Thanks for your patience. I just feel very nervous about posting my own interpretations of station recordings. Fortunately, there is also this
post here that addresses the topic:
The quake demonstrated that when hit hard enough, Earth "rings like a bell," according to John Derr, a seismologist with the Geological Survey in Albuquerque.
The frequency at which Earth rings is far lower than any ordinary bell, beyond anything you could hear. But when struck with the force of Sunday's magnitude 9.0 quake, the ringing can last for days.
Located at Kirtland Air Force Base, the Survey's seismometer continued to show weak echoes of the quake Tuesday afternoon in the form of pulses of movement in the Earth's crust every five to six minutes.
I just feel very nervous about posting my own interpretations of station recordings. I don't want to make you feel that way. I am not a seismologist either. But then some geologists can be sticklers for accuracy in interpreting data.
The quake demonstrated that when hit hard enough, Earth "rings like a bell," according to John Derr, a seismologist with the Geological Survey in Albuquerque.
I never disagreed with you on how the ringing like a bell would be an appropriate comparison or word picture. What I did question is the association with and abundance of 1-3.0 (or what ever it was you origionally posted) richter quakes in the basin and range province. What may be confusing is that these seismographs recorded the 'ringing' and projected false low level seismic reports (which apparently were removed after review by a seismologist) and not posted on the USGS web site.