[QUOTE]Originally posted by soundhound:
[B]I fail to see how routing the LFE into the stereo subs where it is reproduced by both, will not work. Please educate me on why sending this signal to two subs equally "will not work"
____________________________________________

the LFE sub, for movie reproduction, must be capable of subsonic to 120ish hz PLUS redirected bass from 5 satellites (or, 2.5 satellites, in the case of stereo subs). what happens to the 40hz bass guitar E string note when a 30hz (example) LFE+10 note is blasted on top of it in the same amp/speaker? if it's mixed too loud, how do you compensate? if it's out of phase, how do you adjust it? what happens to the LFE's playback capabilities when the sub's LP is set at 40hz to blend with a 40hz HP selection? what sort of subwoofer/amp is needed to survive the assault, and will that sub/amp be the best one for music? what does it do to the stereo sub effect you tried for in the first place? what happens if the .1 channel is a height channel, or contains vocals (in the case of dvd-a/sacd) or other higher range info?

1. adding 5 channels @ 103db and 1 channel @ 113db (LFE+10db) results in a requirement for 121db for the sub(s). testers who have played the dolby test dvd know that 'practically all' systems have a serious limitation in this area.

2.a sub system with a 1w/1m sensitivity of 89db requires 1600 watts to acheive 121db (vs 260 watts @ 113db).

3. intermod and harmonic distortion are unacceptable.

4. volume levels (between LFE signal and RB signal) are not adjustable when they are both summed into one signal.

5. manufacturer's claims notwithstanding, no sub with this capability is worth a crap for music.

6. the .1 channel is unnecessarily limited by the necessity to select the proper LP point to reintegrate redirected bass into the soundfield from which it was extracted.

of course, it 'works' the way it's done now...just not very well. the best education is to segregate the LFE signal in it's own system and run some tests yourself.
__________________________________________
I said from the beginning that this was best for acoustic recordings, and recordings in large venues especially. Last time I checked, this applied to a significant number of recordings out there. I know it does not apply necessarily to some studio recordings. If you listen to jazz and classical music at all in stereo, this is where the benefit is.
____________________________________________

i offer no resistance to the above statement, and apologize if i gave that impression.
__________________________________________

I've simply tried to describe a simple and cost effective way to make a HT system that is also used for music listening as effective as possible in both formats.
___________________________________________

the post is appreciated...in fact, i LOVE this thread. as i said, for 2 channel, acoustic reproduction, i believe your suggestion is a very good one.
____________________________________________
There are a very significant number of people who do listen to two channel (stereo) music. To ignore it's existance is turning one's back on a vast library of recordings that will never exist in a multi-channel format.
____________________________________________

agreed.
___________________________________________

The music is the message, NOT the way it's delivered - 5.1 channels, 2.0 channels, or even 1 channel.
___________________________________________

this is where i disagree. the message of music that's written for and properly mixed in 5.1 cannot be delivered in another format or with bass that never arrives at all, arrives distorted or destroys your system. it's like painting a masterpiece, only to be asked to deliver it to be viewed in watercolor.

the answer is a simple one. 2 discrete outputs, 1 LFE, 1 RB (or, 2 RB, if you prefer stereo RB) and a switch that sums the LFE and RB into the RB jack for those who prefer the current system. not a lot to ask.