Not a fan of any external EQ. Just one more thing to degrade the signal.
Exactly right ! You do not want anything in the signal path that you do not need....
HOWEVER: I can hear and measure that the use of the DSP engine in my JRiver software improves the frequency response of the speakers in question.
BUT: The DSP engine is unavailable for the analog signal of my turntable. So the Loki could possibly solve the issue for my analog rig.
QUESTION: At what price ??
First, you determine what the issue is. Then you determine how to fix it w/o using a band aid. This can be with room treatment, speaker placement, component upgrade, etc. Adding another electronic box to the signal chain is not my idea of fixing anything.
Hi everybody and thanks for the suggestions.
I feel guity to have withheld salient information. The problem to cure is a +6dB increase in the frequency response between 1200 and 6300Hz as estimated from using the Stereophile Test Record 3 and a Radio Shack SPL meter (on a highly reviewed speaker). As said above, the DSPengine of the JRiver software takes care of the problem - my guess was that the Loki could work as well, given its particular characteristics. My bias is that a 6dB difference (equal to 4 times the acoustic energy) over such a broad frequency range is beyond any room treatment or similar. This apart from the fact that other speakers such as the Piega Coax 10.2 or the Gallo Ref 3.5 sound and measure perfectly ok in the same room.
The question really is, whether anybody with a decent analog rig has personal experience with the Loki+ and an idea about whether switching it in has any audible consequences apart from those the Loki is designed to perform. .
At the price of the Loki+ I think it is a no-brainer; I just have to try it. After all a new Loki is of the order of 0.3% of the new value of my living room rig....
That is quite a hump. You say room treatment won’t fix it? from 1200 to 6300hz.
Something is out of whack. Does it give that reading with one speaker at a time or does it take both. That is a frown on the EQ. A lot of the old monitors were that way it was one of the reasons for LPads in a 3 way on the mids and highs, even UHF LPads were common in the 70-80s with 4 and 5 way speakers.
It sounds like to me you got one lively room with a lot of open flooring and ceiling that is untreated. A tree or two might help. :-) I like BIG cannabis plants. Thai plants have the perfect leaf. Thin huge sun leaves.. Perfect.. Couple 8 footer should do..
We use to use cellophane in front of the seated position on the ceiling in a fish net to tame a REAL hot speaker. Line source was good for that. If that fixed it. dress it up or get the correct treatment..
Lot of people forget one of the most important areas. right in front of you, top and bottom and between the speakers.. I pull heavy drapes between the speakers for the degree of dampening I want.. I’ve always liked the look to.. That is one of the reasons for the Queen Ann legs I use on my cabinets.. Heavy floor to ceiling drapes.. I have a throne too. :-) Well I should say the wife, she has taken over my front sound room, lock stock and barrel.
I just want my Cary V12 back in the main room and get rid of the flippin VTL mono blocks. They sound more like a SS amp than a SS amp does. They suck.. 450 MB pretty though.. On loan..
If I wanted that kind of accuracy I’ll use Krells or something.. Leave the tubes out of the mess.
EQ? I’d try a mechanical solution before I’d keep an EQ in the chain. GEQ can be passive and in parallel vs a PEQ that is in series of the chain.. More than one way to add a contour, too. Can dub the signal.. vs digitize it..
Dear @hanshhh : Any decent speaker normally " flat " in that frequency range .
If your speakers specs says is " flat " down there then changing room speaker position ( testing in different ways. ) and along changes in room treatment could be fixed your " problem ".
In the other side you already knew what this gentleman posted about your Audience speakers in your thread:
Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
But that eq. is " no-brannier " as you said. Test it.
I had a Schiit Loki plus for a few weeks.....liked it a lot....so much so that I decided to get their best unit, the Loki MAX.....I hear no loss of resolution or transparency when you switch out the device, ( the Max version allows for instant compares with its remote control capabilities).
Just try one out, if it doesn’t work out within 15 days send it back ( small 5 % restocking fee)
There's also the Lokius which may give you more control over the bandwidth and a tighter curve over your problem area.
I had a Loki on loan from a friend in my system. My setup is pretty revealing and the Loki was transparent. I couldn't detect any added noise when engaged or in bypass. It will also accept a LPS if you desire.
Thanks to all for a lively thread and some good advice. @lowrider57 @musicmann1 in particular for sharing their (g)ear-on experience.
It is not hard to guess that I will receive a mini loko+ shortly and thus have the possibility to judge myself whether it improves or degrades my system.
The issue that remains to be seen is whether the combination of high quality broadbanders with two DSPcontrolled subwoofers has advantages over more classical (passive) loudspeaker designs with multiple drivers.
Dear @hanshhh : I’m not, per se´, against an equalizer but at the same time I want to insist you that making changes/tests in the room speaker position: at sides, front to back and even different eigth you can improve a " little " about ( changes in your seat position too ). Maybe you already try everything with out success and that’s why you want to try the more easy test that’s use of the equalizer.
Btw, I never heard your speakers and I have not idea of its overall quality level performance.
Now, are you buying the equalizer because you don’t like what you listen through the speakers or because those measurements?
@rauliruegas The initial reason to check the frequency response of the speakers in question at my seating position was because its sound was somewhat agressive - particularly noticeable with massed strings as compared to my trusted Gallo ref 3.5. By using the DSPengine on my JRiver I could "rectify" this issue - but of course not for my analog inputs (hence the loki). I did measure the frequency response in various places (also 1m in front of one speaker - driven mono) and found the broad 6dB treble hump (with some variations) everywhere.
As indicated in my previous post - I hear advantages of using a coherent sound source >200Hz combined with DSP controlled subwoofers <100Hz. But this may just be my personal bias.
Experimenting with the Gallo subamp I could get a reasonaby flat frequency response 200 to 25Hz (< +/- 2dB) partly by using different phase shifts on the Gallo subwoofers.
I hope to join the Loki+ community shortly - trusting my subjective judgement augmented by unsophisticated measurements.