Anyone with a high-end home theater sans sub?

Ok, let's look at what's the focus and interests of the general "A-gon" crowd here are, so maybe we can help clear all this mess up here...
I'm looking at the "discussion forum" category break downs, and the posting trends that I can remember off hand, and I've put it all together. (aren't you all so glad?!...lol)
I see here we've got 11,000+ posts for "preamps/amps". Next most is "speakers"...yeah!!!!(with 8,000+ posts). Then we got "digital", with 5,000+. Then "cables" with 4000+ postings, followed by good ol' "analag" with 3000+, ending with "HT" at 2000+ posts for discussion...
Ok, so what I gather, is that, even though speakers are DEFINITELY the most important factor in any audio system, gear-wise, THEY ARE OBVIOUSLY SECOND IN IMPORTANCE to the "gear-heads" on this forum!!! Go figure. Most people here, it seems, from what I read, worship their 10 baggillion dollar CAT L1/Macintosh/Golden Tube/whatever preamp's, as THE ANSWER TO ALL TINGS GOD LIKE IN RELATION TO AUDIO!!!!! I mean I think there was, what, like over 1000 posts (litterally) regarding a past posting entitled "Preamp deal of the century", er something er other, right? So we see the priorit order here.
Then, Digital over analog! K, true audiophiles here, all of em!!! Yeah, don't be FRONTIN'!!!!!!!!!...all you digitalia peps!...lol (ok, I'm one too...oh well...lol!).
And then, we got "Home theater" with a lowly 2000+ postings, WAY BEHIND EVERYTHING ELSE mostly!!!!
So, let me get this straight...most of the people here swimming around in the Audio Gon pond, are really into their preamps, then maybe their 2 channel speaker system. They then like their digital DVD players and CD players more than their turn tables and tuners I suppose. Then, lastly, they MIGHT consider HT, or at least ponder whether HT is even worth it er not!! After all, their great sounding world class, super dupper 2 channel, exotic, one of a kind preamp's (yawn) must be making their mediocre, "just get by" speakers they picked up at the flee market sound SOOOOOOOOOOO good!!!...driven by their 5 year old dvd player or 300 disc cd changer, no less!!!
Of course, there's obviosly still some "tube-guy's" and turntable dedicated's around here...let's not forget them.
Still, they think NOTHING OF HT!! So it's no wonder people here are on the 2 speaker HT bandwagon! It all makes sense now!!!
Oh, it also apears many here believe cables "make a difference!" That's at least a good sign...lol
Like I said, "show me someone who doesn't think cables make a difference, and I'll show you someone with a crappy sounding system...every time!"

Three Flrnlamb posts in a row and they get more rambling and incoherent each time. What in God's name is he even talking about?

Let's have some fun and try something new. Can anyone guess how many exclamation points Flrlamb used in his last post?

A. 16
B. 28
C. 46
D. So many that the author would have to be insane!
E. Both C and D

If you answered E, you are correct. Those who answered D get partial credit for make an astute observation apart from the tedious exercise of actually counting such a ridiculous number of exclamation points. Next time I'm going to count the number of times he uses "lol" or types in all caps.

Also, for a guy who has bragged about his credentials to the point of making everyone nauseous, he really doesn't want to verify what those credentials are. Flrnlamb said:

If you need your home theater (come on over, anytime folks, really!) done to a world class level, then you call me!...seems fair enough, sure...lol

I’m certainly not interested, but maybe some other Audiogoner’s are. "Come on over, really..." Where?

As a newcomer to the 'Gon, I would feel honored to get flamed by Flrnlamb, sort of as a rite of initiation. So here goes.

I would like to comment on the distinction between "passive" and "active" as I understand those terms in this thread. The crucial point is not whether or not the amplifier is inside the same cabinet as the big cones. Rather, the crucial point is whether the crossover occurs before or after the high-level amplification. I have a VMPS New Larger subwoofer, which is passive in the sense that it does not contain a built-in amplifier, but since I am feeding it an input signal that was crossed over prior to amplification, it yields the same advantages that Flrnlamb enumerates for powered subwoofers.

There seems to be a growing school of thought that the best overall sound quality, for both music and home theater, results from placing the crossover BEFORE the amplifier. The real question in predicting a subwoofer's addition to (or subtraction from) overall sound quality is whether the subwoofer starts with a line-level, already-divided input signal (best solution) or whether the subwoofer takes a full-range high-level input and then extracts the bass from it, sending the remainder to the other speakers (inferior solution).

This idea is nothing new. Audiophiles have been bi-amping and tri-amping their speakers for decades. (Although, if full-range signal is delivered to each set of binding posts, then the benefit of this appoach seems uncertain.)

I found an interesting discussion of this topic in Sigfried Linkwitz's website www.linkwitzlabs.com. Linkwitz, no slouch in crossover and loudspeaker design, designed his Orion speaker with a separate pair of binding posts for each driver, thereby requiring 3 or 4 channels of amplification per speaker. The crossover, which is custom made for the specific drivers employed, occurs at line level, between the preamp and the power amp. The result, he claims, is accuracy and dynamic range that is unobtainable with high-level crossovers (the kind that most of us have).

There are many large full-range speaker systems with flat response down to 20 Hz or lower. According to the viewpoint I am describing, these full-range speakers may have an inherent disadvantage if they divide the signal after it has been amplified. The combination of a high-quality subwoofer, high-quality line-level crossover or surround processor, and high-quality amplifier, would seem to have an inherent advantage over the other system design.

Javachip

Certainly sounds like a vote toward the dsp8000 then! Just that it is digital until the crossover.

Javachip - sorry - my post should have been addressed to Dmurfet