axle11
New Head-Fier
My Mani died right after the warranty expired. Bummed but oh well.
Schiit Happened: The Story of the World's Most Improbable Start-Up
- Thread starter Jason Stoddard
- Start date
-
- Tags
- schiit audio schiit-audio
Paladin79
Previously MOT: Cables For Less
This is the 15 watt Class A amp I will attach to such speakers when I get time to build them. My design, power tubes were used by the Russians and Germans in WW2. I have some dated 1942 and this amp sounds very good. I also put in individual ladder pots for each channel. I will try it out with DML speakers whenever I can get around to building them, so many projects, so little time.
Last edited:
Zer0.p0int.Zer0
100+ Head-Fier
Noticed someone just snatched up a Rag2 from the b-stock pretty quickly.
Freya S was great with Aegir, especially if you need to convert SE to balanced to 2 Aegirs, but I really prefer the all in one solution Rag2.
Freya S was great with Aegir, especially if you need to convert SE to balanced to 2 Aegirs, but I really prefer the all in one solution Rag2.
I'm really hoping for an upgraded or premium Mani. I love the sound of mine, but it has developed an issue where the right channel sporadically cuts out. I have tried different cables, cartridges, and preamplifiers, and the issue persists so I know the problem is with the Mani. I think it may be a grounding issue because sometimes if I touch the chassis, I'll get a small shock and the right channel will kick back in. Other times, I need to cycle through the various gain settings with the dip switches.
RickB
Headphoneus Supremus
Re-Tales #11: Business as Unusual
https://www.stereophile.com/content/re-tales-11-business-unusual
golfbravobravo
Headphoneus Supremus
Thanks for that. Be careful what you wish for!!!!
An updated Mani would be nice, not because the sound needs better, but to control my woofies which are breathing I swear to god without a subsonic filter. Also variable MC loading might be nice. But the sound is just fine.
Also a question for @Jason Stoddard and @Baldr if there's any chance for a special order for Sol tonearms ... is there a minimum run needed? Or perhaps @Paladin79 wants to see if he's busy enough to turn down a challenge?
Last edited:
I sent an email on Thursday and after 4 business days there is no answer from Schiit. Do they answer emails at all?
tincanear
Headphoneus Supremus
normally, they answer pretty fast. you might try resending to orders@schiit.com if you are asking about the delivery timeline for an already placed order. best to include your order number & name.
Jason Stoddard
Sponsor: Schiit Audio
2021, Chapter 10
A Trickster You Didn’t Expect
Ha!
That’s all I can say.
You thought you knew what we were doing. Hell, I’ve been talking about Loki Max for a while now. I’ve shared a photo of a prototype board, I’ve said that it’ll be Freya-sized, I’ve told you it will be totally insane, with relay potentiometers, 67 relays, and remote control.
Except this ain’t Loki Max. It’s Lokius.
As in, Loki Maximus.
As in, it’s exactly the same size as with Magnius and Modius, and it’s also sized to stack with any of our “6x9” products (Asgard, Jotunheim, Lyr, Saga, etc).
And, as in, it has both balanced and single-ended inputs and outputs, so you can use it with a whole lot of different stuff that we make. And, with two more bands than Loki Mini, it’s offers a lot more options to control how your system sounds.
I know some of you are confused. I mean, we have Loki Mini. Now we have Lokius. We’ve promised a Loki Max. How does all this work? Why are the names related-ish? How do we expect people to choose?
Aaanndddd…where the hell did Lokius come from, anyway?
Loki Family Geneaology
Let’s get this out of the way first: Loki was intended to be a family of products from the start. That’s why we started with “Loki Mini.” Because we were also playing around with more complicated designs, and expected to shortly introduce a Loki (a 5-band remote EQ, Jotunheim sized) and Loki Max (a 6-band relay-based remote EQ, Freya sized).
But there was trouble in paradise.
Loki never really worked right, mainly due to size constraints—motorized potentiometers, inductors, and a power transformer don’t interact well, even when shielded, if you’re talking something the size of Jotunheim. And Loki Max had huge operational problems that were so intractable that it took several revs before we ever got it to function from input to output.
Because of these troubles, I figured, “Well, heck, maybe we just do a Loki Mini.”
But Loki Mini was popular…and it kept getting more popular…and people kept asking for more capable EQs…
…and so I kept trying.
First, I revived the Loki Max and actually worked through its huge problems. More on that when it’s introduced. But Loki Max is like 10x the price of Loki Mini+. It’s not for everyone. It takes a lot of crazy to do a real LC equalizer with relay potentiometers (NOT the same thing as relay volume ladders, not at all), Nexus, and remote control. So it won’t be cheap.
And reviving the previous mid-sized Loki wasn’t really in the cards. The motorized pots made it expensive. The transformer wouldn’t be able to be inside the chassis, either, so it would be the first Jotunheim-sized product that used a wall-wart. There was limited space for custom inductors, and the inductor cost also went crazy on us…which meant that we might end up with a $800 product that used a wall-wart, and still had two inductors that weren’t exactly ideal due to lack of space.
However, if I threw out the idea of remote control, and used gyrators for the two lowest frequency bands, we could conceivably do an affordable 6-band equalizer with balanced and SE I/O, especially if it shared the form factor of Magnius/Modius…
…and that’s how the idea for Lokius was born.
A Hard Truth
Some of you guys are probably super excited to see balanced inputs and outputs on Lokius, because you can finally achieve the One True and Perfect Balanced Path Through All Components.
Well, yeah, but no.
As in, yes, Lokius has balanced inputs and outputs, but internal processing is single-ended.
Oh gawd, cue the wailing. Cue the crying.
Well, relax. Because:
And yeah, I’m sure some of you are thinking you’ll just wait for Loki Max, that will do it, right?
Well, also again, no.
A true balanced relay-potentiometer LC EQ would be at least 2X the size of Loki Max, and would use something like 134 relays. With all the additional testing required, and a new chassis form factor, it might be well over 2x the cost, as well. This is getting mega-stupid.
And that’s why we concentrated on making Lokius a real step up from Loki Mini, rather than chasing a balanced internal signal path. Things like a much higher-current, lower-distortion discrete gain stage, a two-stage complementary “superbuffer,” and quality parts used throughout, including film capacitors even in the gyrator stage, as well as custom inductors. Add a super low-noise power supply based on a custom two-stage topology, and you have a truly insane equalizer that doesn’t need to make any excuses.
What’s more, adding two bands to Lokius allows us to offer more precise, better placed controls. The 6 bands we’ve chosen are very similar to the much-celebrated Cello Audio Palette equalizer, in fact, and very similar to Loki Max.
Now, I know some people are thinking that there are equalizers with more bands, and, yes, there are. Those are typically going to be constant-Q equalizers, implemented with multiple gain stages (op-amps), rather than a single discrete gain stage and LC filtering, like Lokius.
And I know there are others saying they like parametric EQs, and that’s fine, too, but again, it’s a different approach. Parametric also uses multiple gain stages (op-amp), unlike our more “purist” or “old-skool” approach. Lokius won’t be for everyone—but neither will software, constant-Q, or parametric equalizers be for everyone.
Other Development Notes
Lokius’ development was actually fairly straightforward. I really hate it when it works like that, because it usually means I’ll get boned bad on something else coming up. But hey. Take the win, right?
I really only hit snags in two areas:
1. Buffer performance. Getting a buffer to drive a reactive load (and, by “reactive load,” let’s call it what it is—a metric asston of inductors and capacitors, plus the relatively low impedance of the inverting input terminal of a current-feedback amp) is not trivial. Sure, you can use an op-amp with a billion dB of feedback around it, but that’s pretty boring, especially when you’re using a discrete gain stage. Because of this, I played with a bunch of different buffers:
Yeah. Kinda boring. Two prototypes, and we were good to go. It doesn’t hurt that Lokius uses the same bottom chassis as Magnius (exactly, down to the screen), so we only had to get specific top chassis.
What can go wrong, right?
LOL. Of course, the single glitch we had was related to the tops. When we received first articles of the Lokius boards (way back in March!), we tested them, made sure they made the same specs as the prototypes, and then put them in chassis…
…and instantly realized the potentiometers weren’t poking through the front holes far enough to use!
Yeah.
This is what happens when you don’t do a 3D print of the top chassis. Argh. We really need a larger 3D printer.
So what did I do?
Simple. I moved the potentiometer on the board, re-ordered a new run, and I told the PCB assemblers to throw away all the current boards.
Yep. Boom. Gone. All boards wasted, because a potentiometer was 0.050” off.
So maybe the development wasn’t so simple. After all, one mistake put us months back. But in the craziness of today, where parts are frequently delayed or unavailable, this is really what you’d call smooth sailing.
So How Do I Choose?
Now we have two equalizers. And soon, three. Furthermore, they all share a family name. How do you choose?
Well, it’s easy, especially if you don’t believe in EQ. If you don’t believe in EQ, you choose none of the above, and that’s the end of that.
But if you’re sold on wanting one of our single-gain-stage, LC-style equalizers, then it’s also pretty easy:
And there you have it. Beyond that, it's perfectly fine if you don't want an EQ at all, or a different type of EQ, like a parametric, or constant-Q, or software. As I said in the last chapter, there's no "T" in engineering!
A Trickster You Didn’t Expect
Ha!
That’s all I can say.
You thought you knew what we were doing. Hell, I’ve been talking about Loki Max for a while now. I’ve shared a photo of a prototype board, I’ve said that it’ll be Freya-sized, I’ve told you it will be totally insane, with relay potentiometers, 67 relays, and remote control.
Except this ain’t Loki Max. It’s Lokius.
As in, Loki Maximus.
As in, it’s exactly the same size as with Magnius and Modius, and it’s also sized to stack with any of our “6x9” products (Asgard, Jotunheim, Lyr, Saga, etc).
And, as in, it has both balanced and single-ended inputs and outputs, so you can use it with a whole lot of different stuff that we make. And, with two more bands than Loki Mini, it’s offers a lot more options to control how your system sounds.
Aside: yeah, I know, I know, some people here undoubtedly think equalization is the devil, having absorbed far too much high-end propaganda from the 1980s and 1990s. We have a chapter or two for you on that. Have fun reading those if you want to dismiss equalization out of hand.
Aside to the aside: and yeah, I know, digital parametric eq, software, infinite control, draw curves on a screen, others are saying. Yeah, that’s an option too. This is an option for people who want to twist some knobs to compensate instantly for bad recordings or imperfect systems. There’s no need to fight. The existence of Loki Mini and Lokius in no way will result in the elimination of software EQ options. They are not alien pods or Borg cubes. There’s nothing to fear. No need to nuke the site from orbit. Cool?
I know some of you are confused. I mean, we have Loki Mini. Now we have Lokius. We’ve promised a Loki Max. How does all this work? Why are the names related-ish? How do we expect people to choose?
Aaanndddd…where the hell did Lokius come from, anyway?
Loki Family Geneaology
Let’s get this out of the way first: Loki was intended to be a family of products from the start. That’s why we started with “Loki Mini.” Because we were also playing around with more complicated designs, and expected to shortly introduce a Loki (a 5-band remote EQ, Jotunheim sized) and Loki Max (a 6-band relay-based remote EQ, Freya sized).
But there was trouble in paradise.
Loki never really worked right, mainly due to size constraints—motorized potentiometers, inductors, and a power transformer don’t interact well, even when shielded, if you’re talking something the size of Jotunheim. And Loki Max had huge operational problems that were so intractable that it took several revs before we ever got it to function from input to output.
Because of these troubles, I figured, “Well, heck, maybe we just do a Loki Mini.”
But Loki Mini was popular…and it kept getting more popular…and people kept asking for more capable EQs…
…and so I kept trying.
First, I revived the Loki Max and actually worked through its huge problems. More on that when it’s introduced. But Loki Max is like 10x the price of Loki Mini+. It’s not for everyone. It takes a lot of crazy to do a real LC equalizer with relay potentiometers (NOT the same thing as relay volume ladders, not at all), Nexus, and remote control. So it won’t be cheap.
And reviving the previous mid-sized Loki wasn’t really in the cards. The motorized pots made it expensive. The transformer wouldn’t be able to be inside the chassis, either, so it would be the first Jotunheim-sized product that used a wall-wart. There was limited space for custom inductors, and the inductor cost also went crazy on us…which meant that we might end up with a $800 product that used a wall-wart, and still had two inductors that weren’t exactly ideal due to lack of space.
However, if I threw out the idea of remote control, and used gyrators for the two lowest frequency bands, we could conceivably do an affordable 6-band equalizer with balanced and SE I/O, especially if it shared the form factor of Magnius/Modius…
…and that’s how the idea for Lokius was born.
A Hard Truth
Some of you guys are probably super excited to see balanced inputs and outputs on Lokius, because you can finally achieve the One True and Perfect Balanced Path Through All Components.
Well, yeah, but no.
As in, yes, Lokius has balanced inputs and outputs, but internal processing is single-ended.
Oh gawd, cue the wailing. Cue the crying.
Well, relax. Because:
- It really doesn’t matter that much
- Balanced LC equalizers will cost a lot more
- Balanced LC equalizers won’t fit in a Lokius chassis
- Chasing balanced is sometimes really stupid, and this is one of those times
And yeah, I’m sure some of you are thinking you’ll just wait for Loki Max, that will do it, right?
Well, also again, no.
A true balanced relay-potentiometer LC EQ would be at least 2X the size of Loki Max, and would use something like 134 relays. With all the additional testing required, and a new chassis form factor, it might be well over 2x the cost, as well. This is getting mega-stupid.
Aside: but more on that later, when we intro Loki Max. Suffice to say, I have no problem putting it up against any equalizer from today or yesterday, even if it is converting from and to balanced.
And that’s why we concentrated on making Lokius a real step up from Loki Mini, rather than chasing a balanced internal signal path. Things like a much higher-current, lower-distortion discrete gain stage, a two-stage complementary “superbuffer,” and quality parts used throughout, including film capacitors even in the gyrator stage, as well as custom inductors. Add a super low-noise power supply based on a custom two-stage topology, and you have a truly insane equalizer that doesn’t need to make any excuses.
What’s more, adding two bands to Lokius allows us to offer more precise, better placed controls. The 6 bands we’ve chosen are very similar to the much-celebrated Cello Audio Palette equalizer, in fact, and very similar to Loki Max.
Now, I know some people are thinking that there are equalizers with more bands, and, yes, there are. Those are typically going to be constant-Q equalizers, implemented with multiple gain stages (op-amps), rather than a single discrete gain stage and LC filtering, like Lokius.
And I know there are others saying they like parametric EQs, and that’s fine, too, but again, it’s a different approach. Parametric also uses multiple gain stages (op-amp), unlike our more “purist” or “old-skool” approach. Lokius won’t be for everyone—but neither will software, constant-Q, or parametric equalizers be for everyone.
Other Development Notes
Lokius’ development was actually fairly straightforward. I really hate it when it works like that, because it usually means I’ll get boned bad on something else coming up. But hey. Take the win, right?
I really only hit snags in two areas:
1. Buffer performance. Getting a buffer to drive a reactive load (and, by “reactive load,” let’s call it what it is—a metric asston of inductors and capacitors, plus the relatively low impedance of the inverting input terminal of a current-feedback amp) is not trivial. Sure, you can use an op-amp with a billion dB of feedback around it, but that’s pretty boring, especially when you’re using a discrete gain stage. Because of this, I played with a bunch of different buffers:
a. Your typical buffer—say, a diamond buffer—falls to its knees and whimpers in pain. Well, not literally. But they don’t work well.
b. Some buffer topologies have very poor DC output control, which is exactly what you don’t want to be feeding into a gain stage, even if it has a servo
c. A lot of buffers are fine until loaded with 600 ohms or so, then they fall apart
d. And yeah, I tried tons of stuff, from Broskie’s triadtron stuff to enhanced diamond buffers to error correction
e. What I settled on was actually a combination of two buffers, which have DC offset problems in the opposite direction, so they are essentially DC correct, and, when used together, they are both low-noise and load-invariant. I don’t really feel like naming this “superbuffer,” so I’ve just been calling it “superbuffer.”
2. Power supply performance. One drawback of discrete current-feedback stages is that the power supply noise gets through to the output much more than with, say, an op-amp.a. Throwing a simple LM317/337 pair on the power supply and calling it done wasn’t going to be good enough
b. We’d already improved Loki Mini with filtering after the LM317/337, so I decided to experiment a bit with other, more modern parts
c. We eventually settled on a new TPS part from TI that does both positive and negative voltages at once, and offers much better ripple rejection, at the cost of still being fairly wideband-noisy
d. So I added the filter from Loki Mini afterwards, and boom—our quietest power supply to date.
Yeah. Kinda boring. Two prototypes, and we were good to go. It doesn’t hurt that Lokius uses the same bottom chassis as Magnius (exactly, down to the screen), so we only had to get specific top chassis.
What can go wrong, right?
LOL. Of course, the single glitch we had was related to the tops. When we received first articles of the Lokius boards (way back in March!), we tested them, made sure they made the same specs as the prototypes, and then put them in chassis…
…and instantly realized the potentiometers weren’t poking through the front holes far enough to use!
Yeah.
This is what happens when you don’t do a 3D print of the top chassis. Argh. We really need a larger 3D printer.
So what did I do?
Simple. I moved the potentiometer on the board, re-ordered a new run, and I told the PCB assemblers to throw away all the current boards.
Yep. Boom. Gone. All boards wasted, because a potentiometer was 0.050” off.
So maybe the development wasn’t so simple. After all, one mistake put us months back. But in the craziness of today, where parts are frequently delayed or unavailable, this is really what you’d call smooth sailing.
So How Do I Choose?
Now we have two equalizers. And soon, three. Furthermore, they all share a family name. How do you choose?
Well, it’s easy, especially if you don’t believe in EQ. If you don’t believe in EQ, you choose none of the above, and that’s the end of that.
But if you’re sold on wanting one of our single-gain-stage, LC-style equalizers, then it’s also pretty easy:
- Loki Mini: least expensive, matches Magni/Modi sized products, 4 bands—easy to try and see if you like it!
- Lokius: still pretty affordable, matches Magnius/Modius/Jotunheim/Saga sized products, 6 bands, balanced I/O means you can plug into anything we make
- Loki Max: blindingly expensive (for us), offers features not found on any other equalizer, a true shot at the best of the best, matches Freya/Urd/Gungnir sized products, balanced I/O means you can plug into anything we make.
And there you have it. Beyond that, it's perfectly fine if you don't want an EQ at all, or a different type of EQ, like a parametric, or constant-Q, or software. As I said in the last chapter, there's no "T" in engineering!
Last edited:
FLTWS
Headphoneus Supremus
What frequencies are the bands centered on?
adydula
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Dec 14, 2010
- Posts
- 5,018
- Likes
- 12,670
Well sir this is a shot across the bow!!
Very Interesting.
Priced well!!
Alex
Very Interesting.
Priced well!!
Alex
adydula
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Dec 14, 2010
- Posts
- 5,018
- Likes
- 12,670
Bands: 20Hz, 120Hz, 400Hz, 2kHz, 6kHz, 16kHz
Adjustment: +/-12dB at 20Hz and 16kHz, +/-9dB at 120Hz and 6kHz, +/-6dB at 400 and 2kHz
Ripper2860
Headphoneus Supremus
Now the only question for me is ...
Do I stack under my BF2 or between my BF2 and Lyr 3?
Do I stack under my BF2 or between my BF2 and Lyr 3?
Users who are viewing this thread
