That's the part I don't understand. Where does one get a stereo LFE signal? Are there DVD's and Pre/Pro's that support this? Or is the stereo term being used to describe a single discrete signal that is split and then managed separately?

i didn't say anything about LFE.i'm 99.9999% music.

The cases I've seen where stereo subs are used apply to tying left and right subs to the left and right channels (effectively creating true full range mains). In some cases LFE is mixed in (as can be done with the ICBM), and in others it goes to a third sub.

I'm buying CD's now that have stereo on one side of the disc and 5.1 on the other and I enjoy them both. If it's just a regular CD I kick the 950 into 5 channel stereo for full benefit of the subs. But regardless of the media, if you have two subs, you'll be sending a single-split bass frenquency to each of them. To me that's not stereo subs, maybe ProLogic Subs if they are 180 out of phase with each other.

i bought fionna apple's new cd fri.it was the same way.i took it back before i opened it because it stated that the 2-ch side did not conform to cd specifications.i got the regular 'ole 2-ch disc instead.i was worried it wouldn't play in the CAL.that transport is the greatest,though a bit finicky.

and i was basically talking about stereo subs as gonk stated,but you lose flexibility(can't control the bass from the couch)

Ah, I get the picture now.

Just an observation, but I have full range rear speakers and find that they are not always used to their potential because most of the sound that goes to them has been adjusted to fit the most common surround systems which use smaller speakers for the rears and the signals commonaly sent to them do not require a full range speaker. Just debating in my own mind how useful stereo subs might be.

You need to read Soundhound's posts on stereo subs.

Even if you don't have stereo subs, but do have multiple subs, and even if you are sitting in one spot only (just for yourself) you will still most likely not be getting the best performance possible from your subs when using one SMS-1 - as I have explained above.

While I have not used one, I have no doubt that the SMS-1 will work well in multiple non-stereo sub applications, but because it will be sending the same signal to each sub, rather than an optimized signal for each sub, it will be a compromise.

If it did not come through in my original post, my issue is with Outlaw's statement that a single SMS-1 will "squeeze every last bit of performance from any subwoofer configuration you could throw at it". I simply can't see how this can be true. "improve" or even "dramatically improve" I can believe. But "squeeze every last bit of performance" I can't - not from one SMS-1 as configured, and multiple subs.

This is not a matter of semantics.

Jeff Mackwood

Jeff,

I can understand your point of not sending the same signal to each of the subs, thus the subs not having identical frequency response. However if the sum of both mono subs at a given frequency reach the listener at the the appropriate dB level, does it really matter if one sub is doing more/less work than the other since bass in non-directional anyhow? Also please post a link to the post you are refering to. I'll give it a read and see if there is anything there to sway my opinion on the matter.

Cheers!

That's "squeeze every last bit of performance" for $599.00 not $5999.00. You must have mis-read the price.

Doug917,

If you do a Saloon search for "stereo subs" limited to just "Soundhound" you will turn up several threads / posts.

One of the best is http://ubb.outlawaudio.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?/ubb/get_topic/f/4/t/000250.html#000002

What if you had two subs, and the result was that only one of them was working at all? An extreme example I know, but it would defeat the purpose of having two (or more) subs - and would certainly not be a case of "squeezing every last bit of performance" out of them.

In your less extreme example, having one sub working harder than the others is likewise a compromise, and would also patially defeat part of the purpose of having multiple subs: smoothing out the room response.

MeanGene,

I guess my math ability does not match yours!

As previously noted, an alternative, although not a very attractive one, would be to use one SMS-1 for each sub. Two subs equals $1198. Three subs equals... Never heard of anyone operating a ten sub system like you appear to be doing!

I would have thought that a change in the system's software that would see it cycle through each sub individually and then treat them all globally, along with any very minor hardware mods (if any) would not have added significantly to the cost. The SMS-1 at $599. The SS-1 Pro for $699? I'd buy that.

Jeff Mackwood