Do most people prefer tight bass or non tight bass?

The first consideration must be : What is the SOURCE of the bass ?  Bass is not generic --- it is specific.  Is the source instrument bowed, plucked, blown or struck to produce the bass in question ?  The "leading edge" of the sound predicates the instrument that produces it.  A bowed doublebass has no "slam".  A tuba cannot sustain a note as long as a bowed doublebass can unless the tuba player uses a technique called "circular breathing".  A percussive or struck bass will decay rapidly whereas a blown or bowed bass can be sustained at the will of the player.  Once the source is determined, then a correct assessment of bass can be made.

Of course, with the advent of electronically produced bass, all bets are off since bass guitar can be sent directly into the recording console without the benefit of any acoustical environment to "tailor" the sound.  "FutureMan", the bass player with "Bela Fleck and The Flecktones" added octaves below what one would expect with his ground shaking "Drumitar" instrument that he invented.  So, in regards to electronic bass, your guess is as good as mine.

 

 

 

Great response. Thank you for this.

I don’t think most modern audiophiles listen to classical or jazz music a lot, so acoustic instruments are not something they seem to know well. If I go by what I hear on YouTube, acoustic instruments are practically non-existent on most pop songs.

By contrast, if this was 1982, it would still be mostly acoustic 🎸(and analogue). I can’t fathom not hearing all the beautiful instruments that exist. And it’s ironic: we’ve arrived in the ’Digital Age’  where everything is available, but we use fewer instruments to make music than we ever have and most of that is electronic instruments. Which is wildly ironic, since High End designers were trying to make their component reproduce all the colors of an orchestra playing acoustic instruments, only to have so much music reduced, 20 years later in pop music, to a diet composed (almost completely) of drums, guitar, synthesizer for the most part. The odd instrument is thrown in, but mostly, the tonal palette in pop music is pretty "gray"-sounding.

Actually, this is a very cool bass track that "stacks" an acoustic bass on an electric bass.

https://youtu.be/oG6fayQBm9w

@gbmcleod 

I don’t disagree with your post, mind you; just to play devil’s advocate though, I’ll say that digital instruments allow us to hear sounds and orchestrations we’ve never heard before. I’d say that’s a good thing, and I respect the opinions of those who think otherwise.

I listen to a lot of electronic / digitally produced music. One day, it struck me that the music to which I was listening had never vibrated air until my speakers reproduced it. Think about that! Pretty interesting, isn’t it? 

Yes, it is!

I suppose digital instruments reproduce some things correctly, but when they’re trying to reproduce the sound of an acoustic instruments. Well, they do a good job. Just not the whole enchilada

By that, I mean "as well as analogue." When I hear a french horn on vinyl, I know instantly it is a French horn. When I hear it on some digital recordings, I can hear that the tonal quality is not the same. I can’t say that I hear that on vinyl. At least, not the records of the ’50s, ’60s and ’70s.

When I listen to this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MtsTT-vJ9M4&list=FL8xpTP3iFfuJnnEXYYR5UGQ&index=3

I hear the brass, and  they are recognizably the instruments I hear in the hall. The performance appears to have been VERY well captured, and the tonal qualities of instruments are there. When I hear this piece through digital (usually, a CD player), the tonal richness is less "there." It still sounds good, but it is not quite all the way "there."  (I’m talking about this performance AND on other recordings.)

And I haven’t found digital - in the past  - to be fully likelike enough, that it is indistinguishable from the actual instrument in life. Many, many people who do not listen to classical, opera, jazz or blues will never miss this. But it is on  some  recordings, whether they "care" or not. And if it is there, I want to hear it reproduced accurately (aka: LIVE).

I don’t mind people who say, "Well, I don’t care about that." That’s their right; it’s their preference. But when people then say, that $20K CD player is no better than my $1000 CD player, and start bashing others (with better systems than them, usually!), I wonder: what kind of music do they listen to?

Because it’s patently untrue that a cheap dac will usually match one of the "giants." I’ve owned excellent,  VERY top-of-the-line digital DACs, and they sounded....Excellent. As in: precise. Great Bass. Great Treble. Great midrange. But it did not always come together as a musical experience. Unless, of course, one doesn’t have a lot of experience with the real thing, and then it’s easy to think that you’re getting "everything." And again, someone whose diet is pop and rock is not going to hear  what the best dacs do. There is not a lot of harmonic information in the typical modern recording. It’s mostly fundamentals. So, for those who don’t care, that’s fine.

And your point is very valid.