Bass Vs speaker efficiency

I prefer dry vs warm or fat. I boost below 70 hz up to 5 dB leaving 70 to 140 at 1dB or 2dB down. You could say I am boosting what you feel relative to what you hear. I think my version of "dry" bass is what people interpret as "tight". 70 to 140 Hz are the "warm" or "fat" frequencies. This is an example of why high resolution room correction is such a great teacher. In playing around with a system's frequency response you learn what various modifications do to affect the sound. On top of this you have distortions created by the woofer and enclosure which can not be corrected such as port noise. 

Am I wrong to think tight bass is a clean bass without being boomy?

Am I wrong to think tight bass is a clean bass without being boomy?

Clearly its a word that has different definitions with different people.

So the million dollar question is that if high sensitivity is the way to go, given that such speakers give you the freedom to pair with low watt amplifiers, why do companies continue to make speakers below 89-88db? Is it just a conspiracy to sell mega-bucks amplifiers? 

Also, for some reason I have never met a high sensitivity speaker that I like. I listened to a bunch of Klipsch Heritage speakers (except LaScalas), Devore Orangutan 0/96, JBL. etc. I cannot put my finger on it, but there's something about low sensitivity speakers that pull me in much more so than the high sensitivity ones. I'm sure I'm not the only one, otherwise why would anyone ever buy them.

^You’re not the only one. I feel the same way.