I guess I didn’t have the time to express all my thoughts either, but I think within the wording I used in my last posting I did leave room for everything SH just said to be absolutely true. Specifically:

I run stereo subwoofers, using an ICBM between pre/pro and amp, with reasons as SH states. But I do not have eight subwoofers for absolute segregation of bass to seven respective full-range channels plus an LFE sub. So, in my setup, I experience some signal summing of bass before the bass is acoustically reproduced. I combine some of the signals electrically in order to not miss out on the bass in the channels for which I do not have an independent subwoofer while preserving a measure of bass differential that may exist between right and left in channels in a recording.

In stating that recording engineers generally wish to keep things in phase on each playback track, I did not mean to imply a continued practice of purposeful manipulation of the bass as was done for LP’s. I meant that, unless there is a reason to do otherwise, the original phase relationship of the original recording is maintained. In those recordings where a mono bass signal is distributed during mixing to two or more channels, a stereo sub setup becomes ‘dual mono’ playback. During playback where the original bass differential has been preserved or an induced bass differential exists, I’m glad I’m running stereo subs. Even if a stereo subwoofer setup does not exactly reproduce the original propagation of sound waves, in my perception a ‘live’ feeling is revealed. I have spoken in favor of stereo subs in the Saloon before. My enjoyment of SH’s organ recordings is enhanced by stereo subwoofers.