Well, I finally pulled the trigger on a pr. of LFM-2's over the weekend (really hoping for a Patriots win there!). While I wait for them, I'm hooking them up in my mind and have a few questions. I'm running Paradigm Reference across the front (Active 20's for the 2 mains). Ideally, I would love to just hook them up with Active 20's and bypass the sub out altogether. The only way I can figure that to work is to Y off the fronts (set to Large) and use the internal sub xover and the turn on the "with sub" switch on the back of the 20's. A couple of questions about setup. Will I be able to get enough LFM through the fronts with the sub channel off? Will the Center channel set to small funnel to the fronts or be lost (or does it even matter). I have full-range surrounds, so they won't be a problem. I listen to quite a bit of 2-channel music and am willing to compromise in the HT end if need be. (the wife and kids don't mind as long as booms go BOOM! on movies) Any thoughts? The wait for these guys is killing me!

Sorry, forgot to mention...I have an Outlaw 950 pre/pro.

This sounds like a good approach. If you do what you describe (large fronts, no sub, splitter on the left/right pre-amp outputs to feed each channel to one Active 20 and one LFM-2), the LFE channel will be re-directed to the fronts and will get to the subs. If you set the center to small, its low frequency data will re-direct to the fronts. Same for the surrounds. Oh, and you'll need to adjust the subs' crossovers to blend them in with the Active 20's.

Analog audio is NOT data! Geesh!

Sorry Altec, but there is such a thing as "Analog Data". I am not trying to start a flame war, but as a research scientist (many years ago) studying the performance of both tubes and transistors passing audio signals we would routinely refer to those output signals as "data" and they where of course analog signals.

Whatever, but I was specifically referring to the tendency of people nowadays to refer to ALL signals, analog or digital as “data”. In the context of audio electonics design and audio reproduction in particular, labelling a purely analog signal as “data” is a misnomer.

I can see instances such as yours in research when analog signals are broken down into “data points” for statistical analysis. When analog measurements are presented in a graph, that is “data” – the paper presentation is the “data”. However, when an analog signal is not analyzed, but is mearly being routed in an audio system, to be listened to, it is not called “data”. The term “data” in the context of audio reproduction is taken to mean a digital stream.

Thanks for the info Gonk. Now, if I could just get that confirmation email that they have shipped, I could start hyperventilating!!

Well, Altec, I would agree with you if you were right, but you're not, so I won't! Data is a term that is used to generically refer to a piece and/or a group of information. The way in which the information is represented can take on many forms and it is certainly not limited to "digital" as its only form.

So what I will do is agree to disagree.

Context is the key. In talking about the signal which comes out of a piece of audio equipment, if it is digital in form, such as an S/PDIF stream, then the correct term is data.

In the 30 years I've been working as an audio engineer, I've never heard the term "data" applied to analog signals by any engineer - ever. I've worked for some of the major manufacturers of audio gear, both professional and consumer (including the one which designed and built your Outlaw amplifier). Never have I heard the term "data" applied to an analog signal by the engineering departments of any of those companies.

The terms you used way-back-when obviously had bearing on what you were doing, and the usage had meaning to your group, but it is not the commonly used term in audio design circles now.

If I used that term at any company I've worked for when describing the output from, say, a power amplifier, they would look at me like I was crazy. If, when I was doing sound design and music recording/editing for feature films I called the analog signals for music, dialog and sound effects "data", rather than the correct terms music, dialog or sound effects tracks or stems, I'd probably be kicked off the dubbing stage!

Different fields use different conventions and terms, often to describe the same parameter. Forcing the conventions of scientific research and data gathering onto another field such as consumer audio is a mistake.

Well, they arrived on Wed! I spent the afternoon setting them up and messing with the settings. Then I remembered I had an old Audio Control Richter Scale. It has 2 channel sub xovers and proved to be the perfect solution. Now, the bass is smooth and satisfying, if not quite as loud as I had hoped. I will continue to tweak the system. I really need to weight the boxes down with something. The wife won't like a 90 lb. sandbag like the good ol' days, so I'll have to come up with something more decorative. Count me as a satisfied customer. Perhaps a LFM-EX is in the future for the .1 channel...