What is Tight Bass?

Deal, Janos...Many a slip 'twixt brain stem and fingertips.... :)  And clarity in forums is a moving target that's hard to maintain anyway. *S*  No harm, no issue, no problem....

'Linear response', over any frequency band imo, is really only possible with test tones or sweeps.  Music is generally multiple instruments with vocals or no in constant states of 'flux', so any linearity is the status of the speakers' ability to track a sine or square wave accurately enough so that complex waveforms as music are reproduced in an acceptable level of accuracy befitting the input....*whew*

How that integrates with a musical waveform 'accurately enough' is du jour....doing it better and above is the hard trick.

Cheery enough for now, J

@asvjerry , that is exactly right. The best way to see what your system is doing is to run a sine sweep and measure the results with a calibrated microphone. $300 will get you the mic and the program. If you do not do this you have no idea what you are listening too and all of you will be aghast when you measure your system.

There is no tube amp that can produce accurate bass below 40 Hz. The out stage impedance is just too high to control a woofer never mind a big inductive subwoofer. Class A SS amps with very low output stage impedance is what you want. Parasound JC 1+s are an excellent example. Pass XA200.8s are another. Above subwoofer frequencies or 100 Hz and above tube amps are fine if you like them. The only ones I personally like Atma-Sphere MA2s. They are a great match for my speakers according to many people. I also like supporting hand made in America. Watch this! http://www.atma-sphere.com/en/index.html  

@asvjerry Hi J, you have a lot of good things going on, and a sound path that you walk. Indeed, that is the beauty of audio, that there are so many choices and so many roads. I think the road you picked is one that can work extremely well, and your enthusiasm proves that you are reaping the benefits. I am glad to learn from you, and our fellow audiophiles who post here. To infinity and beyond! ;

Cheers,

Janos

@mijostyn , *L* It’s nice to right, even if the source is suspect...;) *L*

Square wave sweeps seem to be accomplished by that which is deemed ’dry’ or ’too crisp’, although I tend towards that over ’warm’. This seems to fuel the ’tube vs. ss’ debate, which we ought to sidestep at this junction.... That gets flogged on a regular basis ’elsewhere’ here @ AG, and needs no replay here...🤞.

I’ve the calibrated mic already, and a batch of the gratis programs available and downloaded already, so the means and method are in place. ;)

Being able to ’see’ what’s ’line input’ contrasted to ’room response’ is instructive, esp. in my diy Walsh endeavors....it’s silly to expect them to sink to 20 hz. without ’argument’, and they weren’t meant to, either...

And that’s why I hand it off to a sub....and concentrate on what’s above 100ish hz.

I’d be happy to run a tube amp in lieu of my ss amp to hear the contrast involved, but that’s not in my dance card currently (pun not intended...). I’ll have to wait for infamy to be able to do that under duress....and yes, I’m teasing. *G*

@realworldaudio, thanks for your kind comments, and I’ve been committed to this line of irrationality for over a decade now....;)

I’ve achieved a sort of ’presence’, I guess:

https://www.google.com/search?q=diy+walsh+speakers&oq=&aqs=chrome.1.69i59i450l8.781244161j0j15&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

...and I appear 6x in the ’images’ link, which I think for a diy foray gives me some sort of odd gravitas on the subject....and bearing in mind the vid is 7ish yrs. old and shot with a ’point & shoot’ and a lousy mono mic in it...

What you see & hear is not current, no....but the concept is still under ’revisions’...
My goal is to put the soloist within reach, in a psychoacoustic fashion.

It does require a surround arrangement, but trying to keep it inobtrusive and subtle in a physical presence in one’s space, with a nod towards room treatments that don’t suggest ’recording facility’ treatments in an extreme.

It works, but I fried one of four prototypes in the process. Been working on improvements in the meanwhile to prevent that from occurring again.... ;)

As an omni/dipole enthusiast, and the rise of 5.1 & 7.1 in HT in general, I feel that omnis’ need to be developed and become a real ’player’ beyond what is currently available....
And I’m committed to try in my limited means to give it a go..."...not that it is easy, but because it is hard." to quote JFK, once upon....

*L* Don Quixote had the same problem, but my windmills are smaller and I lack a Sancho as a wingman....;)

"To infinity and beyond!" *L* Not on my bucket list...infinity is a very long time, and I’d doubt sanity would last that long within me... But a good cheer for my team of one....;) Thanks....

Regards to you both, I remain a J in process...

A dichotomy on amplifiers for good bass?  'Tight' if you like, but I prefer accurate, or true to the live event.

Some suggest only tube amps supply bass that reproduces the live event well.

Others that only solid state amps have the raw power required.

May I suggest the reconciliation is in the power supplies.  All accurate bass reproduction needs very stiff power supplies that allow the amp to control big woofers rigidly.  The best amps of every type have big power supplies.  When I switch on my big Krells the houselights dim as the huge capacitors suck juice from the wall.  Big ARs have massive transformers.