Phono-pre: subsonic filter on or off ?

It's clear that music is a complexed signal that has over and under tones.
Rumble or subsonic waves of a large amplitude are not safe for the listener and can cause heart problem if not collapsing and should be voided.
I've always thought that it's part of RIAA standards to have subsonic filters as a matter of fact since becides EMI causing rumble there are record or pressing imperfections that also can take part especially if played at the high volumes.

Actusreus, you are missing my point. It is Marakanetz who is saying to use the term Subsonic (or at least that it is synonymous to Infrasonic) for the Rumble filter. I am saying that the proper term is Infrasonic. Note that KAB avoids either term in all its literature.

You know what Will Rogers said about 'common sense', don't you? Or was that Mark Twain?
salut, Bob P.

Sorry Bob, but I think you're missing the point as you're getting too hung up on semantics rather than the design purpose. The point is that subsonic filters are designed to suppress low frequencies that are not audible to the human ear, and are not concerned with the speed of the sound waves, despite the arguably semantically incorrect nomenclature. So if you want to be the Thesaurus police (and as I explained in my previous post, an argument can be made you're wrong about that too), go ahead, but the Marakenetz's point is correct.
Btw, KAB does use the word "subsonic" when describing the filter. I took a quick look and saw the reference at least thrice on their website.

http://www.kabusa.com/rf1.htm

And who the hell is Will Rogers?