• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Sustain Vs Attack

Attack VS Sustain

  • I love a bright defined snappy attacky tone.

    Votes: 9 34.6%
  • Roll off the highs, let the drummer do the work.

    Votes: 3 11.5%
  • Eh. Somewhere in the middle.

    Votes: 10 38.5%
  • Carrots.

    Votes: 4 15.4%

  • Total voters
    26
  • Poll closed .
Personally I love a nice bright attacky defined tone, but recently I've noticed that my favorite tones on recordings are sustained with round tube thickness. When I listen to these recordings, often I cannot even hear the attack of the bass note that much.

For your live tone do you love a snappy attack to your tone or are you content to be a little compressed or have a rounder tone and let the drums/other instruments define the note for you? Any thoughts?
 
I like to have a good attack with the ability to sustain...? I generally just damp the note to make it shorter? I don't really understand why you can't have both unless your definition of attack is different to mine. Entirely possible of course. =]
 
I like attack, and used to believe that attack and sustain were at odds until just recently.

A crappy compressor will leave you with one or the other, but a high quality compressor gives you both attack and sustain.
 
Yeah I guess you can have both, but I've read that when recording it can be best to assign some instruments to have more punch, and have some filling in the gaps. You can't have all instruments being punchy or else they lose their..... punch. So I guess my question was where do you fall in that spectrum, and a bit of both is a valid answer, but I'm interested in people who consciously choose one over the other.