i've been on the list since early march and have followed the saloon postings regularly.
needless to say, it has been exhausting.
i have, most likely as most have, searched the world over to find a reasonably priced new/used pre/pro or receiver with all the decoding options of the 950, good reviews, no bugs reported, etc.
i have considered the integra 8.2 and marantz sr9200 receivers using the preamp outs.
i tried too hard to deal with rotel who gave me a local dealer whose number was disconnected, etc., etc.
the high end makers are all too much money.
so...as sherlock said....once you have eliminated all the possibilities, whatever choice is left, no matter how unlikely, is the correct choice.
i have decided to relax and wait til hell freezes over for my de-bugged 950.
having said what i hope will suffice to condense the last 5.5 months, i would like to add my two cents on the double bass issue.
i think double bass is a good thing. if you set your main speakers to large, they will receive full range program, as will the sub.
most full range speakers are not capable of playing back program under 35hz. (this assumes 35 hz. @-3db., which actually begins to fall to that level at around 50hz.).
i plan to insert at the rear of the monoblock amps feeding the mains, an fmod high pass line level x-over of 50hz, then adjust the x-over on my sub accordingly.
that way, any program sent to the 950 by the sacd/dvd-a player which is below the capability of my mains will be reproduced with only the desired overlap.
if i understand the situation correctly, this is not only a good thing, but would not be possible without the "double bass" feature.
i admit that not having a 950 to play with and not really scrutinizing the threads on this subject makes this theory of turning my 3-way mains into, in effect, 4-way mains with much lower range, suspect.
i have therefore offered this thought so that i may get feedback from those of you who know better and/or own a 950.
i'd also like to add that i have enjoyed reading most of the postings in the saloon beacause you are all smart people with mostly good things to say. i've learned a lot here and i appreciate that fact.

I'd have to disagree. The 950 can provide a crossover as low as 40 hz on the digital side. If the little switch is set to 'no crossover' then there should be no crossover, period.

It defeats the purpose of having a set of 'purist' analog inputs if they monkey around with the signal anyway.

How tough could it be to set or clear a bit somewhere to turn the summing off or on?

Just my opinion, YMMV.

Well, yes, it does seem that it'd be a relatively simple matter to be able to turn the subwoofer off independently of all the other settings in the setup menu, analog in or digital in. Oh well....

That, to me, is not a full range speaker. A full range speaker gives you -3 dB to 20 Hz. They do exist. They do not have to be that expensive. A lot of people have them.

At the very *least*, Outlaw should have made that "feature" user selectable.

I second that motion. Or is it third?

------------------
Matthew J. Hill
matt@idsi.net

While "full range" speakers that go down to 20Hz @3db do exist, they are very few and far between and far from being the norm.

[This message has been edited by karlengle (edited August 20, 2002).]

In fact, it is rather unusual for ANY speaker to go truly below 30/35 Hz -6 dB (non SW).

Please note: not referring here to mfr so-called specs - but actual objective measurements. Please don't get sucked in by 'advertised specs.'

For example, the Tannoy TD10 - huge, expensive speaker $5-10,000 pair only does 38 Hz at -6dB.

[This message has been edited by Jason Kent (edited August 20, 2002).]

Yeah, don't read to much into speaker 'specs'. For example, a given speaker might test to -3 db at say 30 Hz very easily at a 1 meter SPL of 70 Hz.
But, when you try to run it on up to higher SPLs, like the 100-115 dB required of a sub at Dolby reference levels, it might drop WAY down at those frequencies.

In other words, just like most other 'measurements' or statistics, speaker frequency responses are easily manipulated, and misunderstood even easier.

[QUOTE]

It defeats the purpose of having a set of 'purist' analog inputs if they monkey around with the signal anyway.

to me, it defeats the purpose of having a set of "purist" analog inputs if your system can't reproduce the source material.

sacd/dvd-a formats are capable of reproducing a range of frequencies above and below human hearing with huge headroom.
above 20khz. means little to me as i can't hear it. but, below 20khz. means alot because, though i may not hear it, i can certainly feel it.

the point is...if the artist intended it (and certainly many will as more musicians experiment with these formats), i want to be able to play it back.

I agree there. But if the system can't reproduce the source material (I'm assuming you're talking deep bass in the mains) then the system needs an ICBM or the built in management. The point is, there is a teeny little switch on the back panel that claims to shut off the built in bass management but does not. So those 'straight wire with gain' inputs turn out to be anything but.

For systems that need some help in the deep bass it's probably much less noticable, in some cases may even be a good thing, but it doesn't help those of us who have systems that can do it without help. And the sad thing is it took extra work to make this happen. I would have much rather this 'feature' was ommited, the price dropped $50, and a family discount was available on an ICBM.

Who knows, maybe the spare bytes and labor could have been poured into re-nameable inputs or discrete time delay adjustments or any number of things.

But I must in all fairness admit it seems worse for me because it does affect me probably more than most.



[This message has been edited by charlie (edited August 20, 2002).]

charlie...i understand now....and thanx for the detailed clarification.

Yeah - It seems obvious to me, but that's a mistake - it doesn't hurt everyone.

In all fairness I suppose if I were a product manager and had to make a feature set choice (no bass management vs what's there) I might have done the same thing. As a product the 950 has to target the biggest possible market. They have been VERY aggressive about their price point and there's not a lot of room to wiggle. It will work for most folks. From that point of view Outlaw did the right thing I suppose, but not from _my_ point of view.

Since the price is so right and I don't even use the analog outs on a DVD-A yet the 950 probably would be OK, at least for a while if it were shipping.

Yeah, ain't that the rub. The 950 becomes just a little bit less "okay" for every day that passes. It would have been a great feature set a year ago, it's a good feature set now. The lack of good DVD/A support is a ticking time bomb; sooner or later it will matter. The 950 makes more sense the longer you can own it. I've had mine for three months now; if I can own it for two or three years I'll be happy. If I could have owned it for four years I would have been happier. At some point, it becomes not worth buying.

------------------
Matthew J. Hill
matt@idsi.net

That's not what I meant, but I'll take credit if you insist 'cause you're exactly right.

Good point.

Also, I'm not sure if the problems are really design choices or oversights. Only the design team really knows, but it could work either way. Maybe Outlaw was constrained by price, maybe it was oversight due to time pressure or this being the '1.0' pre/pro, who can say?


[This message has been edited by charlie (edited August 21, 2002).]

Instead of "1.0", until it ships, how about "0.9"?

DmC

The 950's stereo bypass mode has double bass, per Scott's July 8 post in another thread:

In stereo bypass mode, when the mains are set to small, bass also goes to the subwoofer, which causes double bass.

This is not 5.1. It's just 2 channels. The full frequency range goes to the main speakers even when they are set to small. With stereo bypass, the main speakers get the FULL frequency range.


[This message has been edited by Will (edited August 23, 2002).]

Will- Makes sense. The Rotel has the same problem.

I.e., the "small" or "large" setting for the mains doesn't mean anything in 2 channel bypass mode. The mains are always "large" and get a full range signal *in addition* to the re-directed bass to the sub.


[This message has been edited by Kevin C Brown (edited August 23, 2002).]

Makes sense to me. That's the way it should work for 99% of us.

Wanted to say "Hello". Although this is my first post, I've been watching the postings for almost a year. I've been on the 950 waiting list since March. Reading the posts about double bass prompted me to ask a question.

My current system consists of a Parasound HCA1205 5 channel amp, mated to a Yamaha RXV1000 AV DD/DTS receiver (To be replaced by the 950 if I ever get my email). The Yamaha does my processing and sends the signal via the 5.1 RCA outputs to my amplifier. I have the NHT 2.9s as main L/R speakers which are rated down to 26hz. I also use a 12" subwoofer, but typically keep the subwoofer volume very low. I like it to fill in only the lowest octaves. I currently do not use the .1 subwoofer output of my receiver, I instead run speaker level right off of my L/R amplifier outputs into the speaker level inputs on the subwoofer. I set the mains to "large" so full range sound is sent out. I then use the crossover on the subwoofer to dial in the right sound.

Question 1: Is there any advantage to using the subwoofer output of the 5.1 outputs over using speaker level? I know RCA output is supposed to be cleaner, but in my system the sub out tends to make the bass from the subwoofer a little sloppy and slow. I always attributed this to a "double crossover effect" of using the subwoofer out. Meaning the Yamaha has a fixed crossover point of 90hz, so everything below 90hz is sent through the sub out. However, there is no way to bypass the crossover in the subwoofer itself, so it too filters the sound at whatever frequency it's set. This "double crossover effect" tends to make a bass a tad sloppy and slow. At least I PERCEIVE the bass to be sloppy and slow, maybe I am just hearing something differnt from what I am used to and really the sound is more accurate....just different. I would assume the 90hz filtering is done in the digital domain, so theoretically there would be no degredation of signal. My subwoofer has a remote controlled volume control so I can adjust the sound as needed and don't really need the subwoofer level offered by the Yamaha. I figure since my mains are set to large, all the bass signals that would otherwise be sent through the sub out are being sent to the main L/R speakers.....which in turn is being sent to my subwoofer through the speaker level inputs. Does running the sub through the "sub out" offer any advantages in this scenario.

Question 2: Will the 950 allow me to send signal through the subwoofer output full range??? This way I could use the crossover in the sub and remove the extra crossover in the signal path.

Thanks in advance for the comments!

Steve

Personally I would consider dialing the subwoofers built in Xover as far up 'out of the way' as possible and use the adjustable crossover on the 950 as a first configuration. If you move the built in sub xover high enough (most will go up to 120-200 Hz) it shouldn't interfere with the pre/pro xover. Set your speakers to 'small' and cross over at 40 Hz in the 950.

See if that works for you.

charlie...
1. if you set the speakers to small, where does the 950's x-over choke them?

2. what is the advantage to using the 950's x-over and not the sub's?

am just curious to know...the subject interests me, and you seem to be on top of it.

harp795,

You can do everything you are currently doing with the 950, except when using the 5.1 inputs.

Telling the 950 set "no sub" and mains to "large", all the bass will go through the mains, which you can then crossover using the speakers levels signals at the sub. That is what I plan to do with my Vandersteen sub, which effectively makes my mains completely full range.

For the 2 channel analog bypass, you get full range through the 950, with double bass on the .1 output. Since you have nothing attached to the .1 output - no double bass. Easy.

Finally though, is you use 5.1 inputs from a SACD or DVD-A player, you would lose any information on the .1 input. Hooking a sub to the .1 output, and you get double bass since the low bass goes to the sub and the mains. The only way around this, I think, is to use an ICBM (or some other bass management in the player) to fold the bass from the .1 channel into the mains. That way you don't lose it, and with no sub attached to the .1 output, no double bass.

So I don't see any advantage to using the .1 output on any reciever or pre/pro as long as you are happy with the results you are getting using the speaker level crossover in your sub.

I guess double bass can be addressed also by always using the .1 channel and always running the mains full range. Then the sub and bass levels can be tweaked to sound balanced and consistent for all sources. The disadvantage is extra distortion due to driving the mains full range when they don't really want to play the lowest notes. Plus this requires a more powerful amp since the mains will suck much more power playing over their entire bandpass vs. being rolled off around 80 Hz.

It's been a while since I read the 950 manual, but IIRC it has adjustable xovers from 40Hz up to ????. 40 hz seems to be a logical choice for speakers that extend to 30 Hz, esp. if the SPL they can produce at that level is limited.

I like the concept of using the xovers in the processor 'cause I can twiddle easier and it also takes care of matching the low and high pass sections auto-magically.

Actually, supposedly it is recommended that for the best flat response and mix of speakers and sub, you should choose a crossover at approx twice your spec'd low freq response of your speakers. For me, my speakers are spec'd at 24Hz but I've found that my ideal crossover is around 40 Hz. As you mentioned, if your amplification is not stout enough to drive those 10" drivers in your speakers to low Hzs and high SPLs, then you may be better with an even higher crossover if your subwoofer is driven more stoutly.

I love the 950s triple crossover for movie viewing... my 950 yearning is for a straight wire 5.1 and 2.0 analog bypass without any bass processing at all if switched off. Ideally, that's what the 950 (and 1066) should do.

And the amp isn't everything - many (most) 'bass' drivers cannot actually generate high SPL at low frequencies without exceeding their limit of linear excursion - result - lots of distortion.

Charlie: yup... and when you consider that that single, for most folks, amp feed drives up to 4 drivers in each speaker... it isn't hard to imagine that an independent subwoofer will do sub-bass better...

My mains have six independent drivers each... Yeah, having a sub helps.

------------------
Matthew J. Hill
matt@idsi.net

Yes. The rule of thumb I heard is the crossover should be at least twice the -3db point of the low frequency range. The -3db point may sometimes be more stringent than the low frequency range. Some speaker makes say the low frequency range is the -6db, -10db or even -15db point.

As a rule of thumb distrust all rules of thumb.

Moving the xover up an octave will attempt to do the xover in a range where the first part of the slope can be controlled better, but if you use the correct slopes and points this is not really beneficial.

OTOH the volume of bass available may make you want to cross over even higher - every case will be different.

I always thought that the reason why you wanted to be (at least) one octave up from the - 3 dB point, was that if that point is too close to the slope itself the crossover provides (where the mains are still audible), that you can get the effect of cascading filters.

For example, let's say you pick the -3 dB point as the crossover point. Well, the crossover drops that another 3 dB so you start off -6 dB in the hole already with the mains compared to the sub at - 3 dB (increasing).

I suppose the *steeper* the crossover slope for the mains, the less danger there is in putting the crossover freq closer to the mains - 3 dB point.

http://www.hothousepro.com/products/spec-sheets/sbx.html

this is the closest thing to true "bass management" i have found.

there isn't a pre/pro available at any price that offers this kind of flexibility. so, i agree that that the option should be there to send the .1 info unaltered to an outboard unit like this one (or multiple units that comprise the equivalent processing options) to the subwoofer.

this specific chain of signal processing, along with proper room acoustic treatment, not only is true "bass management", but will enhance ANY system's ability to reproduce the source material (given the sub and amp are of sufficient quality).

the reality is that the sbx coupled with a good sub and amplifier costs in the 4k range.
there is simply no way a $400 cube with an integral plate amp fed a signal from a pre/pro's "bass managed" sw out will even approach a correct balance.

this is why i agree with charlie when he prefers a good set of mains with the sub off to an inferior mains/sub setup. (and...thanx for helping me to understand that)

on the other side of that, i know, by comparative listening, that a properly managed mains/sub setup is better...hugely better...than mains alone.

i only wish that the pre/pro manufacturers would stop using the "bass management" term altogether as it is misleading and confusing the whole issue.

...sorry if the address at the top isn't a clicky-thingy...i'm not very technical with links and such.

That's correct. It's what I meant by 'range where the first part of the slope can be controlled better'.

But, if your speaker begins to roll off at 40hz and it rolls off at 12db / octave, you can use a 40hz 2nd order highpass and match it with a 40hz 4th order lowpass on the sub and the result should be a symetrical 4th order xover. In order for that to work you need to have control of the xover slope and point and know where and how rapidly your mains fade away, so it's not always easy.

Some THX systems do this at 80hz with good results though. Assuming there is no max SPL issue of course, which is less likely at 80hz.

charlie,

if you use a 40hz 12db/octave (2nd order) high pass filter on (the signal to be amplified and then sent to) your mains, won't the roll-off be at 36 db/octave (B6 alignment), regardless of the natural roll-off of the drivers?

Bossobass:

I suppose it doesn't hurt to mention that the price of the SBX is $1,999, as compared to about 1/8th of that for the ICBM?

ARF ARF says Iggy: What do I know, I'm only a dog!

All the information I have indicates this is not true. Why would you say so?

While amplitude vs. power response is a tricky thing it has more to do with alignment than slope. Every crossover design and electronics book I've got indicate that every order of complexity adds 6db per octave to the filter slope, regardless of if it is pre or post amp, electrical or acoustical.

Most systems have a (fairly) predictable slope as they cutoff.

I'm sorry, but I'm lost. Tell me what to do in the words of that famous pitchman (Ron Popeil?) of the pocket fisherman and more recently the George Foreman style grease dripping cooker of "SET IT....... AND.... FORGET IT!"
Thanks
DmC

[This message has been edited by DMC (edited September 10, 2002).]

Ummm, fiddle until it sounds good, find beverage, watch movie?

Ummm, fiddle until it sounds good, find beverage, watch movie

LOL, I will take your "sound" advice, but not necessarily in that order! plus the fact I don't have the 950 yet, doesn't help

charlie,
i understood it to be an honest question. i apologize for delaying the answer, but my 950 arrived intact today. i just finished connections and i will get back to you as soon as i find the down button on the elevator from heaven.

Charlie,

I'm afraid not many speakers fall into the 12dB low frequency acoustic rolloff you used as an example above (except for THX certified and some acoustic suspension or sealed speakers).

This is primarily my biggest complaint with most bass management, especially when they don't give you enough optional xover selections.

Most of the bass reflex speakers are going to have 18dB to 36dB acoustic low frequency rolloffs.

Combine the speakers acoustic rolloff with the prepro's 12dB high pass electrical xover and it will be impossible to get a 24dB high-pass combination to smoothly match the prepro's 24dB electrical low-pass xover.

This is one of the primary dilemmas of less flexible bass management.

[This message has been edited by bstan (edited September 12, 2002).]

Absolutely true, which is what makes it tricky. You need to know the real slope and knee to even know what you need, then you have to be able to find what you need.

What we really need is a calibrated mike hooked up to the 950's successor which will, of course, be able to play built-in test tones through each speaker and the sub individually, measure the relative frequency response curves, calculate the optimal crossover for each speaker and the necessary slope, and configure itself appropriately.

Following that, of course, it would also have to apply an equalization to get a perfectly flat curve.

All the settings it picked would be viewable and overridable. Per input.



------------------
Matthew J. Hill
matt@idsi.net

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Kevin C Brown:
[B]Will- Makes sense. The Rotel has the same problem.

I.e., the "small" or "large" setting for the mains doesn't mean anything in 2 channel bypass mode. The mains are always "large" and get a full range signal *in addition* to the re-directed bass to the sub.
____________________________________________

guys... this is not what the manual says, this is not what scott said in his post and this is not the case with my 950.

when the mains are set to large in stereo bypass mode, there is nothing sent to the sub....no double bass.

page 31 of the manual, under BYPASS SETTING:
"when playing an analog input source you may bypass the 950's digital processing system and listen to the source in "pure" two-channel stereo."

did i misunderstand all this controversy, or what? help me out here.

Here's what Scott wrote July 8:

I think that in bypass, the full frequency range goes to the front speakers even when the front speakers are set to small. This means the front speakers have to be able to handle a *full* frequency range, in bypass. When the fronts are set to small, bass also goes to the subwoofer (double bass).

This is different than the 5.1 analog input, although both can make double bass. With 5.1 analog, the full frequency range does NOT go to the speakers when the bass management switch is on. However the under 80-Hz content always goes to the subwoofer, independent of the bass management switch.

The difference is, with bypass, the front speakers always get the full frequency range, but the output to the sub is optional. With 5.1 analog on the other hand, the main speakers don't always get the full frequency range, but the output to the subwoofer always gets the under 80-Hz content.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Kevin C Brown:
[B]Will- Makes sense. The Rotel has the same problem.

I.e., the "small" or "large" setting for the mains doesn't mean anything in 2 channel bypass mode. The mains are always "large" and get a full range signal *in addition* to the re-directed bass to the sub.
_____________________________________________

guys.....the above statement is not what the manual says (p.31), it's not what scott said in his post and it's not what my 950 does.

if you set the mains to large in stereo bypass, you get "pure" two channel stereo...just like the manual says....no double bass. did i simply misunderstand this whole double bass thing?? help me out here.

guys.... my manual says on p.31 (and i'm sure you all know this):
BYPASS SETTING:
"when playing an analog input source you may bypass the model 950's digital processing system and listen to the source in "pure" two-channel stereo."

this is exactly what my 950 does...no double bass. mains set to large, analog source, bypass mode= "pure two-channel stereo".

did i misunderstand this double bass thing altogether? help me out here.

guys.... my manual says on p.31 (and i'm sure you all know this):
BYPASS SETTING:
"when playing an analog input source you may bypass the model 950's digital processing system and listen to the source in "pure" two-channel stereo."

this is exactly what my 950 does...no double bass. mains set to large, analog source, bypass mode= "pure two-channel stereo".

did i misunderstand this double bass thing altogether? help me out here.

If you set your mains to small, you can get double bass in stereo bypass, but not if you set them to large, as I understand it.

I thought it was there no matter what the mains were set at. I think that's the problem with the Rotel too, that you can't get rid of it period:

http://home.fuse.net/ill-dre/Bass%20Management%20With%20Rotel%20RSP.htm

I was VERY concerned about this "double bass" issue before I received my 950 last May. In practice, however, with two-channel content, I don't find that it's an issue.

Even when using bypass mode for my vinyl, I generally leave the sub on (40Hz xover) for a little extra support in the lowest octaves.

If it was an issue, I could just walk over to the rack and turn off the sub.

I also found that for albums, the extra sub did not bother me. That may have been due to the fact that most albums didn't even master freqs below 40Hz or so? CD playback seems mastered for systems only down to 30-40Hz regardless....? Even if they are down to 30, the best crossover, IMO, is still 60Hz. Try it and see.

yikes!
i just scrolled and saw the multiple posts.
i didn't intend it and truly don't know what the heck went on. if it was anything i did...please forgive me

Merc:

FWIW, I had been using 60Hz xover until recently. When I recently recalibrated, I found myself preferring the lower xover.

I had a similar experience to you guys. The 950 came from the factory crossed at 100 Hz. I set it to 80 Hz initially. Then to 60 Hz. Now the mains are at 40 Hz. Still experimenting with the surrounds and center, though. Center sits on top of the RPTV and can sound boomy if not careful, when lower frequencies pass through. That's just the quirks of my case system, but sometimes quirks can be adjusted/fixed/changed/improved.

Will,

I tend to prefer my center xover at 80Hz, along with my surrounds (even though the speakers are a matched set of NHT 2.5, 1.5 and AC-1. The higher xover just clarifies the dialogue a bit more effectively.

I waffle on the surround xover. 60Hz makes for more solid surround effects. 80Hz makes for a bit more "space" around the sound, particularly when using surround synthesis from two-channel source.

I'll never be able to kill the tweaking monkey on my back.