Bass Vs speaker efficiency

In general,  low bass extension comes at a cost and that is Sensitivity.  This is only a generalization, overall, the balance of mass vs motor tells the story, but regardless of the woofer,  anytime that you add mass, FS goes down and so does Sensitivity.  

I think many associate tight bass with speakers that don't go very low, and many times this is very efficient low xmax woofers.   Much more to it than what I am pointing out here, but this thought process persists. 

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.