Connecting sub to receiver w/no sub output

[Unregistered]

When it became clear that you could use a little coaching, I stepped it down a little. I have no problem with that, and don't hold it against anybody, but do talk to one in the manner in which they present themselves. You came off as knowledgable, but with certain misconceptions, and I responded as if I were speaking to one that was.

One that was...what? Knowledgeable or having misconceptions? It took you several posts to explain your position because the first few did not. I am well aware of the issues. Although you are trying to be gratious, the way you are speaking reminds me of a quote from the sitcom Coach. The daughter complains to Coach that he is trivializing her life and he replies "Ah, honey I'm not trivializing your little life." Kind of like your tone where you say "it became clear to me that you know a little bit but let me show you what a real expert knows".
Give me a break. You describe an issue and beat it to death like its the worst thing that could possibly happen when in reality it's just another tradeoff.

Now, had you a consistent moniker, I would know who I an talking to next tme we encounter each other. But, don't expect me to break everything down into bite sized little pieces for every unregistered that pops into here.

Again with the registration. No you still wouldn't know anything about me or anyone else for that matter. Would you break things down into little bite sized pieces for a registered user? You would and by your tone you would assume that you are the authority on the subject and you are helping the little people. I don't think I will be registering. There seems to be too much of an elitist attitude around here, like only members have anything valuable to say. That would be ok if all the members were always correct or expert on every topic but that certainly isn't the case.

Don't bother writing another long diatribe - I'm out.

 

[markw]

Final post. Take it or leave it.

From your tone, I'll have to assume that all posts from "unregistered" are from you, so here goes.

Simply put, once you got past the initial suggestion he use the tape monitors, everything you posted was pure BS! I was trying to be subtle and give you the benefit of a doubt and allow you to save face but you blew it, man. But. even with all the opportunities I gave you to graciously save face, like the energizer bunny, you just kept on going, and going and going...

You respond to the initial query with the sugestion he use the tape moniters, whiche was not a bad idea. Merely incomplete. In my response, I don't say they won't work, but merely point out the situation with controling the volume.

Then, he says he only has one input on the sub. I say he can't use a "Y" connector.

Now, you pop in with a quoted reply to my posts with TWO, count 'em, TWO errors.

1) You say that he simply has to set the sub level once and forget about it.

2) You initiate the infamous "Y" connector debate. Rather than question me, you lecture me with wrong information.

And, if you really want to get technical, most subs have TWO inputs. I let this slide before but, what the heck, let's put it all on the table, ok?

I reply (nicely, I might add) telling you you are wrong. Someone else chimes in echoing my advice about the tape monitor/volume situation.

I respond in a fairly flip, but not threatening manner.

Now, some "unregistered" (you?) yahoo chimes in with a snide remark about my greatness.

Now, another "unregistered" (you, I assume) again has a quoted reply to my last thread, only now you say that you see in the manual where it states the volume contriol has no effect on the tape outs. He'll have to adjust it buy hand but if that's all he has, then he should use it.

Exactly what was said in the first three posts... The difference is that NOW you see the volume problem but never did say you were wrong in the fiirst place. But. it's worded in such a way as to insinuate that I didn't know what I was talking about??? ...ooookay.

And, you start in again with the "Y" connector bit. I tried to clear up what I believed was a misconception. I gave a thumbnail explanation that should have been sufficient for anyone semi-knowledgeble in these areas to grasp the concept.

but no, you basically say, in quite a few words, I have no idea what I'm talking about.

By now, it's quite obvious you have NO clue what you are talking about.

I HAD to break it down into itty bitty steps so someone with NO knowledge of electronics could follow it.

The next post is where I gave you a class in Electronics 101. I did this for two reasons. First, to explain to you where you were wrong and secondly, to explain to anyone watching what the REAL facts were so they don't get confused by your BS.

At least the concept FINALLY sunk in for you.

So, here's the score so far... Two WRONG responses from an "unregistered" poster (Again, you, I assume) who, when gently disabused of the truth, was ignorant enough of the facts to not realize the truth when it was presented to him in a gentle fashion, any yet arrogant enough to want to argue them.

Your tone in this thread was that of arrogance, such as how dare I (Markw) question your information. You KNOW it's impeccable so the other guy MUST be an idiot.

I'm confident that what I say is pretty much based in fact, from experience. Even so, when dealing with others, I ASK them to explain something I don't understand and engage in an interplay. I don't try to "challange" then and try to make them look foolish. ...at least not so far, but that may change for unregistered posters.

So, yeah, ol' Markw doesn't know everything, but from our brief encounter here, it's blatently obvious I know a heckuva lot more than you! And, unless I'm pretty sure I know what I'm talking about, I keep out of the discussion. It's pretty easy to get caught up in the undertow if there are others that know more than you participating.

Sorry, the only "elitest "attitude seems to be from some shadows who THINK they know everything and get their panties in a knot when it's pointed out that they don't. Come to think about it, I wouldn't want my good name associated with some of the bogus "info" you posted here either.

So, tell me again exactly WHY anyone would WANT to trust an unregistered poster?

Also, tell me why I simply shouldn't bury their BS with the truth without worrying about their pride and making them look like fools?

 

[Unregistered]

OK, can't resist. Nothing like revisionist history to try to make your point.

Simply put, once you got past the initial suggestion he use the tape monitors, everything you posted was pure BS!

YOU said tape monitor, I said tape-out. I posted twice saying that I am NOT talking about the tape monitor loop. Remember your speculation about whether it was "in circuit or not".

In my response, I don't say they won't work, but merely point out the situation with controling the volume.

Which is why I said he would have to set the volume on the sub. I also followed up to clarify that that may not be sufficient.

1) You say that he simply has to set the sub level once and forget about it.

I said that is his only choice. Notice that someone else posted to support you saying I didn't realize that bass management features aren't required to use a sub. Another one, like you, that didn't actually read the statement and wanted to cozy up to another registered user (remember, Members Only). I said if the receiver doesn't have a sub out then it likely doesn't have bass management features, precluding the ability to affect the volume with channel trims and thus using the sub volume is the only choice.

And, if you really want to get technical, most subs have TWO inputs.

But he said it only had one input, so why would I mention the fact that most subs have two inputs?. That's like many posts I see where someone asks about the difference between receiver x and receiver y and all the replies are "You should look at receiver z".

Now, another "unregistered" (you, I assume) again has a quoted reply to my last thread, only now you say that you see in the manual where it states the volume contriol has no effect on the tape outs. He'll have to adjust it buy hand but if that's all he has, then he should use it.

I didn't say "now I see". I've known all along. I was using that to make clear that what I said at the beginning about using the sub volume as the only choice.

And, you start in again with the "Y" connector bit. I tried to clear up what I believed was a misconception. I gave a thumbnail explanation that should have been sufficient for anyone semi-knowledgeble in these areas to grasp the concept.

It is your misconception that I said a Y connector is perfectly valid. I said it would work, not that it will be ideal or yield good results. I believe I said it won't matter to the sub - and it won't. It will cause reflections and phase shift and time smearing and probably other nasties but someone just wondering if there is anything at all that might work, might be willing to give it a try anyway. Most casual audio enthusiasts wouldn't notice in the slightest.
I never said you don't know what you are talking about. Rather than help with an imperfect solution, you just want to tell the guy, forget it man.

The next post is where I gave you a class in Electronics 101. I did this for two reasons. First, to explain to you where you were wrong and secondly, to explain to anyone watching what the REAL facts were so they don't get confused by your BS. Apparantly the class did you good.

You did it because you are full of yourself. I said it was a good example and once again reiterated that it is not a good solution, but will work. You probably did help others with that little tidbit. However, you simply said that the signal will want to travel to the opposite line. If you are so knowledgeable as to be able to teach Electronics 101, why didn't you expound on exactly what will happen? Because you just want to maintain your point that it won't work, no how no way.

I'm confident that what I say is pretty much based in fact, from experience.

From experience hooking stereo equipment up or experience on the job with test equipment? I'll wager hooking up stereos.

So, tell me again exactly WHY anyone would WANT to trust an unregistered poster?

Your only defense and one that you return to time and again. If someone with a creative nickname posted, you would probably actually read what they said.

The original poster really wasn't sure what he had or what he wanted to do. I gave him the one and only option based on his initial query. You gave him and me your thesis on why it can't be done, no how no way. By the way, I had the same question many many years ago with a Sony receiver and I just wanted anything that would work for awhile until I could upgrade, just like we were led to believe was the original poster's intent. Guess what Sony told me. (See the very first response).

 

[markw]

Whatever...

You just keep on going and going and going...

The posts speak for themselves.

The real pity is that you were more concerned with being "right" than solving his problems and, in the end, you neither solved his problems nor were you right.

you really ought to check that ego at the door, man. You learn more by listening than talking.

chow.

 

[Unregistered]

The problem was solved on the first post.

 

[markw]

Really?

The poster's reply to one of my posts, from post 10, on the first page of this thread. We're now well into the third page and this is post 26...

Like you said, connecting the sub to the tape out last night did not seem to be the answer.

I believe the problems this guy had were finally put to rest after my next post, # 11. After that, he was not heard from again.

Now, post 12 was a snide remark from you, post 13 was a quoted "response" (read "attack") of my previous posts from you and, ever since then it's been you and me, baby. You proving your ignorance and arrogance and me politely trying to correct your misconceptions. Well, politely up to a point anyway.

You just keep on going, and going, and going...

Are you in any way at all related to the Black Knight in Monty Python's "In Search of the Holy Grail"?

 

[Unregistered]

He said it didn't seem to be the answer, no elaboration. Was it that he was dissatisfied with lack of volume control, no sound whatsoever, muffled sound, what?

Tell us professor, what EXACTLY will happen if you were to use a Y-connector connected to either tape out or the pre-outs to a single subwoofer input.

 

[markw]

I've already proved what I know. It's your turn, kid.

Maybe you should show all of us what you know. If what you've posted so far is any indication of your depth of knowledge, I'm sure we all will have a good laugh.

Why should I waste my breath when you've proven beyond the shadow of a doubt you have no idea what you're talking about.

Heck, you couldn't even grasp the simple concepts of combining of the two signals, and the tape monitor/volume situation, why should I think you could understand anything else?

...and you want to test me? Grow up, kid.

Even moreso, why should I bother to answer someone who doesn't even have the cojones to identifty himself? ...particularly one who didn't even bother to read my initial answer.

You have already proven yourself a petulant child who priovides bogus advice hiding behind an anonymous name, so why should I bother any more. I've already proved my point that unregistereds info cannot be relied upon, even though that was not my origional intent.

Tell ya what. Either stick to a consistent name, in which case I'll consider having a serious discussion with you, or else let your big brother have the computer back so he can finish his homework.

So, if you want to view this as a victory for you, go celebrate and have a few drinks, assuming you're old enough to.

Merhinks they just might be starting to rethink this allowing non registereds to post idea.

...run into the killer rabbit yet.

 

[Unregistered]

Exactly what I thought. You can't explain it because you really have no idea what actually happens.

 

[markw]

What grade are you in?

Exactly what I thought. You can't explain it because you really have no idea what actually happens.

Yeah, like thought is a strong point with you.

I already did, many posts ago.

I tried to learn ya but you already know too much. You ain't worthy of my knowledge.

I may bat ya around like a cat does to a mouse, but that's about all.

Is this where we start the "yo momma" insults?

 

[Unregistered]

The only thing you said was that the signal will want to travel to the opposite line as well. If I have a poorly shielded cable or an impedance mismatch the same type of thing will occur with an otherwise proper connection.

So, does the amp blow up or produce no sound?

I want to learn from you.

 

[markw]

Then register.

got it, kid? Then I'll think about it.

 

[Registered]

Official registration pending adequate explanation

Please mister please explain it to me. I promise to listen real good and then help others to see the light for I am blinded.

 

[markw]

First, rax these cars.

You put the rax on with your right hand, using a counter-clockwise motion.

Then, you take it off with your left hand, using a clockwise motion.

When this is done, get back to me.

Rax on... rax off... rax on... rax off... got it, kid?

oh, and while you're at it, you might consider becoming a member.

nice try, kid. ...but not good enough.

 

[Registered]

DONE
I used a Y connector to connect both waxing pads and it worked just fine. I'm sure my professor will tell me it didn't really work, but he just wants me to accept that what he says goes without any explanation.

 

[jcriggs]

The stupid part of this hole forum is that everybody is giving answers when there is little to base those answers off of. There is so much more detail about the receiver and the sub that was not givin to give a diffinative answer. Like the fact that a stereo finatic knows that if a receiver with a biuld in amp only has speaker outputs and no specified sub output it is ment to be used on full range speakers, witch are speakers that have the tweets mids and subs all in the same box. This said speaker box has a board biuld in to seperate the different ranges and send the signal to the speaker that the signal is ment for. So in all actuality u can use the speaker out put for any speaker. If u want to use the 4 surround speakers and a sub but only have 4 speaker outputs then u connect the 4 speakers and then connect the sub to any one of the 4 outputs. This in no way effects the sound. Granted this is not exactly the professional way of setting it up but hey the question was what would work not how is it supposed to be done. Now if it's a normal receiver then common sense says that u need to get an amp for it otherwise it is pointless to even think about using a sub. Question my logic all u want but I have grown up around home stereo systems so I know all the tricks and trades. Maybe if I were givin a better description of what u are working with I could give u an exact answer

 

[fstd]

I realize this thread is 12 years old, but since I have the exact same issue and since it has been dug up last month anyway... Here's my question:

With a stereo amp (no sub out), two speakers and an ACTIVE sub, what is to stop me from doing this: http://penenen.de/subsplit.jpg (same file attached)
Are there serious drawbacks with that approach?

 

[Got Hi-Fi?]

...and why would he need to? If the receiver doesn't have a sub out, then it certainly doesn't offer bass management or individual channel trims. Just use the sub's volume control and adjust it as close as you can. Once it's set, there is no need to change it.

LOL.