Why Humans Describe Sounds with Feelings and Textures

Sound is a subjective experience, deeply personal and unique to the individual. What sounds vibrant and clear to one person may come across as muddy and dull to another. Audio engineers and producers deployed various terms to describe qualities and characteristics of sounds, often using sensory analogies that make these abstract qualities more concrete and understandable.

The Role of Analogies in Sound Description

Every day, we use analogies, similes, and metaphors to communicate more effectively. By comparing one thing to another, we simplify complex ideas and emotions. In the context of audio, producers and engineers use these tools to explain the sonic texture and quality in a more relatable manner. This approach helps others grasp the subtle nuances of audio reproduction and manipulation.

Sensory Analogies in Sound

When we talk about sounds, we often evoke familiar sensations that people can relate to. For example, muddy is used to describe a lack of clarity and definition in midrange and high frequencies. Imagine listening to a classic orchestra while wearing ear muffs—everything might feel dull and indistinct. Conversely, crunchy describes a sharp, high-frequency emphasis, similar to the familiar sensation of scrunching up cellophane. These auditory descriptions help to create a common reference for understanding sound quality.

The Intuition Behind Sensory Descriptions

Our senses of sight and touch are often more concrete and tangible than our sense of hearing. We can see and touch objects, giving them a clearer form and texture. When we describe audio using these sensory terms, it creates a more intuitive and accessible visualization. You can see what muddy looks like in an earphone, and you can touch crunchy in your mouth. Describing harmonic content, timing, and overlay of sounds would be less intuitive and harder to visualize.

Common Terms and Their Descriptions

Producers and engineers often use a range of terms to describe different aspects of sound. Some of these include:

Mellow: A full, warm sound with a rich harmonic structure. Think of a slow, smooth conversation on a clear day. Fat: A rich and warm sound with high resonance. It’s like a well-processed low-end that feels robust and substantial. Crisp: A clear and sharp sound, emphasizing high-frequency details. It’s akin to the detail you get from a high-end digital camera.

Personalizing Sound Descriptions

Creating your own sound description and explaining its meaning is an engaging and creative process. For instance, MelloFluency could be used to describe a sound that is both warm and smooth, with a sense of fluidity and clarity. By assigning a term to a specific sound characteristic, you can help others better understand and identify similar qualities in audio.

Finding Common Ground in Sound Description

The rich vocabulary of audio description, rooted in sensory analogies, allows for a shared understanding of sound quality. This common ground is crucial in collaborative environments, whether in music production, film scoring, or any other field where clear communication about sound is essential.

By using these descriptive tools, audio professionals can convey intricate qualities and nuances to their collaborators and audiences, ensuring that every note and every moment resonate as intended.