Let's talk thunk

[SuperFour00]

That's why I used the word "thud". Both thud and thunk are hard to explain, easier to hear.

[coolvinny]

Wow, tone is such a polarizing concept to discuss, which is surprising in a "let's discuss tone" thread. It's just tone man...good or bad, it never hurt nobody...

Agreed that at least on The Trio album Bean has a carved or at least pressed top, but not ply. You can hear it quite clearly when he comps at low volumes especially as he did not use new strings for recording dates.

[jzucker]

Wow, tone is such a polarizing concept to discuss, which is surprising in a "let's discuss tone" thread. It's just tone man...good or bad, it never hurt nobody...

Agreed that at least on The Trio album Bean has a carved or at least pressed top, but not ply. You can hear it quite clearly when he comps at low volumes especially as he did not use new strings for recording dates.

right but imagine if you went into a jazz sax forum and said you didn't like bird or trane's tone!

anyway just teasin yo

[Archtop Guy]

the best example of thunk is joe pass joy spring.

It's a little "thunk" sound that accompanies each picked note. Carved instruments don't do this.

My heritage 550 had thunk too.

I don't know what Mr. Pass used for a guitar on Joy Spring but,That's a carved Epiphone Delux on the cover.

[pingu]

I've got a lam 175 type guitar it was rather thin
and un-thunky ....

It was also a bit lively with the the feedback
A and Bb on the 6th string as is not unusual round here

So I stuffed it with foam , sorted both issues

addendum .....
I recently took out half the foam cos the guit
was a bit too dead (and thunky) for my taste,
just the left hand side is stuffed now and it have
become a bit 'live-er' than it was (but still thunks)

So my experience and theory of Thunk is that the amount of Thunk is related to the damping of the guitar top ....
But you gotta have big strings to impart lots of energy into the top ... in the first place

Some of those 50's guys used to stuff their
guitars to stop the feedback , so maybe that
backs up my theory ?

By the way I'm in no way saying the Thunk is the grail
for everyone

Some folks like the guitar to ring out , fine

I just happen to like it a bit of the Thunk myself

also feel totally free to dissagree or even insult me
personally for my ludicrous ideas , don't care

[mr. beaumont]

Pingu, you ignorant...

Just kidding. You might be on to something...people always talk about heavier strings awakening a guitar...but sometimes, if you go heavy enough, the effect is different.

Laminate 175 style is not a guaranteed recipe for thunk...I go back to the Eastman 371 I played last year (you know, the one where I somehow got my hands on the only bad one of those ever made--it was terrible) and it certainly had no thunk.

[jzucker]

I don't know what Mr. Pass used for a guitar on Joy Spring but,That's a carved Epiphone Delux on the cover.

it's very well documented that he used a '64 175

[jzucker]

I think you're onto something. Wasn't just the '50s guys that stuffed their guitars though. Martino stuffed his guitars on all his early recordings up to his "forced retirement". He stuffed them with upholstery cotton. Approximately 5lbs worth. I know because I studied with him and he helped me stuff my L5 and Johnny Smith.

I don't hear any thunk with those or on any of his recordings though he does get a very percussive sound. Take a listen to "we'll be together again". (Ignore the picture on the front. He was using a carved top, stuffed Koontz guitar on this recording with .016-.058 roundwound strings and super high action).

Some people are referring to this attack as thunk but this isn't thunk. It's very cool though.

I've got a lam 175 type guitar it was rather thin
and un-thunky ....

It was also a bit lively with the the feedback
A and Bb on the 6th string as is not unusual round here

So I stuffed it with foam , sorted both issues

addendum .....
I recently took out half the foam cos the guit
was a bit too dead (and thunky) for my taste,
just the left hand side is stuffed now and it have
become a bit 'live-er' than it was (but still thunks)

So my experience and theory of Thunk is that the amount of Thunk is related to the damping of the guitar top ....
But you gotta have big strings to impart lots of energy into the top ... in the first place

Some of those 50's guys used to stuff their
guitars to stop the feedback , so maybe that
backs up my theory ?

By the way I'm in no way saying the Thunk is the grail
for everyone

Some folks like the guitar to ring out , fine

I just happen to like it a bit of the Thunk myself

also feel totally free to dissagree or even insult me
personally for my ludicrous ideas , don't care

[mr. beaumont]

I'm coining the phrase "bumwp" (with the w) for that Martino tone.

I love that album. Gonna listen to that today.

[jzucker]

I'm coining the phrase "bumwp" (with the w) for that Martino tone.

I love that album. Gonna listen to that today.

you're too late. I've already labeled it "Thonk"

[mr. beaumont]

Darn. And I really hear that "W."

[ESCC]

ThonWk?

[jzucker]

ESCC, that's what I was going to suggest. Jeff, let's pool our trademarks and go with Thonwk

[mr. beaumont]

Like it!

[Engine Swap]

FIFY

[SamBooka]

FIFY

reddit much? lol

[vinlander]

A very interesting experiment Mr. Beaumont, picks make a HUGE difference indeed, I should consider getting thinner than my jazz III to get a thunkier tone

[Klatu]

I'm surprised to see so much love for the thunk.

[Lionelsax]

I do think thunk comes from the tone level.

[anothersixstringer]

To keep this alive just a bit more, a very brief experiment...

I'd say a "thinner" pick--but not too thin, delivers more thunk.

The pick's effect on thunk: http://youtu.be/HqBeKztkflQ

I'm a huge fan of Tal's tone, that magical thunk or thuwnk or anyway you call it, that woody, percussive, kinda-bright-but-not magical sound. So I have tried to re-create it with many amp, guitar, strings, picks combinations. I arrived to the same conclusion, a thin pick does the trick. The Jazz III and thicker doesn't produce it for me. I think I hit the strings heavily with it and the pick does its work, producing a fast, precise attack. Being a fan of very heavy picks (5mm), I have to confess my certain dissapointment with this discovery. Only reason being that I like to get the guitar vibrating, and the longer sustain that result from the heavy pick attack.
Btw, I made this "groundbreaking discovery" when getting a cheap pack of thin picks as a gift, and trying them out as a courtesy nod. I think I recall somewhere that Tal used thin picks too (?)
My theory is that the thunk is a mix of the thin pick sound hitting the heavy string first, followed by the actual string ringing as an effect of the pick attack.
If I find time, I will try and create a video of all these combinations for the jury to consider

[vinlander]

So there are more people into Thunk Farlow than it might seems...interesting !
I am more and more convinced the pick and then by extension the attack angle and technique might play a huge role in that thunk...maybe more so than simply a maple over a spruce top or even tone knob, amp
Was Billy Bean also using thin picks like on the Trio Revisited ?
Since I used mostly Jim Dunlop .60mm and .73mm picks for playing rock and metal back in the days, It might not be too difficult to try again...

update: I just took my old Jim Dunlop nylon .60mm out and I'm now wondering why I was using thicker pick on my jazz boxes...

[Phlatt Wound]

Okay, now for something completely different: Does pickup height (closeness to strings) make any difference with the thunk, gulp, thonk, thownk , or ddouchhe?

[DRS]

Thunk - it's the new haunting mids.

[ESCC]

Not convinced on the pick theory, I've thunked with my fingers. With those exact same fingers I've played thunkless as well.

[SamBooka]

nickle, nickle plated, or stainless steel?