Sound clips that demonstrate the lingo

[Naxn]

I've seen a lot of terms thrown around describing how cabs/amps/whatever sound. Is there a collection of sound clips that demonstrate exactly what "punchy," "tight," etc. sound like?

Thanks from a newb.

[KJung]

Might or might not answer your question, but if you check out my Youtube channel (link in my sig), I have a large number of reviews of various cabs and heads with different basses. I try to use the same verbiage I use on the site, hence linking some of the things I try to describe to the many players who would not have a chance to try any of this stuff prior to purchase.

So, you can year 'wide and smooth' with the 12/6 and 15/6 clips, tight and grindy with the AE410 clips, 'studio monitor pure and even' with the Thunderchild clips, a bit hi fi with the Bergantino HT112ER/TecAmp clips, etc., etc.

At least, you can hear one person's take on a variety of different tonality (of course, all within the context of the same player in mostly the same room).

Edit: If you have a good quality playback system, it is pretty easy to hear the different voicings in the various rigs. The recording quality is quite good. If you listen on computer speakers, not so much.

[bassybill]

I remember TBer luknfur tried to get a collection of clips to give exemplars of these terms a few years back, mainly for the pickups forum - never really got too far with it, unfortunately, for a number of reasons.

I remember being pleased (at the time) that he chose a clip of me on fretless for the very definition of "mwah" though.

[billfitzmaurice]

Originally Posted by Naxn

I've seen a lot of terms thrown around describing how cabs/amps/whatever sound. Is there a collection of sound clips that demonstrate exactly what "punchy," "tight," etc. sound like?

Thanks from a newb.

Two problems. First, none of those terms are strictly defined, they're all subjective. One man's tight is another man's punchy. The other is that any clip is only as accurate as the gear it was recorded with and listened to on. Typical computer speakers aren't exactly high fidelity, while laptops are definitely no fidelity.

[bobcruz]

Yep. I take all these terms to mean "I liked the sound I heard." Nothing more. Sound perception and preferences are so individualized that I just skip over these kinds of adjectives. At most, I think to myself that a piece of gear getting a lot of attention in the form of all these adjectives is something I'd like to hear for myself.

[will33]

+1

Even if the recordings are consistent, playback systems vary from really good to really crap. Throw the style of the individual player in there and who knows what it's going to sound like in your hands.

How many individual definitions of "scooped midrange" or "smooth topend" are there? Could be as many as there are individuals.

I think Kjung does a good job trying to explain it as one can. He's a good player but like anyone who's been playing for a while, or who is good, he sounds like slightly different variations of him playing on all this stuff.

I'm no slick slapper tapper but I have had a bass in my hands for 25 years. I can plug into a SVT or a TNT and sound like me, pull a decent sound out of it and get the job done. Of course it's nice to have great sounding gear, I persue that too, but not having it shouldn't hold you back.

Invent some interactive way to hear this stuff over the internet that sounds like being in the same room with it, with you playing it and you'll be a rich man.


And no....modeling patches and headphones aren't it.