On Tue, 12 Oct 2004 18:36:29 +0100, "Keith G"
wrote:

"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 12 Oct 2004 12:08:16 +0100, "Keith G"
wrote:

I may be wrong, but I don't think it's that simple - I'm awaiting delivery
of a cheap sub (from the same outfit as the ch*nky amp :-) as I type. My
speakers go very low but I'm not happy that the amp is delivering the '.1'
stuff to them, especially as we don't use a centre speaker. I want a sub
just to pull these frequencies off (ie tell the amp there *is* a sub) -
now,
is anybody going to tell me I've got that all screwed up??

If you set the processor to 'no sub', the .1 LFE signal should be fed
to the 'large' speakers. It doesn't matter if you're using a phantom
centre.


Have you had a hard day or summat?

Nope, I simply read your statement to mean that you weren't
*convinced* that your amp was delivering the .1 signal to the fronts,
not that you were concerned about overloading the fronts.

Read the words - I bloody *know* that, ie I want to be able to tell the amp
(processor, if you prefer) that there *is* a sub to 'relieve' the front
speakers of the LFE burden. (I'm not worried about 'centre speaker' as the
sound is perfectly fine without one and the speech comes 'straight from
their mouth', IYSWIM....)

When I was using the mission sub there was a much better overall sense of
space, even when there was little or no s/w activity - it ain't all about
'tectonic bass'....

It's certainly likely that the fronts will be happier not having to
deal with high levels at frequencies below their design capacity.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering