@dwest1023, feel free to reach privately. I am very passionate about EQ and have a lot of experience with different pieces
Schiit Loki Max Impressions
- Thread starter Ableza
- Start date
Sorry @dnnaudio raised the question. My bad. Can reach me anytime
Also, if you want to read more about what sound engineers say about MA just google Michelangelo review Gearspace
dnnaudio
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2006
- Posts
- 188
- Likes
- 54
The ability to use the LM and eliminate having to use an adapter i.e. RCA in XLR out is part of the attraction for me. I only need to add a touch more HF maybe a click or two so I am hoping it would do a decent enough job.
No need for adapter with either piece. As I stated. Your call. You have great gear. If you want to put “decent enough “ in there it’s your call.
The Michelangelo is elegant looking, easy to use, well vetted and beloved by sound engineers as a high end tone box. Trust me, with your level of gear you will want a piece that plays at a commensurate level with your gear when tone is adjusted. It is the most hi fi way I’ve heard thus far to add or adjust tone. To your point, even with smaller boosts to treble the MA trounces the LM when it comes to mids integrity and sonic integration of the boost with the whole FR. Even with small boosts the MA clearly sounds better than LM. With larger boosts the sonic gap is even wider and absolutely no contest. You may be right that the LM is “decent enough” but that’s not good enough for my gear. If you’re concerned about adapters and wiring, forget it. Buy Mogami Gold XLR to RCA on Amazon and done. They are already pinned with 3 tied to 1 and work right out of the box. I know multiple other EQ users I’ve met on that Audiogon thread that prefer pro over Schiit. They will tell you the same things.
Attachments
Last edited:
To quote Chris Henderson himself from Hendyamps, maker of the MA:
“Honestly, digital and analog are two completely different beasts. When you want precision tools that can break the laws of physics, then you need digital. When you want a tonal enhancement and intangible “mojo” then analog is the way. I have been a part of the process in designing the Oven and the Michelangelo digital emulations and while the final product is excellent, you are still in the world of trying to make an emulation of something else. And this emulation is extremely limited by the ability to actually capture all nuance of boiling electrons and quantum field interactions on a fundamental level, which will never produce results that satisfy serious engineers and serious hifi consumers. It really is that simple. They are amazing products, but it is much like wanting to fly an F-16 fighter jet and then claiming that the high end simulator is the same as flying the actual jet.”
I think this is really well put. Chris is a musician as well as recording engineer. His bio online is really interesting as is he. He started building his own gear to better serve his own mastering and mixing needs. His gear sounds amazing.
“Honestly, digital and analog are two completely different beasts. When you want precision tools that can break the laws of physics, then you need digital. When you want a tonal enhancement and intangible “mojo” then analog is the way. I have been a part of the process in designing the Oven and the Michelangelo digital emulations and while the final product is excellent, you are still in the world of trying to make an emulation of something else. And this emulation is extremely limited by the ability to actually capture all nuance of boiling electrons and quantum field interactions on a fundamental level, which will never produce results that satisfy serious engineers and serious hifi consumers. It really is that simple. They are amazing products, but it is much like wanting to fly an F-16 fighter jet and then claiming that the high end simulator is the same as flying the actual jet.”
I think this is really well put. Chris is a musician as well as recording engineer. His bio online is really interesting as is he. He started building his own gear to better serve his own mastering and mixing needs. His gear sounds amazing.
Last edited:
Hi…you are in an audio tier above me…bet your system sound AMAZING!!:
Roon Server->Volumio Rivo->Denafrips Iris-> I²S->Denafrips Pontus II->Schiit Loki Max->Schiit Freya+ (souped-up
)->McIntosh MC-152->DynAudio Contour 20s-> Stereo Rel T/5x'sI put the Loki Max in my system just to tweak bad recordings…my system sounds GREAT "to me" 90% of the time. I am the opposite of you…taking off a little edge on the top is where I use mine the most…only occassionally and to add some bass sometimes. I am very happy with it. I am simple…it seems simple and does what I bought it for. …but I have never heard another equalizer.
The Headyamps Michelangelo sounds very interesting… like some kind of different approach to sound alteration/shaping…not exactly equalizing? Not sure…would love to hear one someday. It sounds exciting. I bet it’s GREAT…+$800…so it should, too. Now…. this is just for me, I do not find it to be "elegant looking". No aplogies
It looks like something out of a science lab "to me". Something functional, but not "pretty". I have to say that The Loki Max has it beat there! 
Also, having the remote is nice. Being at the listening position when changes occur is far superior! I am using XLR cables in the gear above…but I also have a Marantz SACD30n connected to the Loki Max via RCA and it outputs thru the XLRs to my Freya just fine.
Just my 2¢
Last edited:
Great recordings I don’t boost treble much if at all. I enjoy smiley face EQ with ends boosted for compressed rock recordings, which often are lacking at the very top and very bottom. Rock presents in hi fi gear often as mids forward. I like to give a little high end shimmer and air as well as some slam down below for that genre. But for others the recording can be so good that one doesn’t need to change tone. Just depends. That’s why the hard (transparent) bypass is key.Hi…you are in an audio tier above me…bet your system sound AMAZING!!:
Roon Server->Volumio Rivo->Denafrips Iris-> I²S->Denafrips Pontus II->Schiit Loki Max->Schiit Freya+ (souped-up
I put the Loki Max in my system just to tweak bad recordings…my system sounds GREAT "to me" 90% of the time. I am the opposite of you…taking off a little edge on the top is where I use mine the most…only occassionally and to add some bass sometimes. I am very happy with it. I am simple…it seems simple and does what I bought it for. …but I have never heard another equalizer.
The Headyamps Michelangelo sounds very interesting… like some kind of different approach to sound alteration/shaping…not exactly equalizing? Not sure…would love to hear one someday. I bet it’s GREAT…+$800. …but this is just for me, I do not find it to be "elegant looking". No aplogies
I am using XLR cables in the gear above…but I also have a Marantz SACD30n connected to the Loki Max via RCA and it outputs thru the XLRs to my Freya just fine.
Just my 2¢
You’d boost highs more often for certain recordings if the band was a quality boost. Clean crystalline airy sounding. Smooth. A 16khz boost on Loki Max is not those things. I know as I’ve owned it briefly before I returned it. The bass boost was lame and lacking much impact or layering and articulation as well. Loki Max just isn’t as good a device. You’d be bowled over to hear the two side by side with U shaped boosts on a flat lifeless recording. The MA breathes life and punch into the track in an entirely musical way. The LM has an artificial plasticy sound to the treble boost and the bass boost is flat and lifeless and just hurts dynamics. It’s a good box for cutting, perhaps, but not boosting.Hi…you are in an audio tier above me…bet your system sound AMAZING!!:
Roon Server->Volumio Rivo->Denafrips Iris-> I²S->Denafrips Pontus II->Schiit Loki Max->Schiit Freya+ (souped-up
I put the Loki Max in my system just to tweak bad recordings…my system sounds GREAT "to me" 90% of the time. I am the opposite of you…taking off a little edge on the top is where I use mine the most…only occassionally and to add some bass sometimes. I am very happy with it. I am simple…it seems simple and does what I bought it for. …but I have never heard another equalizer.
The Headyamps Michelangelo sounds very interesting… like some kind of different approach to sound alteration/shaping…not exactly equalizing? Not sure…would love to hear one someday. It sounds exciting. I bet it’s GREAT…+$800…so it should, too. Now…. this is just for me, I do not find it to be "elegant looking". No aplogies
I am using XLR cables in the gear above…but I also have a Marantz SACD30n connected to the Loki Max via RCA and it outputs thru the XLRs to my Freya just fine.
Just my 2¢
Orange5o
1000+ Head-Fier
At this point I think you should be posting on a thread for that equipment, then, instead of repeatedly posting negative comments on a piece of equipment you had briefly.
Fair enough. My goal though is only to enlighten others as to the possibilities out there for analog EQ. Getting better EQ gear becomes absolutely intoxicating to listen to one’s favorite music on. I simply want to share this joy with others. Be open minded is all I ask. I’ve got other like minded friends at Audiogon. And they like I are having a blast. API. Manley Massive Passive. You name it. I’ve got another who picked up the Charter Oak pEQ-1 that I still own and love. He’s got amazing gear and loves punching up old blues guitar recordings with his gear. He’s as in love with the unit as I am. I simply want to heighten awareness. There’s better out there!
By the way, I did start a thread for the Charter Oak here on HF. It got absolutely no traction. I only occasionally weigh in here. But when I do…
Look, I get it. You’re vested time wise, belief wise, monetarily in this piece of gear. You don’t want to believe there’s something out there just as easily accessible that sounds way better. But it’s the truth. Guys here turn over and swap equipment like it’s underwear. But you won’t plunk down a few grand with 30 day money back guarantee to try a professional equalizer that others here and elsewhere can fully endorse? It just doesn’t make sense! Man, Schiit has got y’all good and brainwashed that it’s the only analog audiophile EQ in town. Be open minded like you are with every other piece in your chain!
Ok. One last quote from the Audiogon thread and I’ll leave y’all alone:
“
I have nothing to add to this interesting discussion except for another vote for the Manley Massive Passive. I purchased the latest version with switching power supply, initially to complement a custom speaker with a Purify 6.5" mid woofer and matching passive radiators that handle LF boost well enough to produce high quality bass to 30hz. Over time I’ve used all bands of the Manley with excellent results.
After break-in and experience on how to optimize its relatively complex and sometimes counter-intuitive controls, the Manley piece has become an essential component. It is a bit fiddly to tweak, and once set up properly, wants mostly to be left alone. It has a clean, open sound with tube characteristics that don’t sound "toobie." No hiss on top.
Of course it is well vetted by mastering pros-- which encouraged me to skip past lots of cheaper solutions.
I’ll add that at this level of performance, a studio equalizer is a seductive and cost-effective opportunity to improve a system without endless component and cable swaps. Perhaps an endpoint.
Esoteric K-O1x w/Rubidium clock>SOtM>AtmaSphere MP-1 or Goldpoint balanced passive>Pass XA-160.8 monos or modified BAT VK-75SE.”
“
I have nothing to add to this interesting discussion except for another vote for the Manley Massive Passive. I purchased the latest version with switching power supply, initially to complement a custom speaker with a Purify 6.5" mid woofer and matching passive radiators that handle LF boost well enough to produce high quality bass to 30hz. Over time I’ve used all bands of the Manley with excellent results.
After break-in and experience on how to optimize its relatively complex and sometimes counter-intuitive controls, the Manley piece has become an essential component. It is a bit fiddly to tweak, and once set up properly, wants mostly to be left alone. It has a clean, open sound with tube characteristics that don’t sound "toobie." No hiss on top.
Of course it is well vetted by mastering pros-- which encouraged me to skip past lots of cheaper solutions.
I’ll add that at this level of performance, a studio equalizer is a seductive and cost-effective opportunity to improve a system without endless component and cable swaps. Perhaps an endpoint.
Esoteric K-O1x w/Rubidium clock>SOtM>AtmaSphere MP-1 or Goldpoint balanced passive>Pass XA-160.8 monos or modified BAT VK-75SE.”
Users who are viewing this thread
