz Low Shelf (that Oratory uses as his bass filter tweak), that way you can manipulate the bass whilst staying away from the muddy zone - but we're praps talking more here about EQ rather than Tone Controls. Would be pretty cool as far a manual tone control would be, if you could have one that just tilted the whole frequency response perfectly linearly like a see-saw, but I expect there's reasons for why those might not exist in manual tone controls.
 

PeteL

Major Contributor
Joined
Jun 1, 2020
Messages
3,303
Likes
3,838
effect just the frequency areas on which they're focused
It is called a brickwall filter, Impossible in the analog domain and would create breaks in the frequency response, that would not be pretty, now you can think ok then not brickwall but steeper slope, higher order? OK but then the chosen center frequency would be more enhanced than anything around it, but then which frequency exactly you want to enhance? Hey I am not saying that it's perfect. It does have limited applications. But I don't think, at all, it is about as you say as "Not well implemented". I do prefer a parametric EQ, even a semi parametric EQ. Or just a sweep able mid with bass and low shelf. Much more flexible, but I think what they implemented, they implemented it "well". Doing real EQ without measurements for the average music listener will create more harm than good. Not many have access to a measument microphone. Schiit customer base are not audio professionals.
 

restorer-john

Grand Contributor
Joined
Mar 1, 2018
Messages
12,580
Likes
38,281
Location
Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia
??? That is not the point of that graph.

Well, what is the point?

You said the following:

"I set all the controls at max and min which should just set the unit up for flat response and act as extra or negative gain. Instead of that, we get quite bit of deviation. This will make it hard to interpret what the unit is doing by looking at the controls."

This is just plain wrong. When you set all the controls at max or min and sweep the unit, it will not, nor should not, be flat.

The controls should be set in the middle for such a sweep and that is merely to see the deviation from flat when in circuit, but not bypassed.
 
Last edited:

Kc1234

New Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2021
Messages
4
Likes
1
No it is not. There is no intelligence in the software. It is just a pure frequency sweep. That the graphs cross at 1 kHz is due to the way the filters are implemented in Loki. Not because I did anything special. Yes, I set reference signal at 1 kHz but that does nothing to automatically align anything.
The problem is exactly because you used reference signal at 1kHz.
Lets say if you use 20Hz as you reference, then you turn the bass knob (C1) up, then your graph will show that it does nothing to the 20Hz but attenuating the entire frequency range. Because all other frequencies is attenuated in relative to the boosted 20Hz signal.
 
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
44,368
Likes
234,394
Location
Seattle Area
The problem is exactly because you used reference signal at 1kHz.
Lets say if you use 20Hz as you reference, then you turn the bass knob (C1) up, then your graph will show that it does nothing to the 20Hz but attenuating the entire frequency range. Because all other frequencies is attenuated in relative to the boosted 20Hz signal.
What? If I set 20 Hz to reference when control is at 12:00 o'clock, the boosting bass will absolutely raise that level if the EQ works the way one expects. If it instead it kept 20 Hz the same and reduced the rest, it is a function of the device and totally non-intuitive.
 
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
44,368
Likes
234,394
Location
Seattle Area
Well, what is the point?
Just whether it is a flat line or not. It matters not how smooth the deviation was as you commented.

As to why it shouldn't, if the filters have the right slopes and are distanced correctly, then they should all sum to neutral at max in addition to center. On the other hand if each one has a different gain/slope then you get what I showed. Which is again, non-intuitive.
 

Kc1234

New Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2021
Messages
4
Likes
1
What? If I set 20 Hz to reference when control is at 12:00 o'clock, the boosting bass will absolutely raise that level if the EQ works the way one expects. If it instead it kept 20 Hz the same and reduced the rest, it is a function of the device and totally non-intuitive.
You might want to try to actually rerun your graph, using a different frequency as reference point and see what happens.
#17 graph already explained pretty well. It is really not that difficult to understand...

If you use 20Hz as reference, then 20Hz is always considered 0dB in the graph.
You turn up the C1 and boost the 20dB signal, then all other frequencies will show negative.. but 20Hz, being the reference point, will still be at 0dB..
 
Last edited:

Mike-48

Active Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2020
Messages
163
Likes
224
Location
Portland, Oregon
Seems like a pretty pointless product nowadays (miniDSP and software parametric EQ possibilities to rival and outdo)
For EQ that always remain the same, I agree that miniDSP and parametric EQ can do that fine and with more flexibility, at least for digital signals. However, if you are trying to fix recordings that bother you, i.e., you want a more versatile tone control and something that can be adjusted in seconds without interrupting the music, the Loki models are better suited. The EQ on my miniDSP is nothing I'd want to adjust with music playing (I'm not sure it's even possible) to suit a particular recording.
 

restorer-john

Grand Contributor
Joined
Mar 1, 2018
Messages
12,580
Likes
38,281
Location
Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia
As to why it shouldn't, if the filters have the right slopes and are distanced correctly, then they should all sum to neutral at max in addition to center.

The right slopes and distanced correctly? What are you talking about? It's not a graphic EQ with spacing at fractions of an octave across a 20-20kHz bandwidth and equal boost/cut for each band.

The device has 4 controls with specifically chosen centre frequencies. The maximum boost/cut is specified as +/-12dB at 20Hz and 8kHz and +/-6dB at 400Hz and 2kHz. Clearly it can never sum to 'neutral at max' and neither should it. That's not how tone controls work.

Shiit's own AP test report shows the controls and their boost characteristics are accurate.
 

Kc1234

New Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2021
Messages
4
Likes
1
The right slopes and distanced correctly? What are you talking about? It's not a graphic EQ with spacing at fractions of an octave across a 20-20kHz bandwidth and equal boost/cut for each band.

The device has 4 controls with specifically chosen centre frequencies. The maximum boost/cut is specified as +/-12dB at 20Hz and 8kHz and +/-6dB at 400Hz and 2kHz. Clearly it can never sum to 'neutral at max' and neither should it. That's not how tone controls work.

Shiit's own AP test report shows the controls and their boost characteristics are accurate.
Well, one can't wake a person who pretends to be asleep.
 

mhardy6647

Grand Contributor
Joined
Dec 12, 2019
Messages
11,217
Likes
24,180
The right slopes and distanced correctly? What are you talking about? It's not a graphic EQ with spacing at fractions of an octave across a 20-20kHz bandwidth and equal boost/cut for each band.

The device has 4 controls with specifically chosen centre frequencies. The maximum boost/cut is specified as +/-12dB at 20Hz and 8kHz and +/-6dB at 400Hz and 2kHz. Clearly it can never sum to 'neutral at max' and neither should it. That's not how tone controls work.

Shiit's own AP test report shows the controls and their boost characteristics are accurate.
Found this out in cyberspace & presume it's reflective of the performance of this beast. Looks like a four band EQ with very low "Q" for each band(?).

source: https://www.reddit.com/r/headphones/comments/72r5x7
XGDm140.png


Looks like one could do quite a bit of damage (aesthetically, and -- with too much LF boost -- literally) with one of these little boxes.

Kind of reminds me -- umm... parametrically ;) -- of this ...

1685152113757.png

source: https://www.radioshackcatalogs.com/flipbook/1977_radioshack_catalog.html page 25
 
Last edited:

restorer-john

Grand Contributor
Joined
Mar 1, 2018
Messages
12,580
Likes
38,281
Location
Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia
Looks like one could do quite a bit of damage (aesthetically, and -- with too much LF boost -- literally) with one of these little boxes.

The issues may arise with vinyl.

I see no trailing off of boost, unlike something designed in the vinyl era, like the Realistic bass enhancer/subsonic filter I linked in a previous post/thread.

 
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
44,368
Likes
234,394
Location
Seattle Area
If you use 20Hz as reference, then 20Hz is always considered 0dB in the graph.
Do you even know what you are writing? What on earth would force it to be zero if you boost that frequency? Magic?
 

Kc1234

New Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2021
Messages
4
Likes
1
Do you even know what you are writing? What on earth would force it to be zero if you boost that frequency? Magic?
No I don't. Actually you are right, you must be, I apologize.

With a second thought I find your graphs accurately represents how Loki works
Loki is designed this way that no matter how you turn the knob, 1kHz remains unchanged as your graph says. I take back whatever wrong comment and misinformation I posted. I am so sorry.
 
Joined
Sep 6, 2022
Messages
39
Likes
63
I see no trailing off of boost, unlike something designed in the vinyl era, like the Realistic bass enhancer/subsonic filter I linked in a previous post/thread.

It does drop off just a little as you get lower. Probably not as much as we'd like, for vinyl.

Sorry, all I have right now is a photo of the screen from back when I tested this.
 

Attachments

  • 20230320_064312.jpg
    20230320_064312.jpg
    338.5 KB · Views: 53
Joined
Sep 6, 2022
Messages
39
Likes
63
Do you even know what you are writing? What on earth would force it to be zero if you boost that frequency? Magic?

I believe he's writing that -more or less- because that's precisely the definition of a reference frequency.

On your graph, anything higher in amplitude than the reference frequency will be above the zero dB line. Anything lower amplitude than the reference frequency will be below zero dB on the graph.
Since 1khz is the reference frequency, in your graph, it will always be equal in amplitude to the reference frequecy; the reference frequency is always equal to zero dB.

And for another way of looking at this... do you really think Schiit would have managed to keep a rocksteady 1khz when it's all implemented in analog? They couldn't keep the 20hz knob from affecting 20khz, after all.


Edit for clarity: what I said in the middle paragraph is true for any individual sweep you took. The reference amplitude is not the same for each sweep.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom