Linear vs. minimum phase shouldn't make any difference. The biggest problem is going to be the overall volume boost.
 
Even in a relatively bass-light master (e.g. mastered for vinyl), most of the energy is still going to be in the low frequencies. In order to add 3dB boost down there you'll need to have 3dB of headroom to begin with. Depending on the era of the original recording, you may not have even 1 dB to play with.
 
I'd be curious to see a spectral display of your before and after versions, as well as a volume analysis that shows digital overs. You could be adding significant distortion and not notice it without A/Bing your enhanced master to the (volume-compensated) original.

bitflipper
Linear vs. minimum phase shouldn't make any difference. The biggest problem is going to be the overall volume boost.
 
Even in a relatively bass-light master (e.g. mastered for vinyl), most of the energy is still going to be in the low frequencies. In order to add 3dB boost down there you'll need to have 3dB of headroom to begin with. Depending on the era of the original recording, you may not have even 1 dB to play with.
 
I'd be curious to see a spectral display of your before and after versions, as well as a volume analysis that shows digital overs. You could be adding significant distortion and not notice it without A/Bing your enhanced master to the (volume-compensated) original.

Hi bitflipper,
 
Sure I will do that tonight or as soon as I get to my studio.
 
I was careful with my "remaster".  I noticed that if you add a few db to the low end where it was almost non-existent, it really doesn't effect the peaks from going over 0 db really.  In some instances it does slightly, so what I do is I've been turning the overall gain down maybe -1db and then adding my EQ.  RMS stays relatively close to the original, but now I have some room to boost those lower frequencies into :)

bitflipper
Linear vs. minimum phase shouldn't make any difference. The biggest problem is going to be the overall volume boost.
 
Even in a relatively bass-light master (e.g. mastered for vinyl), most of the energy is still going to be in the low frequencies. In order to add 3dB boost down there you'll need to have 3dB of headroom to begin with. Depending on the era of the original recording, you may not have even 1 dB to play with.
 
I'd be curious to see a spectral display of your before and after versions, as well as a volume analysis that shows digital overs. You could be adding significant distortion and not notice it without A/Bing your enhanced master to the (volume-compensated) original.

 
question for you in the meantime, I often heard that bass was intentionally reduced because of vinyl - but vinyl is being made again for a lot of bass-heavy current modern recordings.  How is it possible now, but not back in the 80s?

Better limiters would be my guess. Multi-band limiters were a rarity during the analog years. Nowadays we've got smart limiters such as Ozone 7 that are pretty amazing in that regard.
 
But masters from the glory days of vinyl had a lot more headroom than today's pancaked roadkill. There may just be more room to maneuver in. 
 
 

bitflipper
Linear vs. minimum phase shouldn't make any difference.

Technically, there is a difference and the Linear Phase filter should be avoided in this application because the inherent pre-ring can alter the attack of the bass drum.
 
See the excellent FabFilter video which explains this in detail:
 
https://youtu.be/efKabAQQsPQ
 
 

Well, of course you're absolutely right, Mike. There surely is a technical difference, or there wouldn't be two types of EQs on the market.  It's just not relevant to the OP's particular scenario.
 
You really won't hear the difference with a broad 3 dB boost. To get enough pre-ringing that you'd actually hear it, you'd need a very narrow Q, large boosts and a transient slope on the kick drum that's steeper than any real drum would produce. Like the completely artificial setup Dan resorted to in order to achieve an audible example. 
 
So I'll stand by my original reply: "linear vs. minimum phase shouldn't make any difference". Of course, I'm happy to be corrected. Just create a full mix (pick something with a prominent bass drum) and apply a broad 3dB bass boost, first using minimum-phase and then using linear-phase. Post the results, and if anyone can discern the difference I'll eat my proverbial hat. 
 
(BTW, Mike, I am not being combative. I just want to challenge readers to be skeptical of the many audio myths we've all been brainwashed into thinking are more significant than they really are.)

True. In this case a 3dB boost is not going to produce enough pre-ring to be audible.
I guess my point was to just be aware that pre-ringing can occur with a linear phase EQ.
Most of the time it is not a problem because it is at a very low level.
What if next time the OP re-masters a recording and he uses 12dB of boost on the low end?
Perhaps the pre-ring would be audible then?
For me, it just seems to be good practice to not use a Lin Phase EQ when you are boosting low frequencies and low frequency transients exist, such as bass drum.
 
 
For fun I put a single bass drum sample on four tracks, put three EQs all set to exactly 50Hz, 3dB boost, Q=1.
Track 1 = no EQ, Track 2 = Minimum Phase, Track 3 = natural Phase, Track 4 = Linear Phase.
The magnification is zoomed all the way in on all tracks so that the front detail of the track can be seen.
Note that track 4 (Linear Phase) clearly shows the pre-ring. Note that the pre-ring amplitude is -53.4 dB below FS.
In other words, the pre-ring is "down in the dirt" but larger than I expected (!).
 

Thanks for doing that experiment, Mike. I was too lazy to do it myself.
 
What was the actual pre-offset for the linear phase track, in milliseconds? 

bitflipper
What was the actual pre-offset for the linear phase track, in milliseconds? 

About 50mS.
I would have expected a pre-ring of 20mS which is the period of 50Hz.
I guess with the Q set at 1 the filter is under-damped.
I guess that if the Q was set to .5 the filter would have then been critically damped and the pre-ring would have better matched the 20mS period of 50Hz.
 

I did one more experiment to illustrate various Q settings using the Linear Phase EQ.
The Sonar cursor is set at the first sample of the bass drum.
Anything before the cursor is pre-ring added by the Linear Phase EQ
 
Track 1: No EQ
Track 2: LP, 60Hz, 12dB boost, Q = 40     (very narrow Q)
Track 3: LP, 60Hz, 12dB boost, Q = 1       (typical default Q setting)
Track 4: LP, 60Hz, 12dB boost, Q = .025  (very wide Q)
 
Q = 40: At the very narrow Q setting the filter is under-damped and almost an oscillator (lol).
One full second of ring before the bass drum sample sounds!
You can really hear it. It sounds like a backwards tape effect before the sample plays
 
Q = 1: you can hear a quick "thud" immediately before the drum sample plays.
 
Q = .025: The extremely wide setting has the least audible artifacts.