While I am not a great believer in ultra high end cables — at least in my level system, I am a believer in effects of cable length, resistance, and connections. When you swapped out the Loki, did you also swap out cables, or did you connect the cables going to and from the Loki together with a double female connector? Not a perfect model of changing nothing but the Loki, but pretty close. I only thought about this because you talk about your cables in the first paragraph.
3 Likes
Interesting, I haven’t really noticed any change in the sound with the Loki in the chain and it was measured I believe to be transparent, I would have to A/b my chain to see if I could notice a difference.
1 Like
“When you swapped out the Loki, did you also swap out cables, or did you connect the cables going to and from the Loki together with a double female connector? Not a perfect model of changing nothing but the Loki, but pretty close. I only thought about this because you talk about your cables in the first paragraph.”
Well, I thought cable lengths only really matter once you start having long runs like speaker cables. I also used two 1 meter Morrow Audio MA3 RCA cables with over 180 hours on them.
I didn’t thin the Loki would make a difference, but I did notice it early on, but I thought it was just me adding tone. There’s no difference between having 0dBs on all the knobs and using the by-pass, but I do notice a difference with taking the Loki off completely.
I like your taste in female vocalists 
IME, comparing active devices vs. true bypass can be a disappointing exercise. Even $$$$ devices such as TOTL preamps clearly alter the signal if directly compared to bypass.
Loki is a reasonably priced device with many parts, each of which can and will impart its own signature, even something as simple as the pot used. Still, one can minimize the negative effects and maximize the benefits by minimizing signal path, e.g. use RCA adapters instead of extra cables.
1 Like
Thanks! What do you mean exactly with RCA adapters, and how would that be implemented?
These are the 1M RCA cables I use. I have two pairs that I bought at the same time and were using when I was chaining the Qutest to the Lyr 3 tube amp as a preamp to the Drop THX 789 AAA headphone amp to the LCD-3. Both cables have the upgraded Pure Harmony RCA terminations on both ends.
I’m sure they are good cables, but IME even something like a pair of excellent $4000 reference interconnects still had plenty of deviation from transparency when compared to bypass.
As an aside, I’m not too fond of Morrow’s marketing language. For example:
“SSI Technology stands for “Solid core, Small gauge, Individually insulated” wires”
“Total combined SSI wire gauge: 22 gauge/ each positive and negative leg.”
To me, this sounds like either 1) copper litz wire (each strand is “solid core” technically), with more expensive models using more litz strands. MA2 is 24 gauage, for example.
Or 2) Magnet wire. Either using several magnet wires to make up 22 gauge or using 22 gauge magnet wire. Now, all of the above can be made to sound excellent, but not exactly anything new…
The way I avoid extra cable, say for iFi iTube2 is by male RCA to male RCA adapters. Of course, this means the left and right RCA connector spacing has to match, but you’d be surprised how many components use the same spacing!
*Also note the USB adapter to avoid USB cable and male RCA-BNC adapter to avoid a spdif digital cable in the picture.
0228201425 by drjlo2, on Flickr
2 Likes
Silly question but did you notice the sound change when the Loki power was off and on? @JoeyGun
1 Like
Yes, I do hear that, too, and Schiit recommends to NOT turn off the unit instead of going by-pass since the circuitry when off does thing to the sound. I lose resolution in the bass, for example.
I decided to keep the Loki, since although it’s not 100% transparent, the changes are very subtle, and I really have to look for it.
Plus, I’m only adding minimal amount of bass and mid-bass, and Equalizer Pro doesn’t do it for me.
1 Like
I wonder if your Loki is defective, did you buy direct from Schiit? Have you contacted them?
Morrow Audio is pretty good stuff. I have several in use: Dig4, MA3, MA4, MA5. They tend to be a touch fragile at the connector. I’ve had to send a couple back to Morrow for repair. They’ll fix them under warranty, but a shipping and handling charge is incurred. I have been moving to Cardas ICs over the past year or so.
Did you use those upgraded end connectors for each ones, too? Which Cardas did you use and how would you describe the differences between the Morrow Audio and Cardas?
Well, having plugged them in today, I do notice that difference is far less noticeable, like I have to really, really look for it (instead of just enjoying the music).
Since I’m not that impressed with Equalizer Pro because when I add bass it dampened higher frequencies, I opted to keep the Loki back in my system for now
2 Likes
Some yes, some no. Mine are a few years old.
Quadlinks, Parsecs, Neutral Reference, and Lightnings (Digital). I also have two pairs of Golden Presence. Hard to put my finger on it, but I just like them a little bit better. Seem to be a tad warmer, especially with tubed sources.
I’m going to pull all of the MA3s out of service, and stick with MA4/MA5 for a few sources. (I have two systems).
The connection failures were with the cheaper connectors, not the upgraded ones.
1 Like
Great description of tubes. I am newer to headphone tube amps, but have more experience with stereo tube amps. I know this thread is for tone control vs tube amps, but I’m posting this image here regarding tube amps vs solid state as I didn’t see a dedicated thread. It helps illustrate resolution/tonality vs dimension.
To your point on spacing, with tube amps that capably perform, I perceive being able to walk around each instrument in the holographic acoustic image (not an original thought) .
5 Likes
That thought may or may not be original, but it definitely makes the point well!
2 Likes
I agree with this! I call it having a “fuller” presentation or more “meat” to it…but this visually gets to the point better for most I think! =)
3 Likes
Appreciate the ratification by you audio black belts! @Pharmaboy @TylersEclectic
3 Likes
After sitting on the fence about getting a Loki for a couple years, I finally received mine yesterday. I’d procrastinated because I didn’t want extra clutter, an extra wall-wart, and something else in the chain.
Within 3-4 hours of testing, the Loki proved itself as a “problem source” detector and semi-corrector. Per my track list in Headphone Evaluation thread, the Loki quickly lets one diagnose the issues with certain tracks. Quick findings include:
- Some sources were recorded way, way too bright and need the mid-high and high pots turned down (#3 and #4). This includes many Loudness Wars tracks.
- Some sources were recorded with V shaped high ends and need #3 turned up but #4 turned down. This shifts high frequency noise down into the musical spectrum, and also preserves presence/energy.
- Some sources have virtually no bass and it doesn’t matter what one does with the low end (pot #1).
- Some sources have truly awful random noise filling the high end. I think the creators/audio engineers felt they were adding sparkle. But, their high range hearing was probably gone and they created pain for normal or bright-sensitive ears. The best solution is to turn #3 to 9 o’clock and #4 all the way down to 7 o’clock (minimum).
I’m very happy so far. Per the thread topic, a tube amp is much less specific and causes global transformation to all sources – even those not requiring correction. I do end up fiddling with the settings, but I’m an album listener. Most problem albums had similar recording issues from start to finish.
8 Likes
Tone Control, Tubes, and Music Produced with / for Dated Technology
Here are additional thoughts on tone control, tube amps, and historical factors that affect musical content and the need for modification. This follows a few days of experimentation with the Loki and thinking back to commercial music pitfalls over the last several decades.
Until the 1980s, music industry technology was driven by a quest for better and better “high fidelity” reproduction of sources. Good equipment was very expensive, while mainstream products suffered from serious flaws. Music was often heard through crude AM radio, small portable systems, and single-speaker devices with no high or low range. Quality home audio and FM radio exploded in the 1970s, as component systems sought to bring better quality to the public.
In the 1980s, there were many cheap or mainstream audio systems with elements of high-end equipment, but they had dated efforts to correct the flaws of past and current recordings. At the time the fixes helped – but seemingly created issues that persist until today. The impact of 1980s production may be overlooked given the distractions of digital/CD audio and the even more destructive Loudness Wars that began in the 1990s.
Anyone into music in the 1980s would recognize graphic equalizers (along with ‘Turbo’ badging, asymmetrical haircuts, neon colors, and square or triangular car bodies). Equalizers were added to everything audio no matter the quality (I even had a $30 portable cassette player with an equalizer):
Note the U and V shapes of the sliders. This was a common STANDARD for many who had an equalizer in the 1980s. It was in part based on the paper and fabric cone speakers of the era, the production habit of cutting off bass to prevent records from skipping due to vibration, and weak mainstream amps that often didn’t produce good bass.
So, many people wanted ‘fun’ boosted bass and treble a long time ago. In the 1980s this tweak could often be justified. In testing my Schiit Loki, I went to the problem album The Replacements “Let It Be.” This is an independently produced 1984 rock/post-punk album, and an album that had always given me ringing ears and a headache. I’ve used it to test how bright, buzzy, shrill, and downright unpleasant productions are handled by a given audio setup. I’ve tried it on at least a dozen systems over the years (there are some decent songs; it was good enough to get the band a major label contract).
The Loki brought back memories of the 1980s and the standard equalizer “corrections” of the period. I twiddled the knobs into an ^ or 
rather than a V. I listened to the entire album with both the bass (left) and treble (right) pots turned down. The album sounded reasonably normal, with less harshness. The original release has very little bass, but what’s there is rubbery and flabby – turning down the bass tightened it up.
Those in the audiophile community today have access to full-range reproduction including deep bass and ‘fun’ V shaped products. When one layers V shaped headphones on top of full-range amps, full-range DACs, and V shaped studio productions — pain is the expected outcome. In my testing anti-V settings (^ or ) are more effective than tube amps in correcting such a harsh and cold source.
Sometimes layers upon layers of V shaped modifications need to be undone, and tubes can’t do this.
9 Likes