Bass, more or less?

Interesting thread, Nocaster. My experience is largely similar to your own. I have tended to own speakers (Quad 57's, Ruark Talisman II's, Rogers Studio 1a, Mordaunt-Short P6's) which do the mids right rather than fully extending to the lowest octaves. With any of these speakers, they do so much right in the critical mid range and lower treble that I seldom feel I'm missing out on the low lows.

Having said that, I've had the opportunity to listen to a few systems with genuine full range speakers (MBL 101's, Avalon Isis, Rockport, Von Schweikert, and a few others) and they have definitely had an additional dimension that my own speakers have lacked and this was no doubt bass related. The common element in all these systems, however, was a significantly larger room than mine and significantly more expensive (and powerful) amplification.

If I win the lottery and suddenly find myself in a listening room double the size, my priorities would certainly shift to seeking a more full range loudspeaker.

"The search for perfect bass is futile, because if you want more you miss it and when you have it it disturbs you".

Yes - technically speaking low frequencies will mask higher frequencies. So what you gain in bass may turn out to be a loss somewhere else (usually in the midrange).

The worst form of bass is the impressive kind or "one-note-bass". This is your prototypical ported speaker with a high Q and a frequency response hump around 80 Hz. Extremely impressive (this sound sells speakers) but hardly musical.

IMHO, the only good bass is one that it is tight and dynamic with absolutely no resonance (critically damped). This will sounds like "less bass" to most people who have often been long exposed to one-note bass, however, you can actually hear more detail and articulation in the bass with this type design (instead of boom boom boom boom)

It's something people hate to hear, but the best way to get good bass (acoustic bass and assorted musical cues) is from room treatment. The cleanest bass can not be bought, it has to be made. In a sense it's based reduction, not addition.

Treatment is generally impossible in most people living-rooms - but it's not an audiophile choice - it's a design choice. I think it should be acknowledged that people spend fortunes and spend years agonizing over something that they have control over once they step out of the audio chain.

In real life (with acoustic music) there is no bass bloat or "boxiness", why should we have it in our systems?

Gregg

IMHO, the only good bass is one that it is tight and dynamic with absolutely no resonance (critically damped). This will sounds like "less bass" to most people who have often been long exposed to one-note bass, however, you can actually hear more detail and articulation in the bass with this type design (instead of boom boom boom boom)

Very well said!

For almost 20 years I belonged to the same school. . . ran Maggies 3As driven for at least half that time with the very hefty Rowland 7M monos. . . no, I did not need any deeper bass. . . I was perfectly happy with the silky mids of the Maggies, even if the bass tended to be anemic. Every time I auditioned other speakers with bass that I could even remotely afford I was confronted with a flawed bottom that was occasionally deep, sometimes punchy, other times bloated, and most of the times tuneless. Then I heard Vienna Mahlers with their twin 10" side-mounted subwoofers. . . fell in love, divorced the Maggies, married the Mahlers. . . and realized that for 18 years I had been living in denial, while suffering of. . . "bass envy." G.