Given the subs are low freq. does it really make a big difference ?
I cannot daisy chain the subs. SO, I use a Y adapter coming out of the amp now.
I have a friggin Pioneer VSX 1252-k ( SC-32 equivalent ) Had a Denon 3808, however lightening hit the house and took it out. Yes, had it on a surge protector, but, had it in the wrong friggin circuit andit was a bypass.
Anyways, the insurance company, didn't think I needed a 4 ohm amp for my highly priced speakers I guess, had to send pics and info on them. Needless, to say after a few days, he agreed a 8 ohm (normal ) amp wasn't enough. So, he offered to replace it with this amp and I said yeh ok.

Enough rambling, that is to be replaced this summer with either a Anthem 500 or a Marantz 6007 and a Emotiva XPA 3.

However, the Anthem is a 7.1 and the Marantz is a 7.2. and just wondering "if" the .2 is that much of a noticeable difference ?

PS, house is finally being built and the movie room is
13.6'W x 18.5'L x 8' H
I will sit 11 ft from the fronts. The M80 will be about 6" off the back wall and about 1ft from the side. The Side QS8 are 6.5 ft my sitting position and the rears are 5ft.

PS, not sure if I am going with the VP160 or VP180, yet and I am seriously looking at the Martin Logan Depth One, Just not suite sure yet, may go with dual EP500 or SVS 12 plus.
I heard the ML and it really kicks butt

Obviously, the .1 or .2 refers to whether or not you wish to use one sub or two which will, as everyone knows, depend on your room acoustics. In the case of the Anthem, if you want to use two subs, all you will need is a "Y" plug out of the AVR to accomplish that. Compared to the use of the "Y" plug, individual subwoofer connections as applied to the Marantz, especially with bass, other than maybe some minor volume differences which can be adjusted at the sub anyway, have virtually no affect on what you may be hearing.

My own personal preference is always have, at least, two subs to deal with any room anomalies and "dead" spots especially since you have a fair size room and when set-up with the proper phase and volume balance between them, the overall bass response with two or more subs will be smoother AND more dynamic, a noticeable difference as opposed to just one.

makes a difference if setup correctly to even out peaks/nulls across multiple locations.

For the RECEIVER, the only difference you would gain from the 7.2 over 7.1 is in the very rare possibility that it can apply room correction to each sub independently. If the Marantz doesn't EQ each sub independently, it's really just 7.1 with two sub outputs and you might as well use a Y-connector on the Anthem.

Troy, two well-positioned subs(typically at the mid-points of the opposite side walls, or of the front and back wall, or in diagonally opposite corners)can help lessen the effect of room modes and result in smoother bass.

Your main question, however is whether a so-called "7.2" receiver has significant benefits. The first point is that there's no such thing as a 7.2 channel receiver or a 7.2 channel format. There's only a single .1 low frequency channel, and having two outputs for that channel rather than one(in effect, an internal Y adapter)is at most a minor convenience since an external Y isn't needed. The 6007 sends the same bass signals out through each of the two outputs and they can't be calibrated for loudness and delay separately, as a very few receivers can do(which still doesn't create .2 channels, just independently calibrated .1 content).

The 6007's "7.2" label should therefore have little or no weight in your decision.

Thanks, I don't think the Marantz does. atleast I cannot find it in the manual and I am sure if I ask the sale guy at Futureshop he will say it does, to get the sale ,

Think, I may go with the Anthem MRX 500.

Thanks, John and Tom

OK, one more question for you guys.
I have heard the Martin Logan Depth sub, albeit in there outdoorsy room and am impressed even at that.

I also, read some reviews and all favorable and then I read some reviews on the Paradigm Sub1 and sub2. Although, these are way higher end then the Martin Logan, they are based on the same concepts.

I wonder if, these would be as benificial or have better bass response than one EP500, given that they are driving in three different directions and they cancel out localization.
They definately seem to be beter than one sub.

Also, I wonder ... I currently have two Energy ESW-10 subs. Do you think, it would be wise to mix them in with say a EP500, SVS 12 or even the ML ?
I guess what I am saying "IF" i get two EP500's would it be benificial to set up all four or would the Energy degrade the quality of sound

There will be some benefit. However, the larger subs will outplay the smaller one by a large margin. I had 1 EP600 and an 8" JBL sub.. The JBL was adding to the room, but you couldn't tell the damn thing was on, unless you put your head right next to it.. The 600 was THAT over powering... Now i have 600's and can say replacing the JBL with a second 600 did make a HUGE difference in my room. Depending on the size of the space you have i think two or more subs can be beneficial, even if they aren't the exact same size... If you go with a pair of 500's, those will over power your other stuff. But, your other subs will be adding to the room, and they're paid for; so, why not use them...?? :~)

Troy, although the process of minimizing the effect of room modes through the use of multiple subs works best with identical or at least very similar subs, you should certainly experiment with the EP500/ESW-10 setup. I'd suggest that you place them so that the same subs are placed in opposite mode positions. For example, place the EP500s at the midpoint of the front and back walls and the ESW-10s at the midpoint of the opposite side walls. Another such positioning would be having the same sub in diagonally opposite corners.

I have a 9.2 Pioneer receiver now, replacing my previous 9.2 Onkyo receiver, and I suspect that the ".2" has only a marketing significance. That is, it's just like having a ".1" receiver with a Y-connector to connect another sub. However, the Onkyo did play a test signal through each sub separately during calibration, so it's possible that it somehow used information about the distance or volume of two subs independently. The Pioneer 9.2 receiver doesn't even do that, and in fact in its manual refers to the speaker system as "9.1", not "9.2" -- some engineer being more honest than marketing people, I suppose.

I like to use many subs of varying types and room positions. I have 3 subs in one room and 2 in another, currently. You see, more commonly, a recommendation for multiple subs of the exact same model and in nearly the same position in the room. In my opinion, the first arrangement tends to give the smoothest bass response, and the second gives the loudest bass response.

Well, I bought the Anthem MRX 500 ... 7.1 but comes with the ARC Software and mic.

Lots of great reviews.