Hi Folks:

I searched for this but can't believe this hasn't already been defined in one thread before. We throw around these subjective terms all the time...I'm thinking it would be nice to actually make them more objective, like in noting frequencies where applicable, etc. OK, here's probably the most common list (feel free to add to it):

Punchy
Warm
Round
Snappy
Bright
Sizzle
Bite
Grind
Growl
Throatiness
Sterile
Clean
Gritty

PUNCHY: the frequency range approximately between 100Hz and 300Hz, more or less. This is the frequency that carries a clear fundamental for most notes on a bass guitar, and a clear harmonic where the fundamental frequency is below 100 Hz. This is the frequency range toward the higher-end of what you can feel and in the lower end of what most people can distinctly hear. Presumably, it's called "punchy" for just that reason...it's the range of frequencies that you can both hear and feel, thus giving them considerable emphasis.


Feel free to add more terms, definitions, and/or to add to my definition!

Dave

Great topic. I'd love to hear the definitions. But I think your topic is way too big. Maybe discuss/argue/pontificate about one item at a time.

So, how 'bout punchy then for starters?

Interesting definition you have there. I like the part about "considerable emphasis." I see what your'e getting at, I think. That hit you in the chest feeling in a rock club, though nowadays it's the kick drum that really punches you.

But I'm not sure about your frequency parameters. The fundamental of a four string's 1st octave E is like 82 hz, yes? And low A below that. Cannot these notes be punchy? And the second octave of E is like 164 hz. Is that note so punchy? And a geetat playing an E at 328 hz; can this note be punchy? Can a violin playing an E @ 656 hz be punchy? I'm not sure of this frequency thing here. Maybe something is punchy relative to something else. Does a P bass atill sound punchy coming out of the AM radio speaker of my old 67 buick? I guarantee that this "audio system" never, ever produced a sound felt more than the buzz of a house fly. But I might say of a song coming out of it, that bass is punchier than the bass on that other song.

Here's what a few online dictionaries say about the word:

having punch : FORCEFUL, SPIRITED

1. Said of speech or writing: vigorous and effective; forcefully expressed.

expressing something effectively and with power

I'm not sure what these definitions mean in a musical sense, but it does kinda sound like they're talking about basses. Lemme turn up this amp a bit and express something effectively... with power!

I dunno, here are what I think of some of them. I apologize for inventing some other words to describe the sounds. Whatever, just my opinions.


Punchy- A sound that tends to punch through and be heard through the mix?

Bite- A sharp sound, what you get from using a pick.

Growl- A dirty sound, what happens when you start banging strings on the frets.

Sterile- The sound my bass made on my bands only attempt at recording, no character, kinda muddy.

Clean- Piano like?

PHAT- Has a nice bwah sound to it, like using a very fleshy pick.

Or you could get crazy and use your fingers

When I think phat I just think about "fight for your mind" by ben harper and paul mcartney's beatles stuff....oh yea the hollowbody hofner on the neck pickup with bass boosted....phat

What the hey. . .I'll tackle 'em all. . .

Here's my $.02. . .

Punchy -- Able to 'cut through' a mix. Balanced emphasis in the mids, in tandem with proper balance of lows and highs.

Warm -- Three-dimensional. Think 'first time you listened to your Alembic F-2-B through headphones'. . .Possessing depth, clarity and overall 'presence' without being harsh.

Round -- Emphasis on lows and low-mids, with flat/trimmed highs. Think James Jamerson.

Snappy -- Tight, focused response in the upper register. . .Around 4K. Think Sadowsky preamp.

Bright -- Similar to the above, but a more 'general' adjective, IMO. Has both positive and negative connotations, too. "Too bright. . .Not bright enough", etc.

Sizzle -- High-end response above the 4K range.

Bite -- Ability to cut-through when you dig in hard.

Grind -- Ability to generate mild overdrive in an amp's preamp when plucked/picked/slapped hard.

Growl -- Same as "grind" but with more low/low-mid empasis.

Throatiness -- Ear-pleasing combination of 'grind' and 'growl'.

Sterile -- Two-dimensional sounding. Usually, if not always, has negative connotations. Think plywood-bodied bass, crappy solid-state preamp, etc.

Clean -- Just what it means. "What goes in = what goes out".

Gritty -- Fuzz-like quality. To me, means 'peaky' overdrive, sudden distortion.

Can't wait to see what everyone else comes up with. This is a cool thread. . .

Cool so far...especially the different definition of "punchy"...let me add another of my own probably twisted definitions...

WARM: Slightly boosted frequencies in the range below 100 Hz (maybe even 60 Hz and below?). The range can be felt but not heard quite as distinctly as higher frequencies, thus the association with something you can feel (warmth) moreso than hear. Makes the bass tone sound thick, full-bodies, and substantial. Too much boost in this frequency range = muddy.

On the grind/growl/grit side, I associate this with higher frequencies (probably 300 Hz - 1KHz or so maybe?). I generally think of "gritty" as being done with mild overdrive or distortion being produced by the preamp, while I tend to associate "growl" or "grind" moreso with producing this on the bass guitar itself by digging into the strings to get more fret noise added to the signal. I guess I think of "grind" as the higher pitched fret noise, and "growl" as the similar but more low-mid sounds...

Dave

You probably have a point there. . .

"Warm" might just lie in those frequencies. . . Maybe the "F-2-B" syndrome that I mentioned can be attributed to that -- "Thick", "Full-Bodied" and "Substantial" all describe that "Tone I Hear In My Head" (F-2-B), if you know what I mean.

I still think "Growl" and "Grind" are "interactive" Bass/Preamp sounds. Of course, you can, in my book, take "grind" to the point where it becomes "Clank". Not something I desire in my tone overall, but it's another adjective possibly worth discussing. . .

Another thing, too. . .I guess I should temper my idea of "grind" with the fact that I usually associate "it" with the "thchhk" sound of a pick on a roundwound string. . .

R

Growl/grind
bass tone-lemmy, chris squire, geddy lee

voice-lemmy

Agreed on the "Lemmy" idea. Not much other than "growl" and "grind", overall. Just gotta say, I saw Motorhead at Ozzfest in Wisconsin a number of years back. Lots of "growl" and "grind" to go around, in all quarters.

Christ, they rocked. . .And they only played 40 minutes. . .

Defining these terms without context won't be all that useful.

Instead, something along the lines of I want to sound punchy, like the bass on track xyz of the abc album is a bit more useful.

I am no engineer, but I have a decent ear. I can't tell you what frequencies are boosted with any accuracy. Also, boosting certain frequencies on a Precision bass will react differently than say a Jazz bass or a Ric. Throw in a different players, and there are too many variables to quantify these terms in my opinion.

Good idea, though.

Thats kinda what I was getting at, but to me its like a fingerstyle where you really dig in, and the strings kinda roll off your fingers(like they sould with a pick), ass opposed to a gentler stroke where the strings bounce of your fingers.

BTW Bright- A set of breand new light guage super slinkies

Phat is so much more. I hesitate to define phat and put limitations on it. Phat bridges that magic realm between tonal excellence and nirvanic groove.

In short, phat is a term not be used lightly.

Juan Nelson's line on Ben Harper's tune "Fight For Your Mind" is indeed phat.

Peace.
--s-dub

I always wondered what people meant by a Warwick having a "low Growl". Based on the above, it sounds like a combination of distortion and fret-noise.

That can't be right...

Anyway, I wonder if the different sounds could be characterized by thier waveform - sine/triangle/square. I remember in my earlier days learning a bit about that in the context of synthesizers. I've never looked at a bass through an osciliscope, but I suspect a low EQ sound would be somewhat like a pure sine, and a big-muff would give you more of a square. Maybe just the right EQ can give you a triangle? Too bad I sold my old 5 Meg Heathkit scope...

I agree (to an extent). Terry Buddingh (sp?) wrote a good column trying to define the different words to describe sounds - I could scan it and stick it up on t' web if anyone's interested (and BP's not going to take me to court...) IIRC he broke it down into frequency response, texture, and time-based parameters, which helps clarify things, but many of these terms overlap.

Punchy is the worst one of all - "that which will make me be heard" seems to sum it up, but every bassist wants to carve a different 'punchy' space for themselves.

If we could generate and interpret multi dimensional graphs of SPL against frequency against time against all the different components of distortion, that would let us really nail down what it all means. But that's never going to happen...

Alex

Interesting thread. In some case qualifiers can be separated by a very fine line.

Warm - To me things that sound warm have alot of 60 hz.
However alot of 60 Hz can equal muddy.

Same goes with punch, to much punch can be boomy, etc.

Clarity can be increased in the high frequencies, but can produce sizzle if used too much.

My favorites are terms like "airy," "open," "spacious." I have no idea what any of them means. They also seem to be very likely to appear in BP pickup & string reviews.

Besides, I think "woody" and "tinny" pretty much exhaust the really interesting sound categories.

Hi all, Jonathan Herrera from Bass Player here. This is a topic near-and-dear to my heart, as its vagaries are at the core of what I have to do each month. Although I believe one's tone terminology is fairly subjective, I do think Terry Buddingh's April '02 piece on the topic is a good comprehensive overview.

Having said that, I'm trying to paste the contents of Terry's story in here for you, but can't get it to work. Any tips? In the future, if you have any specific questions regarding terminology I or one of my colleagues used in a review, please fell free to drop us an email. Thanks! Hope y'all are doing well...just got a copy of the redesigned Bass Player today. Hope you enjoy it when you see it.

Jonathan Herrera
Technical Editor
Bass Player Magazine
jherrera@musicplayer.com

C. Alex, that Terry B. column was pretty good about this stuff.

Perhaps one of the BP product review staff will chime in and explain how they use some of these terms.

In the end, describing sound in words is a challenge. All it does it make me want to hear the actual tone/sound/product or whatever.

Peace.
--SW

Punchy - The drummer after 5 beers
Warm - When the lead plays a "C" chord in an "F" key. When he plays Em, that is "colder"
Round - Direction the drummer should face when playing (face the "round" end).
Snappy - The front man when he forget the lyrics.
Bright - Opposite of drummer.
Sizzle - Noise made by an overdriven Hartke.
Bite - When the battery for your active pickups die mid-set.
Grind - What your teeth do when the frontman gets all "artistic" on you mid-song.
Growl - Noise in your throat during "grind".
Throatiness - Noise made by frontman after the abortive and ill-advised Robert Plant imitation.
Sterile - What happens when you sit on a tube.
Clean - Strings before the first set.
Gritty - Strings after the last set.
Phat - What she never, NEVER EVER looks like in "this".

I contacted Jon who sent me the file (thanks Jon!). Here's Terry's article.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Amp Clinic by Terry Buddingh

Describing tone is the most difficult task confronting a gear reviewer, who must use words to convey complex sonic characteristics. The verbal art sometimes seems woefully inadequate when describing tone’s more intangible aspects. This is further complicated by the fact that not everyone perceives tone in the same way; in particular, equipment designers and musicians seem to speak different languages.
Gear designers are usually engineers, and engineers like to quantify characteristics with numbers. A speaker designer might boast that a new cabinet varies only ±1dB from 100Hz to 1.5kHz. That’s impressive—if you speak the language of decibels and Hertz. But a bassist might ask, “Does it growl? Does it bark?” (And how much does it eat?)
Some engineers are offended by the vague nature of subjective verbal descriptions. They prefer to cite the benefits of objective measurements: Numbers don’t lie, and everything you need to know is in the specs. The methodology for accurately measuring frequency response and loudness was perfected decades ago, but it’s still difficult to measure more abstract characteristics such as “growl” and “bark.” Specs are great for quantifying performance; words, however, can more clearly communicate tonal qualities.

The Three Elements Of Tone
After performing critical listening tests for over three decades, I’ve concluded that tone-describing terminology falls into three basic categories: shape, texture, and dynamics. “Shape” refers to broad frequency-response variables; “texture” describes more subtle characteristics (kind of like the difference between the feel of satin and sandpaper); and “dynamics” describes variations in loudness.
I’ve also observed that there appear to be three stages of tone-perception development. The language of beginning tone connoisseurs is often limited to the shape element, but as the listener becomes more experienced—and as their awareness of more subtle detail develops—they become more aware of the second element, texture. An acute awareness of subtle dynamic variations is usually the last skill to develop.
Here are some subjective examples of descriptions within each category, intended to help you develop your awareness of tone. The list is intentionally brief—you’re encouraged to develop your own descriptive vocabulary.

Shape

• Balanced: Minimal response variations from one end of the frequency spectrum to the other.
• Bite: Lower-treble emphasis.
• Booty: Low-frequency emphasis; extended low frequencies.
• Boody: Very low-frequency emphasis and extension.
• Boo-tay: The most extreme example of low-frequency emphasis and extension, a requirement for great reggae tone.
• Brightness: Treble emphasis.
• Fizz: A distorted form of treble emphasis, often superimposed above a more fundamental tone.
• Hollow: Having a moderate midrange dip.
• Scooped: Having a more severe midrange dip.
• Twink: Very high-frequency emphasis; an essential component of good slap tone.
• Zing: High-frequency emphasis, voiced a bit lower than twink.

Texture

• Detail: Sonic resolution, applicable to all frequency ranges.
• Grit: Dirty, unrefined high end.
• Grind: An aggressive-sounding form of upper-midrange harmonic complexity.
• Growl: A more subdued form of midrange harmonic complexity.
• Lace: A subtle form of treble complexity.
• Polished: Smooth and refined; elegantly subtle detail and nuance.
• Raw: Unrefined and lacking sophisticated textural detail.
• Rich: Thick with smooth harmonic emphasis.
• Vicious: Having very aggressive-sounding upper midrange/lower treble complexity.

Dynamics

• Bark: Dramatic dynamic response (with midrange emphasis).
• Quick: Instantaneous dynamic response; no lag.
• Lively: Acutely sensitive to dynamic nuances.
• Mushy: Slow, compressed dynamic response.
• Mwah: Delayed, blooming attack—the classic fretless sound.
• Pop: Explosive dynamic response.
• Punch: Dramatic dynamic response, generally with lower-midrange emphasis.
• Tight: Well-controlled dynamic response.
• Sloppy: Poorly controlled dynamic response; loose and unfocused.
• Snap: Quick treble-range dynamic response.

Musicality
There is another aspect of tone that transcends the other three elements. How well does the piece of gear convey the performer’s musical vision and emotion? Ultimately, this is the most important characteristic. Unfortunately, musicality is extremely difficult to convey in words. But by attaining a better mutual understanding of the language used to describe shape, texture, and dynamics, we can approach the difficult task of describing musicality.

Great article...thanks Tom!

Dave

I think you forgot to include "Clown Shoe."

Anyway, sound like a good thing for the resource page, eh?

ATM

When I first started cruising the various bass forums and info sites, I found somthing through the miscellaneous links part of the BPM website that defined some of the basic terms; technical, mechanical and acoustic. Never could find the site afterwards. I wish I knew how to use the damned "add to favorites" feature.

Phat- Ibanez's new marketing ploy :p

My Hohner's have great growl.

Growl - A sligt low end boost that has just a hint of distortion.

Rooster, I think you've got the best definitions so far.