actually, with dvd-a/sacd, you're sending 6.0 through 5 cables.

LFE should have the option of NO filter in every player and every pre-pro. the fact that this is not the case shows that these products are made for dolby formats and ignore dvd-a/sacd formats. if you could select NO for LFE filter, your sub could set the LP and send the HP to a satellite, making dvd-a/sacd 6.1.

a step further...outlaw, please read:

1. the output config should have an lfe output (discrete LFE, nothing else, with LP points and slopes or NO filter selectable). this should feed sub # 1.
2. the output config should have an RB output with nothing but redirected bass (selectable LP point and slope or NO filter). this should feed sub #2.
3. a switch that sums the 2 signals into the RB output for those who like things the way they are now.
4. an adjustable HP filter 'Q' for matching filter-to-speaker (many people report a rise in response at crossover as a 'room mode', when, in fact, it is simply the HP filter's 'Q' causing the hump).
this would cost nearly nothing, would be true bass management and transform dvd-a/sacd from 5.1 into 6.1+1.
it will also allow for a 'musical' sub to coexist with a 'movie' sub in the same system, eliminate most of the intermod distortion incurred with summing LFE and RB into one sub, reduce the ridiculous demands the dolbly spec places on a single sub channel (allowing for many more subs to meet spec and be smaller), allow for total phase control, allow perfect reintegration of RB while not affecting the LFE signal and many more wonderful things.

...there...i said it.

i wish everyone who complained about the so-called double bass config would list their speakers for reference.

thousands of people have 2 or 3 subs and none of them complain about double bass. they simply calibrate the SW channel to their system. in the end, though, it's still the same old BM crap we're all stuck with.

if outlaw would implement the above described output config, they would have a pre-pro that separates them from every pre-pro in existence, at any price, for a cost to them of a few dollars per unit. and i, for one, would order it today.

This is from the Sound and Vision review of the 950: That comment makes it sound like it's an intentional FEATURE that the 950 always sends bass content below 80 Hz from the 5.1 analog inputs to its subwoofer output regardless of the position of the switch.

Okay, so they did it on purpose. Can anyone explain to me WHY they would design this "feature" into the 950? It just seems wrong, no matter how I look at it.

I have *heard* that the reason why both they and Rotel does this, is that they *aniticipated* that most people wouldn't have full range speakers. Hence the rerouting to the sub because the mains wouldn't be able to handle that bass anyway. But the funny thing now that I think about it is: then why have the 80 Hz switch at all?

But I agree. 5.1 passthrough should be just that.

With all the "discussion" concerning this feature in the 950 and 1066, I betcha it's long gone in the 1098 and the 950 Mk II and/or the 950's big brother.

i'll bet my lunch money you're absolutely right on this one!

That is exactly my point... why allow people to defeat only half the crossover? I can not think of a situation where one would WANT only the hpf defeated and not the lpf.

------------------
-Kieran

Here's the only case where it would work: if you had THX speakers all around. Bass roll off starts at 80 Hz at whatever the THX specified crossover slope is.

Here's a guess: the "double bass" feature was put in by Cirrus for a "generic" pre/pro design without any analog crossover. Then Outlaw decides to use the chip and adds the analog crossover.

But anybody's guess is as good as that one.

I spoke with the Outlaws about this, and this is what I understood the situation to be regarding the 5.1 bypass BM.

There are generally three classes of users who would be typically using this input, and these are:

Those people who have "small" speakers and a subwoofer - For these people, the 80Hz switch should be "on", as their mains cannot reproduce the low bass that is present in most music, and therefore a sub is needed to reproduce this range. All bass below 80Hz is routed to the subwoofer. The LFE is generally not used on multi-channel music discs, but in those instances when it is, it would be routed to the sub also. This matches the setup that would be used in normal DVD movie playback.

Those people who have truly "large" speakers all around, and no subwoofer - In this instance, the 80Hz crossover switch would be "off". Since there is no subwoofer attached, what is coming from the subwoofer output does not get used. In those infrequent discs that do have an LFE channel, this generally contains redundant information, so there is nothing lost: the low bass is also coming from the other speakers.

Those people who have speakers that are too large to be considered "small", yet too small to be considered truly large, i.e. they are able to reproduce down to 40-50Hz or so, and they are also using a subwoofer. This category encompasses a large segment home theater speakers, such as floor standing units and mid-size bookshelf models. While the mains can reproduce bass, their ability to reproduce low bass is limited. The lowest ranges of the string and electric bass fall into this category, as does the low ranges possible in music that uses synthesizer or sampling.

It is for these people that it was decided to provide "summed" bass below 80Hz on the subwoofer output regardless of the position of the crossover switch. This allows the subwoofer output to augment the bass that is already in the main speakers, yet is not being reproduced by the mains with enough weight to the lowest octaves. In other words, it is "filling" in at the low end, where speakers in this class are starting to diminish in bass response.

Outlaw mis-calculated the number of people who fall into this last category who don't find this feature useful, or more likely don't understand the usefullness of it. I can see that it would be useful if I had speakers that fell into this class to have the ability to fill in the bass region where my mains were beginning to roll off. There is technically no "double bass" in this situation because of the natural rolloff of the bass from the mains.

Anyway, I've been told that they have taken our feedback into consideration, and in the future will expand the available options.

[This message has been edited by soundhound (edited April 11, 2003).]

Soundhound,

Thanks for the info from the Outlaws. It always helps to know the reasoning behind a design decision. I still don't like it but it helps to know. It's also encouraging to know they are listening. Now when did they say that new pre/pro was coming, hmm?

------------------
Tekdredger

I heard a tidbit (unconfirmed because I don't follow the issue that closely), that on the 1066, the "double bass" was only produced for the front L & R channels. But then the obvious question was, isn't that the opposite of what it should be? I.e., it is a lot more likely that people will have "more" full range speakers for the front L & R, and "less" full range elsewhere. But I didn't follow the thread after that...

I think they missed on this one as well. The "LFE" channel is being used on DVD-A discs and it's not being used strictly as an LFE or subwoofer channel. Many discs have full range signals on this channel. 950 users won't notice this because there is a 120 hz LPF on this channel.