I was recently advised by the maufacturer of my speakers (Maggies) that in order to get the proper sound out of the center CC3 in particular it is recommended that the connection to the sub come from the processors front left/right outputs and that the processor be set to "no sub".

My question is: assuming I follow this advise if the processor is set to "no sub" will it still decode the new audio codecs that come on most HD DVD or Blu-ray discs or even the older surround formats for that matter.

I just recently ordered an Integra DTC 9.8 for the specific purpose of having it decode the newest formats thru HDMI but I am concerned that if I connect the sub the way Magnaplaner suggests it will strip out the decoding of the new formats. Does anyone know what happens if the processor is set to "no sub"?

no it wont strip out the decoding of new formats. It will still decode.

However, you'll have to set the mains (front L/R, and center if you want, to LARGE) and the processor will route the LFE through there.

If you are running maggies, I assume there is a sub - of course you then have to connect the sub separately; instead of using the subwoofer pre-out from the receiver the fron L/R speaker connectors how have to go from receiver to sub, and use the sub crossovers. then another speaker cable from the subwoofer to the front L/R

it gets complicated, and probably the most convenient connection is to ignore Maggie and connect everything conventionally.

no it wont strip out the decoding of new formats. It will still decode.

However, you'll have to set the mains (front L/R, and center if you want, to LARGE) and the processor will route the LFE through there.

If you are running maggies, I assume there is a sub - of course you then have to connect the sub separately; instead of using the subwoofer pre-out from the receiver the fron L/R speaker connectors how have to go from receiver to sub, and use the sub crossovers. then another speaker cable from the subwoofer to the front L/R

it gets complicated, and probably the most convenient connection is to ignore Maggie and connect everything conventionally.

Thanks for the response. I have read and re-read the instructions and find no mention of the last step you mention of running another speaker cable from the sub to the front L/R. This is what the instruction sheet says:

"Even though you will probably be using a subwoofer, set your receiver or processor for "no subwoofer". This may seem strange, but it is necessary for the proper integration of the center channel bass. To drive your subwoofer, use a pre-amp output from the front L/R of the processor (it may be necessary to use Y adapters. How this setup works-normally, when "small" center speaker is specified, the center channel bass is routed to the subwoofer. In reality, this does not work very well, especially for Maggies. There is usually a "hole" in the response or the sonic integration is poor. When " no subwoofer" is specified, the processor automatically routes the center channel bass to the front left/right "full range" maggies. The front left/right maggies provide the bass for the center channel, and the integration is seamless, having the same characteristics as the CC3. Since the signal from the front l/r pre-amp outputs is "full range," the subwoofer receives all the bass information. The .1 channel (effects) is not needed. Adjust the subwoofer crossover point so it does not overlap with the "full range" front l/r maggies."

As you can see there is no mention of the last step you suggest. Am I missing something? Any other thoughts on this arrangement?

On second thought they would know what they are talking about - and its best that you try it the way they recommend. you should also try conventional sub connection and use what you prefer.

now, as for the way they describe; I see what they mean. They are connecting the sub to the front L/R pre-outs instead of the LFE output. it will work - you would need a Y splitter to run one output from the pre-outs to the sub and another to the amp.

As you can see there is no mention of the last step you suggest. Am I missing something? Any other thoughts on this arrangement?He thought that you meant connecting the subwoofer via a speaker-level connection. I did too, upon first reading. But now that you posted their instructions, I can see that they meant to use the R/L pre-outs to connect the subwoofer. If you are using a pre-amp/processor, you WILL have to use a Y-splitters to split the pre-amp's front channel outputs to both the subwoofer and the front channel amps' inputs.

Although my system is SPL calibrated, i still find Pure Direct without processing with a one step DSD-waveform conversion (Oppo HDMI to Yamaha 3800) most pleasurable.

The more i listen the more i get convinced that for a faithful reproduction esp of 2 channel DSD one need good LFE mains, my Para. Ref. 100 v.2 take me to 35 Hz. The Servo-15 is there down to 20 if i switch Pure Direct off and for multichannel DSD of course.

Taking the LFE out to the sub will require processing and you will lose some of the fidelity IMHO, but that's just me.

Thanks for the response. I have read and re-read the instructions and find no mention of the last step you mention of running another speaker cable from the sub to the front L/R. This is what the instruction sheet says:

"Even though you will probably be using a subwoofer, set your receiver or processor for "no subwoofer". This may seem strange, but it is necessary for the proper integration of the center channel bass. To drive your subwoofer, use a pre-amp output from the front L/R of the processor (it may be necessary to use Y adapters. How this setup works-normally, when "small" center speaker is specified, the center channel bass is routed to the subwoofer. In reality, this does not work very well, especially for Maggies. There is usually a "hole" in the response or the sonic integration is poor. When " no subwoofer" is specified, the processor automatically routes the center channel bass to the front left/right "full range" maggies. The front left/right maggies provide the bass for the center channel, and the integration is seamless, having the same characteristics as the CC3. Since the signal from the front l/r pre-amp outputs is "full range," the subwoofer receives all the bass information. The .1 channel (effects) is not needed. Adjust the subwoofer crossover point so it does not overlap with the "full range" front l/r maggies."


That is an outdated advice from Magnepan. Many current receivers and pre amps like the Integra 9.8 will send the bass from the center speaker to the mains if the center is selected small and the mains are large. They also send the difference from the center to the main if both are selected as small, but the mains have lower xo point. BTW which model Maggie you are using for the front L-R?

That is an outdated advice from Magnepan. Many current receivers and pre amps like the Integra 9.8 will send the bass from the center speaker to the mains if the center is selected small and the mains are large.With the subwoofer set to ON? I know that a few processors DO send the rerouted bass info from the SMALL channels to the LARGE fronts when a subwoofer IS used, but the majority of processors simply reroute the bass from the SMALL channels directly to the sub, even when the fronts are set to LARGE.


They also send the difference from the center to the main if both are selected as small, but the mains have lower xo point.Again, a few (very few) processors may do this, but the vast majority simply reroute bass from SMALL channels to the subwoofer.


If getting the center channel's bass info into the front channels+sub (as opposed to ONLY the sub) is the goal, then their recommendation is, for the most part, with most processors, correct.

With the subwoofer set to ON? I know that a few processors DO send the rerouted bass info from the SMALL channels to the LARGE fronts when a subwoofer IS used, but the majority of processors simply reroute the bass from the SMALL channels directly to the sub, even when the fronts are set to LARGE.


Again, a few (very few) processors may do this, but the vast majority simply reroute bass from SMALL channels to the subwoofer.


If getting the center channel's bass info into the front channels+sub (as opposed to ONLY the sub) is the goal, then their recommendation is, for the most part, with most processors, correct.

Outlaw started this over 6 years ago with their 950 which was confirmed on their forum at the time. With all the processing power now is available, this is rather simple to do. Of course I wasn't refering to all processors, and it's quiet possible that the Integra 9.8 do this as well.

..................but I wouldn't dismiss it out right becuase you haven't heard of it. ;)
As I clearly indicated, I have heard of it. ;) Those sorts of bass management schemes are not very common. It'd be nice to be able to customize it, but the majority of processors simply reroute bass from SMALL channels to the subwoofer when the processor is set up as having a subwoofer.

OP's other thread (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=13203879#post13203879), btw.

As I clearly indicated, I have heard of it. ;) Those sorts of bass management schemes are not very common. It'd be nice to be able to customize it, but the majority of processors simply reroute bass from SMALL channels to the subwoofer when the processor is set up as having a subwoofer.

OP's other thread (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=13203879#post13203879), btw.


Perhaps I shouldn't say "many" without absolute proof [ and so are you to say "very few"] my point was that Magnepan is using and old and inaccurate description to make a blanket statement when there are exceptions to that rule. Also the OP will get the Integra 9.8 which is rather specific and may not be like most processor, so the Op should experiment instead of following advice blindly. I hope I cleared this up?

That is an outdated advice from Magnepan. Many current receivers and pre amps like the Integra 9.8 will send the bass from the center speaker to the mains if the center is selected small and the mains are large. They also send the difference from the center to the main if both are selected as small, but the mains have lower xo point. BTW which model Maggie you are using for the front L-R?

I am using 1.6s for my front L/R. So you think the Integra, if it ever gets here, will be able to accomplish what Magnapan is trying to accomplish with this connection arrangement? If that is the case I will just wait to get it before making a decision about a new sub. Thanks.

So you think the Integra, if it ever gets here, will be able to accomplish what Magnapan is trying to accomplish with this connection arrangement?No. The Integra may offer variable crossovers for each speaker channel, but that won't accomplish what Magnepan is recommending.

It is important that you understand the ramifications of the Maganepan recommendation. When you set a processor up as having NO SUB, the LFE channel and any bass from speakers that are set to SMALL is rerouted to the front speaker channels. So, with a subwoofer connected to the front speaker pre-outs in this situation, the combination of the [front speakers + sub] are sent (1) the front channel bass, (2) the LFE channel, and (3) the bass from any channels set to SMALL. All of this low-frequency info is mixed together in the proper measure by the processor and fed to the front channels to which are connected, in this case, the front speakers and the subwoofer. So, properly adjusted, upon reproduction, this mixture of low-frequencies will, essentially, be "spread" across the front speakers and the subwoofer with each of those units contributing to the overall low-frequency output according to their individual capabilities. The subwoofer will be adjusted, in this case, to take over the low-frequency reproduction where the front speakers roll-off.

So, think of the [front speaker + sub] combo as being a single pair of speakers that share a low-frequency driver. The LFE channel, for example, which can contain information as high as 120Hz, will be reproduced by BOTH the front speakers and the subwoofer. The low frequencies from the front channels will be reproduced by BOTH the front speakers and subwoofer. And the low-frequencies from any speakers set to SMALL will be reproduced by BOTH the front speakers and the subwoofer.

Unless a processor is set up as having NO SUB, it cannot produce this same situation where this combination of low-frequencies is perfectly mixed and perfectly "spread" across the full-range [front speakers + subwoofer] combo.

No. The Integra may offer variable crossovers for each speaker channel, but that won't accomplish what Magnepan is recommending.

It is important that you understand the ramifications of the Maganepan recommendation. When you set a processor up as having NO SUB, the LFE channel and any bass from speakers that are set to SMALL is rerouted to the front speaker channels. So, with a subwoofer connected to the front speaker pre-outs in this situation, the combination of the [front speakers + sub] are sent (1) the front channel bass, (2) the LFE channel, and (3) the bass from any channels set to SMALL. All of this low-frequency info is mixed together in the proper measure by the processor and fed to the front channels to which are connected, in this case, the front speakers and the subwoofer. So, properly adjusted, upon reproduction, this mixture of low-frequencies will, essentially, be "spread" across the front speakers and the subwoofer with each of those units contributing to the overall low-frequency output according to their individual capabilities. The subwoofer will be adjusted, in this case, to take over the low-frequency reproduction where the front speakers roll-off.

So, think of the [front speaker + sub] combo as being a single pair of speakers that share a low-frequency driver. The LFE channel, for example, which can contain information as high as 120Hz, will be reproduced by BOTH the front speakers and the subwoofer. The low frequencies from the front channels will be reproduced by BOTH the front speakers and subwoofer. And the low-frequencies from any speakers set to SMALL will be reproduced by BOTH the front speakers and the subwoofer.

Unless a processor is set up as having NO SUB, it cannot produce this same situation where this combination of low-frequencies is perfectly mixed and perfectly "spread" across the full-range [front speakers + subwoofer] combo.

I think I understand what you are saying. I still am not sure if I should follow this approach, given the Maggies that i am using, especially the 1.6s, or just connect the sub in the traditional way and setting the xovers to match as closely as possible. I would appreciate your thoughts.

I would appreciate your thoughts.Experiment.

When comparing the 2 connection schemes, there are 2 major things to consider:

1.) Exactly how your processor behaves when set up as having a sub (SUB ON) is important. Where does it reroute bass from channels set to SMALL when a subwoofer IS used (SUB ON) and the front channels are set to LARGE. Most processors simply reroute all the bass from any channels set to SMALL to the subwoofer no matter what size setting is used for the front channels. Some processors, though, will reroute some or even all of the redirected bass to the front channels in this circumstance.

2.) With most processors, the LFE channel is sent to the subwoofer alone when the processor is set up as having a sub (SUB ON). However, there are a slight few processors that will reroute LFE to the LARGE fronts, too, depending upon some of the processors's other settings, such as an LFE+Main-type setting. But if the processor is like most, and the LFE channel is ONLY sent to the sub (when SUB ON) no matter any other settings, then a major difference between the 2 connection schemes, is that when set up as having a sub (SUB ON), no matter whether you set the fronts to LARGE or SMALL, the LFE only goes to the subwoofer. If setup with NO SUB, then the LFE channel gets spread in the correct measure across BOTH the LARGE fronts and the subwoofer.

No. The Integra may offer variable crossovers for each speaker channel, but that won't accomplish what Magnepan is recommending.



Do you own this piece? Reading the manual online can't tell you everything about it. Unless you had posed this question to directly to Integra's technical department, your advice is hearsay about it.

Do you own this piece? Reading the manual online can't tell you everything about it. Unless you had posed this question to directly to Integra's technical department, your advice is hearsay about it.No, I do not own it. Do you own it? If so, you can try and answer his question. I think my responses in posts #13 and #15 were pretty thorough and I strongly suspect that it cannot provide for the same exact result that the Magnepan recommendation provides. If you can make a case otherwise, by all means, please do. But I would suggest you read both post #13 and #15 so that you fully understand the issue. I didn't even look in the manual, btw. I didn't have to. I included plenty of caveats in my responses that will cover any processor's varying capabilities. There are only so many ways that a processor can manage bass.


So, is there ANY instance when setup as having a subwoofer that is connected conventionally (to the subwoofer pre-out) where the processor will simultaneously:

1.) Spread the LFE channel perfectly across BOTH the LARGE front speakers and the subwoofer?
and
2.) Spread the front channels' bass perfectly across both the LARGE front channels and the subwoofer?
and
3.) Reroute and spread the bass from those channels set to SMALL perfectly across both the LARGE front channels and the subwoofer?


I doubt it, but I'm all ears (and PEH is too) if you can present a hypothetical example and the settings within the processor which will produce these exact results. If you don't feel like tackling it, I can try and present the settings and a scenario with his processor which will get PEH closest to the results achieved by following Magnepan's recommendations.

Otherwise, your one-off criticisms of my well thought out and in-depth responses (and, yes, maybe even wrong!) are useless to PEH. I'm spending quite a bit of time answering his questions thoroughly because I want to help and all you seem to want to do is come around and defend the processors, the capabilities or quality of which were never in question. You insist that we defer to the knowledge of "Integra's techinical department" yet are unwilling to listen to what the manufacturer of his speakers recently recommended to him.

Do you own it?

Yes!

I've read you responses and it has nothing to do with what Magnepan says, so I won't bother to quote the rest of your post.

The single issue is between the center speaker and the sub.
The issue arises from the fact that Magnepan center speakers are nototriously bass shy and requires a different setting then the rest of the speakers hooked up to the same pre amp receiver. For a long time there was only a single global setting was available to set HP/LP which would create a response hole they're talking about, however current DSP chips use triple or quadruple crossover designs, which does permit a different setting to any each or group of speakers without discarding any info including the the LFE. The Integra use a quadruple design and treat the LFE with a separate crossover still [LP only].
Now earlier I've said that some pre amps do redirect bass from the center speaker to the main even if the sub is set to "on", but rethinking what Magnepan want to achieve here, this level of sophistication, is not needed at all. So as long as the pre amp lets you choose a different crossover setting for center and the mains, then there won't be any response hole.
There is another issue here though and it has something to do with "directionality" of the upper bass raeches the sub, and in return how to position the sub becomes crucial.
This is also why they wan't you to fold both LFE and centes bass into the mains, since this upper bass info would remain with the mains which would keep the localization issue at bay. The Integra 9.8 of course could provide this configuration as well as most processors and receivers do, as it is part of Dolby's requirements/recommendation of how to implement bass management.

I am using 1.6s for my front L/R. So you think the Integra, if it ever gets here, will be able to accomplish what Magnapan is trying to accomplish with this connection arrangement? If that is the case I will just wait to get it before making a decision about a new sub. Thanks.

Yes, sort of, as it's not exactly the same thing[so is your current Outlaw 950, which I also own] see my response above. If you buy a sub, which I highly recommend as the 1.6 is not really a full range speaker especially for reproducing the LFE on movies, the positioning of the sub is critical for localization problems do to the unusually inefficient bass response from the typical Magnepan center speaker, which force you to use a high HP/LP configuration on your preamp or the "workaround" recommendation by Magnepan.
Positioning also responsible for most subjective impression of a given sub, not who makes it or how much it costs. Of course this is a different subject, and the subwoofer forum is the place to discuss that.

I'm spending quite a bit of time answering his questions thoroughly because I want to help and all you seem to want to do is come around and defend the processors, the capabilities or quality of which were never in question. You insist that we defer to the knowledge of "Integra's techinical department" yet are unwilling to listen to what the manufacturer of his speakers recently recommended to him.

This was the reason you've edited your post? :D

I know you're wanna help I think many people here appreciate that, but before you do, you're wanna be sure, that you cover your ground first. You don't own the Integra yet you're so sure what it can do.
The Magnepan recommendation has been up there for years, I know because I used to consider to buy their speakers, and I do my home work on every piece I consider for purchase. They also recommend not to use AV receivers at all for powering their speakers, mostly because of their 4ohm rating and that the cheap models indeed introduce cuurent restriction when a 4ohm rated speaker is connected. However many mid to high priced receivers are capable to drive these speakers without issues, so I would take their recommendation more like a "guideline" then a gospel since it is clearly falls out of their "expertise".

I came here to advise the OP on the processor I own which he consider to buy and know more about then you and Magnepan it seems.

The single issue is between the center speaker and the sub.

The issue arises from the fact that Magnepan center speakers are nototriously bass shy and requires a different setting then the rest of the speakers hooked up to the same pre amp receiver. For a long time there was only a single global setting was available to set HP/LP which would create a response hole they're talking about, however current DSP chips use triple or quadruple crossover designs, which does permit a different setting to any each or group of speakers without discarding any info including the the LFE. The Integra use a quadruple design and treat the LFE with a separate crossover still [LP only].
Now earlier I've said that some pre amps do redirect bass from the center speaker to the main even if the sub is set to "on", but rethinking what Magnepan want to achieve here, this level of sophistication, is not needed at all. So as long as the pre amp lets you choose a different crossover setting for center and the mains, then there won't be any response hole.
There is another issue here though and it has something to do with "directionality" of the upper bass raeches the sub, and in return how to position the sub becomes crucial. This is also why they wan't you to fold both LFE and centes bass into the mains, since this upper bass info would remain with the mains which would keep the localization issue at bay.Of course I agree that the ability to vary each speaker channel's crossover seems useful in accomplishing what they are after (and it may very well be, but, as an aside, using different crossovers is also frowned upon by many). This ability is not a new feature. HK has offered this capability for years. But the whole point of their recommendation is to get the higher frequencies of the center channel's redirected bass into the front channels where the front speakers can reproduce it more accurately than the subwoofer can. Basically, it creates a pseudo-phantom center situation where the center channel is still responsible for those frequencies that it CAN reproduce.

Carefully reread Magnepan's recommendation that PEH posted above.

Quite often (and, yes, it does depend upon the subwoofer in question) even when calibrated perfectly properly, a subwoofer will NOT reproduce the upper bass region appropriately. This problem can actually be MORE apparent with a more capable subwoofer. This is the "hole" they are referring to. They are not referring to a hole caused by too low a "global" crossover setting being utilized.

Seamless integration is their goal. Are the Integra's digital crossover's infinitely variable? Probably not. Can the high and low pass filter setting used for a particular speaker channel be varied independently? Probably not. Can the filter slopes be varied? This it may actually allow; I don't know. Even though we think that the digital crossovers available in processors are nifty and work perfectly, they are actually quite rigid. An 80Hz crossover setting, for example, utilizes an 80Hz HP and LP filter and this sort of rigid crossover (where the HP and LP point are identical) requires specific filter slopes in order for it to work properly. A subwoofer's variable low-pass filter often utilizes a more ideal slope and, more importantly, allows for a sliding LP relative to the fixed natural HP of a LARGE speaker.

No, I'm not saying their recoemmendation MUST be the best. In the end PEH should experiment, especially in light of the fact that he WILL have the capability to use multiple crossover points. How well that works depends upon how different the crossover settings are and the exact capability of his subwoofer. You might think that multiple crossover points is a bonus, but many consider it a Pandora's box. Adjusting multiple crossover points and the speaker channel levels appropriately so as to all work perfectly is not something that is that easily done.


The Integra 9.8 of course could provide this configuration as well as most processors and receivers do, as it is part of Dolby's requirements/recommendation of how to implement bass management.This is not a Dolby requirement. The vast majority of processors simply direct rerouted bass to the subwoofer channel. Yes, there ARE some processors that will direct some or all of the redirected bass to the LARGE front channels. But (and correct me if I am wrong) what you are proposing is running the front channels as SMALL, too, in which case, there IS NO possibility that any redirected bass is routed to the front speakers. So that's a moot point, no?

...................but before you do, you're wanna be sure, that you cover your ground first. You don't own the Integra yet you're so sure what it can do.I don't have to know what it can do. I am assuming it is the best thing since sliced bread; that it can wipe my butt and cook dinner, too. Not that it is crippled in any way shape or form. I know exactly what MY ideal processor would be capable of doing and there isn't one made that I know of that can do it - infinitely variable (as opposed to a choice of a few fixed values), asymmetric crossover points with variable (albeit limited to a few values) filter slopes. That's what is necesaary to achieve truly seamless integration. Otherwise you're just working within the constraints imposed by your processor to adjust things as best as possible.

But, honestly, I don't know; does the Integra do any of that?

The ability to use different crossovers, alone, does not completely allow one to achieve what Maganapan recommends.


I came here to advise the OP on the processor I own which he consider to buy and know more about then you and Magnepan it seems.I wonder.............. ;)

Carefully reread Magnepan's recommendation that PEH posted above.

Quite often (and, yes, it does depend upon the subwoofer in question) even when calibrated perfectly properly, a subwoofer will NOT reproduce the upper bass region appropriately. This problem can actually be MORE apparent with a more capable subwoofer. This is the "hole" they are referring to. They are not referring to a hole caused by too low a "global" crossover setting being utilized.

Right it could be interpreted as well, but once again they would throw a blanket statement on every subwoofer, and again this problem exitsts, because they center speakers can't reproduce any bass below 100-150hz depending on the model.

Even though we think that the digital crossovers available in processors are nifty and work perfectly, they are actually quite rigid. An 80Hz crossover setting, for example, utilizes an 80Hz HP and LP filter and this sort of rigid crossover (where the HP and LP point are identical) requires specific filter slopes in order for it to work properly.

THX certified processors are required to have 2nd order slope for HP and 4 th order for LP. Digital crossover are far more precise and don't introduce phase alterations like those in speakers and subwoofers that use analog type filters.

A subwoofer's variable low-pass filter often utilizes a more ideal slope and, more importantly, allows for a sliding LP relative to the fixed natural HP of a LARGE speaker.

Most subwoofer don't have built in HP filters, and the ones often use are just single XO point that maybe too high for the mains like the OP is planning to use. Their slope on the LP is usually is 4th order same as most receiver use these days THX or not.

You might think that multiple crossover points is a bonus, but many consider it a Pandora's box. First of all it's not just me against the many as you put it, there are many also who thinks that better and multiple crossover setting can be a good thing, but I laso think that it could create more problems indeed though it depends on many variables.

This is not a Dolby requirement. The vast majority of processors simply direct rerouted bass to the subwoofer channel. Yes, there ARE some processors that will direct some or all of the redirected bass to the LARGE front channels. But (and correct me if I am wrong) what you are proposing is running the front channels as SMALL, too, in which case, there IS NO possibility that any redirected bass is routed to the front speakers. So that's a moot point, no?

Consider yourself corrected. The ability to set the subwoofer to no is a requirement of any bass management system which Dolby pretty much wrote, though they don't require it per se, but THX does. That's all I was refering to since that's what Magnepan want's you to do as step one. ;)


I don't have to know what it can do. I am assuming it is the best thing since sliced bread; that it can wipe my butt and cook dinner, too. Not that it is crippled in any way shape or form.

It's too bad you had resorted to this..........

I wonder.......

what a shame.

PEH I just noticed this in your post from Magnepan: The .1 channel (effects) is not needed. Adjust the subwoofer crossover point so it does not overlap with the "full range" front l/r maggies."

So the LFE is not needed? is that really what they say, because that flat out idiotic even if this will be a music only set up. The LFE is never a redundant info encoded into the .1 channel when it comes to movie recording/mixing. This changes quiet a bit with music, but simply for one reason, because there is no standard which by the industry lives. There are entire drum kit even bass guitar mixed in that channel, discarding that, well you get the idea. So if you have any idea why would they say it's not needed please share.

they say its not needed because the receiver is expected to (should?) route the LFE to the speakers designated as LARGE

...which the 1.6s cannot handle properly....

Maggie's advice seems to be dated from the Pro-Logic days. There is nothing wrong with setting all speakers to SMALL and running a subwoofer. That would certainly be my advice with 1.6s.

A subwoofer's variable low-pass filter often utilizes a more ideal slope and, more importantly, allows for a sliding LP relative to the fixed natural HP of a LARGE speaker.
Most subwoofer don't have built in HP filters, and the ones often use are just single XO point that maybe too high for the mains like the OP is planning to use. Their slope on the LP is usually is 4th order same as most receiver use these days THX or not.Not to belabor this too much longer, but I'm referring to the "fixed natural HP of a LARGE speaker"; the inherent roll-off of a speaker that is being run full-range. This is fixed. The subwoofer's LP can be completely, variably "slid" up and down around this point to provide the smoothest integration.


You might think that multiple crossover points is a bonus, but many consider it a Pandora's box.First of all it's not just me against the many as you put it...........With all due respect to you, I didn't "put it" that way, thehun. I opened that post saying:
"Of course I agree that the ability to vary each speaker channel's crossover seems useful in accomplishing what they are after (and it may very well be, but, as an aside, using different crossovers is also frowned upon by many)."



This is not a Dolby requirement. The vast majority of processors simply direct rerouted bass to the subwoofer channel. Yes, there ARE some processors that will direct some or all of the redirected bass to the LARGE front channels. But (and correct me if I am wrong) what you are proposing is running the front channels as SMALL, too, in which case, there IS NO possibility that any redirected bass is routed to the front speakers. So that's a moot point, no?Consider yourself corrected. The ability to set the subwoofer to no is a requirement of any bass management system which Dolby pretty much wrote, though they don't require it per se, but THX does. That's all I was refering to since that's what Magnepan want's you to do as step one. ;)Well, if you set it up with NO SUB, you're (obviously) following Magnepan's recommendation. That's not what we are discussing. YOU proposed that the Magnepan recommendation was not needed, and said the processor could achieve the same result as their recommendation WITHOUT having to be set up as having NO SUB. Of course, if set up with NO SUB, the processor can achieve their EXACT recommendation. I fail to see your point, here.


You don't own the Integra yet you're so sure what it can do.I don't have to know what it can do. I am assuming it is the best thing since sliced bread; that it can wipe my butt and cook dinner, too. Not that it is crippled in any way shape or form.It's too bad you had resorted to this..........Resorted to what????? :confused:

You misunderstand. I am giving your processor the full benefit of the doubt and assuming it can do a WHOLE lot. That it is the most advanced processor available today. I just don't think that when set up as having a sub that is connected conventionally to its subwoofer output that it can be set up to fully mimic the results achieved when following the Magnepan recommendation. And that was your contention. You claimed that the Magnepan recommendations are not necessary and that the processor can provide the same or better results when the subwoofer is connected conventionally. It can't. The Magnepan results can ONLY be achieved by connecting and running everything the way they recommend. This is the crux of this whole discussion.


I came here to advise the OP on the processor I own which he consider to buy and know more about then you and Magnepan it seems.I wonder.......what a shame.:confused:

I guess so. I never once questioned your knowledge of EITHER product. Only your contention that the Magnepan recommendations were dated and no longer necessary, especially with that particular processor. Yes, the processor's variable crossovers are useful in integrating all the speakers based upon their individual capabilities, but it still can't mimic the Magnepan recommendations when the subwoofer is connected and used conventionally, especially when all the speakers are run as SMALL, as would most likely be the case per your recommendation. You contend that there is a better way to connect and configure everything. I say that there very well may NOT be a better way, as the processor cannot achieve the same exact results as the Magnepan recommendation (without following them, of course).

So the LFE is not needed?they say its not needed because the receiver is expected to (should?) route the LFE to the speakers designated as LARGEYeah, I agree, thehun, it is poorly worded. Of course, as discussed, all processors will reoroute the LFE channel to the LARGE front channels when their connection scheme used. They are saying the "LFE connection is not needed".


The LFE is never a redundant info encoded into the .1 channel when it comes to movie recording/mixing.:) As an aside, and not to start another "argument", but there IS often redundant (no, not identical) info in the LFE channel and the other channels in movie soundtracks. In fact, most low-end effects ARE mixed across the main (R, L, C, and surrounds) channels and the LFE channels. Occasionally the LFE content IS truly and completely unique.

...which the 1.6s cannot handle properly....No, but a subwoofer that is connected to the front L/R pre-outs and adjusted properly to the low-end roll-off of the (LARGE) 1.6s can handle the front channels' lower bass, the rerouted channels lower bass, and the brunt of the LFE channel (the upper region of which will, of course, be reproduced by the fronts with their connection scheme).


Maggie's advice seems to be dated from the Pro-Logic days. There is nothing wrong with setting all speakers to SMALL and running a subwoofer. That would certainly be my advice with 1.6s.Oh, man. We gotta start this all over again, now? Please read the thread in regards to this paying particular attention to their recommendation. There is nothing really "dated" about it. There is no way to set the speakers to SMALL and achieve the particular bass management scheme they are recommending. Their connection scheme can still be useful in a variety of situations and can often provide better and smoother integration than that provided by the rigid bass management schemes provided by most processors. That connection scheme is still preferred and utilized by some people.

they say its not needed because the receiver is expected to (should?) route the LFE to the speakers designated as LARGE

Well that's not the same thing. Naturally it should be folded into the mains, but it is needed for sure, regardles what speaker will end up reproducing it.

Oh, man. We gotta start this all over again, now? Please read the thread in regards to this paying particular attention to their recommendation.

I DID read it...my advice is to ignore it and hook things up as I suggested. Why go through all of that complication when there is NOTHING wrong with hooking it up the "standard" way?

I see ZERO point in relying on the natural roll-off of small speakers (which the 1.6s are IMO) and bringing up a sub underneath. This puts a lot of stress on speakers not really designed to handle it as well as requiring very high amplification (Maggies are 4-ohm and very insensitive).

You are doing an excellent job of explaining your points (as usual), but I think it's all a waste of time as IMO, the proper way to hook things up is the simplest and easiest way.

I see ZERO point in relying on the natural roll-off of small speakers (which the 1.6s are IMO) and bringing up a sub underneath. This puts a lot of stress on speakers not really designed to handle it as well as requiring very high amplification (Maggies are 4-ohm and very insensitive).The point is to get some of the rerouted center channel info into the front speakers, too, instead of directing it all to the sub, where it may not be reproduced as well as the front speakers could reproduce it. As I pointed out in an earlier post in the thread, it's sort of like running a phantom center with the front speakers set to LARGE, with the sub helping to reproduce the lowest frequencies from both channels, but the center channel speaker still reproducing the frequencies that it can.

I realize that running the 1.6s as LARGE may not be the best idea, both at the speakers and the amps, but I also do not think it is all bad, either. Run as LARGE, they will simply not reproduce what they are incapable of reproducing. They won't really strain themselves trying. Those speakers, with a 40Hz (+/-3dB) low-end, are most definitely made to be sent a full-range signal in a stereo setup, and it is also probably assumed that the user would have a sufficiently powerful amp to do so.

The CC3 has a low-end capability of 80Hz (+/-4dB). Its +/-3dB point is obviously even higher than that. So, assuming a 100Hz crossover would be ideal for it (and I may be being generous), you'd be forced to at least run this high a crossover with it and the 1.6s if you were only capable of one single global crossover setting. Even if you had the ability to use different crossovers for each speaker channel, as thehun implies, you're asking the subwoofer to reproduce the center channel info up to 100Hz+. With their recommendation, the fronts would be responsible for the more than an octave of center channel info that is between 40 and 100Hz.

At any rate, I still think that PEH should experiment, but I think that it is very important before he try it that he understand exactly what their particular recommendation entails and exactly how it is different from a conventional connection and why they recommend it. That's all. I never really "championed" their recommendation as being the best, and I clearly stated that several posts back. Unfortunately, I found myself not only having to fully explaining their recommendation and the reasoning behind it, but I was forced to defend it, too.

The Integra DTC 9.8 will actually show you in it's setting that is has a "Double Bass" if your speaker are set to "Large" (I forget the actual term it uses), hence you will get full bass to both your speakers and your sub. I also believe it will apply resonance corrections as "double bass" allows for actual cancellation of standing waves.

The Integra DTC 9.8 will actually show you in it's setting that is has a "Double Bass" if your speaker are set to "Large" (I forget the actual term it uses), hence you will get full bass to both your speakers and your sub. I also believe it will apply resonance corrections as "double bass" allows for actual cancellation of standing waves.OK. What does that have to do with getting some of the rerouted center channel info into the front channels? And, correct me if I am wrong (and although it is sort of an unintended by-product), but that setting does not do with the LFE channel what the Magnapan recommendation does either. Most likely it only duplicates the front channels' bass at the sub, but not the LFE in the front channels.

The Integra DTC 9.8 will actually show you in it's setting that is has a "Double Bass" if your speaker are set to "Large" (I forget the actual term it uses), hence you will get full bass to both your speakers and your sub. I also believe it will apply resonance corrections as "double bass" allows for actual cancellation of standing waves.

Are you refering to the THX feature of "boundary gain control"? That is available to the sub but you have to tell the processor, you're using a THX certified sub. Of course it doesn't have to be as such, but so that one can enable that setting. If you're talking about something else, I'm all ears, as this is the first time I've heard of this.

sivadselim: you bring up some interesting points, though I'm still not sure I agree. :)

I'm also sore as I just damaged one of the woofers in my left surround speaker playing the organ encores on the recent Camille Saint-Saens Symphonie No 3 SACD. This happened while running an 80Hz x-over to sealed surrounds. Bummer.

I'm also sore as I just damaged one of the woofers in my left surround speaker playing the organ encores on the recent Camille Saint-Saens Symphonie No 3 SACD. This happened while running an 80Hz x-over to sealed surrounds. Bummer.:(

Yeah, to anyone who thinks they are "wasting" their big speakers by running them as SMALL....I assure you this is not the case with the Atma Classical Symphonie No 3 recording (a fantastic recording by the way). Even with the 80 Hz x-over, the woofers in the surrounds were still experiencing long term and repeated 1/4" excursions during the organ encores. My poor old Paradigms just couldn't keep up (well one woofer out of 4 anyway). Listening level WAS pretty loud, very close to actual level.

Guess I'll have to see how much the newer Paradigms differ from my older ones...

Yeah, to anyone who thinks they are "wasting" their big speakers by running them as SMALL....I assure you this is not the case with the Atma Classical Symphonie No 3 recording (a fantastic recording by the way). Even with the 80 Hz x-over, the woofers in the surrounds were still experiencing long term and repeated 1/4" excursions during the organ encores. My poor old Paradigms just couldn't keep up (well one woofer out of 4 anyway). Listening level WAS pretty loud, very close to actual level.

Guess I'll have to see how much the newer Paradigms differ from my older ones...I don't know what equipment you have or how it's all connected, but are you certain your player or processor is applying the crossover to SACDs properly? I've had experiences with 2 universal players recently that do not apply bass management properly to DVD-A tracks when utilizing their analog outs. When set up as SMALL, no bass is rerouted and the main channels are, instead, simply treated as LARGE with only the LFE channel going to the sub.

I am using a Denon 2900 uni player. The Atma disc is 5.0 but I am DEFINITELY getting subwoofer output on the disc. :D There is still a LOT of bass in the surrounds on that disc, but it's a very large pipe organ at full throat too. A x-over at 80 Hz doesn't do much at 100 Hz...

Your theory has merit as occasionally the 2900 seems to improperly deal with bass management.

Oh, just to be clear -- running analog outs from the Denon 2900 into my receiver, which is just acting as amplification. The 2900 is set with Filter ON and all speakers set to SMALL.

Yep Filter can only be "on" if the speakers are set to small. The crossover slope changes from 2nd order to 1st[HP] if you play SACDs, possibly the reason why there was still so much bass FR's present in your surrounds. The Denon used a second generation Sony DSD decoder chip which had a DSD domain BM incorporated with very limited capabilities, as you can tell. It was not used in later models, only the DSD decoding part. All in all the BM works fine in the 2900 exception of the slope change on SACD, and no time aligment for both SACD and DTS, if you choose to decode DTS on board.

thehun, GOOD CALL! I just did some reading and saw that the 2900 does indeed switch to a 1st order slope for SACD. That explains both the high levels of bass in the surrounds as well as the occasional boomy mid-bass on a few SACDs.

I realize that running the 1.6s as LARGE may not be the best idea, both at the speakers and the amps, but I also do not think it is all bad, either. Run as LARGE, they will simply not reproduce what they are incapable of reproducing. They won't really strain themselves trying. Those speakers, with a 40Hz (+/-3dB) low-end, are most definitely made to be sent a full-range signal in a stereo setup, and it is also probably assumed that the user would have a sufficiently powerful amp to do so.

On most movie soundtracks, most of the bass reside on the main channels, all the way down to 20hz and below.[on top of that you adding more from the center ch] That's a full octave below what the MFR's low end published FR is. Yes it will struggle despite enough power, and yes you will loose that info, because it is not "duplicated" in the LFE as many people believe it is. The only way to avoid this to use external crossovers, like Outlaw's ICBM, however this could mess with the time aligment phase correction set by the preamp, as that step usually happens after bass management. The ICBM was really designed to put between a DVD-A/SACD player and a MCH pre amp for that reason. However that's still better then run these speaker at full range as Magnepan suggests, which a far bigger compromise IMO.

Yes it will struggle despite enough power,.........That's arguable. Those speakers are made to be sent a full-range signal in a stereo setup. Of course, they won't encounter much below 30Hz with music. Whether 20Hz (or lower) is an issue for them, I really don't know. They do not work like conventional speakers, so............


............and yes you will loose that info, because it is not "duplicated" in the LFE as many people believe it is.You won't lose ANY info if the processor is setup as having NO SUB and the subwoofer is connected to the front channel pre-outs and used to fill in below where the front speakers drop off. Nothing at all is lost. If the receiver is set up as having NO SUB, of course nothing is ""duplicated" in the LFE" (whatever that means, in this particular case).

If the subwoofer is connected conventionally, and the front speakers are run as LARGE, the front channel info that is below the front speakers' capability can be routed to the sub with an LFE+Main-type setting (if desired). Again, nothing at all is lost. In this case, yes, the front channel info (below the crossover setting) IS fully ""duplicated" in the LFE". But, if one were to connect a sub conventionally with the speakers being discussed, here, very most likely they would be run as SMALL, so it's a moot point.


The only way to avoid this...............Only way to avoid what?

Just curious, thehun. How would you run the 1.6s in a 5.0 (no subwoofer) setup, LARGE or SMALL?


The only real criticisms of Magnepan's setup recommendation are:

1.) The main issue is that the front speakers will be sent a full-range signal which also contains LFE info. As has been discussed, this may not be ideal, however, it is the exact situation encountered when running any setup with no subwoofer.

2.) The LFE channel will no longer be discretely sent to the subwoofer ONLY, but instead will be rerouted to the front channels where it will be reproduced by both the front speakers and the sub, each according to their capabilities. Properly adjusted, this will not produce any redundancy except within the range where the speakers roll-off and the subwoofer takes over (the "crossover" area).

3.) Running a processor setup with NO SUB may invoke some sort of DRC-type situation.


My front speakers have a low-end f3 of 45Hz. I would have no hesitation in running them as LARGE with NO SUB if that were the circumstances I faced. Would I be careful? Of course. But, as I've said many, many times here in these boards, speakers don't simply explode when they are sent frequencies that are below their capabilities.

But, as I've said many, many times here in these boards, speakers don't simply explode when they are sent frequencies that are below their capabilities.

Ahem....are you ignoring my case of woofer damage I just experienced? :p And that occured even with sealed speakers, not vented ones.

That's arguable. Those speakers are made to be sent a full-range signal in a stereo setup. Of course, they won't encounter much below 30Hz with music. Whether 20Hz (or lower) is an issue for them, I really don't know. They do not work like conventional speakers, so............

Of course they do, they convert electrical power to acoustical, and they can't ignore any of it, just because they're planar magnetic, the basic rules applies.

You won't lose ANY info if the processor is setup as having NO SUB and the subwoofer is connected to the front channel pre-outs and used to fill in below where the front speakers drop off. Nothing at all is lost. If the receiver is set up as having NO SUB, of course nothing is ""duplicated" in the LFE" (whatever that means, in this particular case).
That's true, but PEH has no sub yet. :)

Again, nothing at all is lost. In this case, yes, the front channel info (below the crossover setting) IS fully ""duplicated" in the LFE". wrong, the LFE remains discrete as a channel no matter what speaker is reproducing it, don't confuse LFE with a subwoofer channel, what gets duplicated is the redirected bass, which is not the same thing.Just curious, thehun. How would you run the 1.6s in a 5.0 (no subwoofer) setup, LARGE or SMALL?
I wouldn't, not for HT. I 've been using subwoofers for over 10 years I owned several that was custom built to me by my specifications, and I would never have a system without one but rather 2. There are simply fery few main speakers that I would call full range, and even fewer if any that can move as much air like my subwoofers do, which is essential to get deep bass down to 20hz and below. If it's for a music only system I would probably follow Magnepan's recommendation with ot without a sub.2.) The LFE channel will no longer be discretely sent to the subwoofer ONLY, but instead will be rerouted to the front channels where it will be reproduced by both the front speakers and the sub, each according to their capabilities. Properly adjusted, this will not produce any redundancy except within the range where the speakers roll-off and the subwoofer takes over (the "crossover" area). Unfortunatelly not all processors fold the LFE correctly, meaning the required +10db boost gets "lost" or discarded" which obviously is not desirable, but it happens in most cases, as to not to overload the mains, which was the original reason behind the creation of the LFE channel. Some does it as an oversight since this setting is rather unconventional.
It's hard to know which processor does this right or not, only measurments can answer that.
But, as I've said many, many times here in these boards, speakers don't simply explode when they are sent frequencies that are below their capabilities. They don't explode, but the voice coil can be damaged, which happens to woofers when over driven, especially if it's vented and the signal is below the tuning point, which can "unload" the woofers, and cause "bottoming" out which basically means that the voice coil hits the back plate, it sounds quiet aweful. Planar magnetic speakers are different, no voice coil, spider or diaphram like dynamic speakers. It's unlikely you could damage them like conventional speakers, but you could cause "distress" if driven beyond their capabilities and wasting a lot of power as well.

Again, nothing at all is lost. In this case, yes, the front channel info (below the crossover setting) IS fully ""duplicated" in the LFE". wrong, the LFE remains discrete as a channel no matter what speaker is reproducing it, don't confuse LFE with a subwoofer channel, what gets duplicated is the redirected bass, which is not the same thing.thehun, you're the one that used the term "duplicated in the LFE", not me! So, I ask you, what does "duplicated in the LFE" mean to you? I'm just using your (incorrect) terms. You're not going to lecture ME on bass management, are you? If you use an LFE+Main-type setting, the front channels' bass below the crossover IS duplicated at the subwoofer output (provided the processor is setup as having a subwoofer).


Just curious, thehun. How would you run the 1.6s in a 5.0 (no subwoofer) setup, LARGE or SMALL?I wouldn't, not for HT. I 've been using subwoofers for over 10 years I owned several that was custom built to me by my specifications, and I would never have a system without one but rather 2. There are simply fery few main speakers that I would call full range, and even fewer if any that can move as much air like my subwoofers do, which is essential to get deep bass down to 20hz and below. If it's for a music only system I would probably follow Magnepan's recommendation with ot without a sub.Nice sidestep. WTF? Just answer the question. :rolleyes: As YOU pointed out, PEH has no sub, yet, so how should he run his front speakers? And gee, hmmmm, why do processors reroute the LFE channel to the front channels when set up as having NO SUB, anyway?


2.) The LFE channel will no longer be discretely sent to the subwoofer ONLY, but instead will be rerouted to the front channels where it will be reproduced by both the front speakers and the sub, each according to their capabilities. Properly adjusted, this will not produce any redundancy except within the range where the speakers roll-off and the subwoofer takes over (the "crossover" area).Unfortunatelly not all processors fold the LFE correctly, meaning the required +10db boost gets "lost" or discarded" which obviously is not desirable, but it happens in most cases, as to not to overload the mains, which was the original reason behind the creation of the LFE channel. Some does it as an oversight since this setting is rather unconventional. It's hard to know which processor does this right or not, only measurments can answer that.It is a Dolby requirement that they do it correctly. But what you are saying is (again) completely irrelevant to the point I was making. That being that the LFE will no longer be sent discretely to the subwoofer output when a processor is set up as having NO SUB, but is instead PROPERLY rerouted to the front channels, and that when a sub is connected to the front channel pre-outs in this situation, the LFE channel ends up being reproduced by both the front speakers and the subwoofer. This rerouting of LFE is something that all processors are required to be able to do and is one of the few things that IS done properly and consistently by all processors.

The LFE channel was not created so "as to not to overload the mains", BTW. The LFE channel was created to provide an additional 10dB of headroom for low-frequency effects. The Dolby specifications clearly specify full-range main channels. Bass management was not a consideration. Bass management is the compromise that we use in our home theater setups so "as to not overload the mains" and to reproduce the full-range info that, as you say, is often present in the main (L, R, C, and surrounds) channels.

thehun, you're the one that used the term "duplicated in the LFE", not me! So, I ask you, what does "duplicated in the LFE" mean to you? I'm just using your (incorrect) terms. You're not going to lecture ME on bass management, are you? If you use an LFE+Main-type setting, the front channels' bass below the crossover IS duplicated at the subwoofer output (provided the processor is setup as having a subwoofer). I said nothing of a sort can you read? I've said the LFE is not duplicated anywhere by encoding and mixing, is that somehow not clear to you? And yeah lecture is in order but you're too big of a popinjay to learn. BTW there is no crossover used when "double bass" [LFE+MAIN] is used, since you can only use this feature when the mains are specidied as "Large". You were saying about "incorrect" terms? ;)Nice sidestep. WTF? Just answer the question. As YOU pointed out, PEH has no sub, yet, so how should he run his front speakers? And gee, hmmmm, why do processors reroute the LFE channel to the front channels when set up as having NO SUB, anyway?
I did answer it, once again you just can't read or comprehend, pitty.

It is a Dolby requirement that they do it correctly. But what you are saying is (again) completely irrelevant to the point I was making. That being that the LFE will no longer be sent discretely to the subwoofer output when a processor is set up as having NO SUB, but is instead PROPERLY rerouted to the front channels, and that when a sub is connected to the front channel pre-outs in this situation, the LFE channel ends up being reproduced by both the front speakers and the subwoofer. This rerouting of LFE is something that all processors are required to be able to do and is one of the few things that IS done properly and consistently by all processors. :D

Wrong again, it's funny how you said a page back that this is not a Dolby requirement, but now you say it is. First of all the LFE remains discretly encoded info per se, yes it could be mixed with the redirected bass for instance, or folded into the mains, but the 10db headroom can be lost if it's not done correctly by the processor, and can't be recovered, now if you think that's irrelevant, then you might wanna refrain yourself to "educate" others on this subject.
Just because a processor can select "NO" for sub doesn't mean it does it correctly though, and Dolby don't test and certify these processors, so they wouldn't know about it.The LFE channel was not created so "as to not to overload the mains", BTW. The LFE channel was created to provide an additional 10dB of headroom for low-frequency effects. The Dolby specifications clearly specify full-range main channels. Bass management was not a consideration. Bass management is the compromise that we use in our home theater setups so "as to not overload the mains" and to reproduce the full-range info that, as you say, is often present in the main (L, R, C, and surrounds) channels.

The LFE with it's 10db headroom[correctly decoded] COULD overload the mains, not just the speaker, but the preamp stage of the processor, which why it's preffered that separate speaker [a sub] would reproduce it.I wasn't reffering to it's commercial roots but to it's HT ones You say BM is a compromise presumably again in contrast to the commercial cinemas, but in reality assigning bass to a speaker that can't fully reproduce it is a far bigger compromise to me. Dolby was among the first to reckognise this.

....................sigh

I'm tired of this childish tit-for-tat, thehun. You really should work on your posting style. It is sadly clear that you are not interested in adding anything useful nor helpful to the discussion, but instead are only interested in trying to argue. Yes, I said trying. As you've more than clearly demonstrated it elsewhere in the recent past, I feel confident in declaring you to be FOS. Rebut that. Too bad I won't be able to read your crap response as you'll now be on my ignore list. You're a 'parrot' and a sh!tty one, at that.


BTW there is no crossover used when "double bass" [LFE+MAIN] is used, since you can only use this feature when the mains are specidied as "Large".The crossover setting dictates what frequencies from the LARGE front channels are "doubled" at the subwoofer when the LFE+Main setting is used. Crossover set to 100Hz? Those frequencies from the LARGE front channels below 100Hz are redundantly sent to the subwoofer. 40Hz? The frequencies below 40Hz are "doubled" at the subwoofer. This is true even when ALL the channels are set to LARGE and the LFE+Main setting is used. The crossover setting still dictates what frequencies are redundantly sent to the subwoofer.