• 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 free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Epiphone Thunderbird Vintage Pro vs Classic Pro

jacoby75

jacoby75

Supporting Member
Mar 11, 2010
5,661
10,716
Coldwater, MI
Disclosures
Endorsing Artist: Mike Lull Custom Guitars, DR Strings
#1
Hey guys,

In searching the threads, I have seen some positive reviews of both the older Epiphone Thunderbird Classic Pro (not to be confused with the pro with the active electronics) and the new Thunderbird Vintage Pro. But can anyone actually compare them to each other? Does anyone own both? Apart from the obvious hardware differences, how would you compare the sound of them? I have listened to the reviews by Chris Catero on youtube, and it's hard to distinguish the difference. If anything, perhaps the new vintage pro sounds a bit brighter/harsher (not in a bad way). Maybe a little thinner compared to the classic pro with the actual Gibson pickups. I don't have a guitar store near me at which to compare them. Nobody around even has the new Vintage models in stock where I could try one out.

I know "better" is all relative and subjective, but what are your thoughts?

Thanks
 
  • Like
Reactions: BlueAliceOasis, hillerup, byoung93888 and 1 other person
#2
I know this means very little, but looking at old pics of John Entwistle, his Tbird has the nickel hardware. I realize that tone has nothing to do with the color of the pickup covers, but if that's the sound I'm aiming for, would that mean that the new Vintage Pro thunderbird might get me more in the ballpark, if that's the era they were trying to replicate with the 760 pickups?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: godofthunder59, austin2112, Grapevine921 and 1 other person
#4
Thank you. "Snappy" and "Aggressive" are definitely words I'd use to describe the tone I'm looking for. From what I've heard online, the Classic sounds a bit darker. Not quite as "hairy." I know these are all subjective terms, but I think we're in the ballpark.
 
  • Like
Reactions: byoung93888
#5
I'm running mine through a dirty Orange and Ged 2112 so that helps alot but it still is better sounding to me than my previous Gibsons were.
0106181020b.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nocturnal, flashgod, BlueAliceOasis and 8 others
#6
I'm sure a little dirt would help. I like the tone in the intro of Chris Catero's review of the Vintage Pro on Youtube. I'm assuming he's adding a little drive of some kind, or there's some drive dialed in on the amp, but I don't see any kind of note in the description of what he might be using. Them basses are real purty.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nocturnal and byoung93888
#7
jacoby75 said:
I'm sure a little dirt would help. I like the tone in the intro of Chris Catero's review of the Vintage Pro on Youtube. I'm assuming he's adding a little drive of some kind, or there's some drive dialed in on the amp, but I don't see any kind of note in the description of what he might be using. Them basses are real purty.
Click to expand...

Thanks, for the money I cant say enough good things about the new Vintage Pro. The fit, finish and sound are fantastic.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: JJR58, hillerup and pudgychef
#8
I have the Classic Pro, and it sounds great. But I can not compare it with the Vintage Pro. I would love to own a VP so I could compare them myself, but my budget for new basses is on red numbers nowadays.
Anyway, the Classic Pro is a killer bass. Only thing I think that can be improved is the bridge. I have the look set on a Babicz replacement.
I will stay tuned to thread and see what other can say about both basses.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BassmonkeyJ, GBassNorth, thebreakman and 4 others
#9
I'm curious if one is "better" than the other, which of course is subjective, or if they're just different. If all other things are identical, it would seem that the american pickups of the Classic might give it a slight advantage, but perhaps not.
 
#10
On paper, the pickups and the bridge are the only "relevant" differences. And both can be changed easily, anyway.
Well, apparently the fingerboard is from different species of wood too, and the tuners are of a different style, but both with same ratio.
 
  • Like
Reactions: byoung93888
#13
I have both, but I can't really compare without putting the same strings on each and doing a level-matched recording. Not going to happen while I have all these actual songs to record :). I can say going back and forth between them, there is no quality difference, but there may be slight tonal differences that I could not describe without the aforementioned boring testing. Having said that, I am selling my Classic to get another VP, but that is almost entirely due to looks. I'm ordering a set of Thunderbuckers to put in one of them just for the hell of it, and that will be an interesting comparison.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GBassNorth, thebreakman, SteveHeissner and 6 others
#14
PianoOfDoom said:
I have both, but I can't really compare without putting the same strings on each and doing a level-matched recording. Not going to happen while I have all these actual songs to record :). I can say going back and forth between them, there is no quality difference, but there may be slight tonal differences that I could not describe without the aforementioned boring testing. Having said that, I am selling my Classic to get another VP, but that is almost entirely due to looks. I'm ordering a set of Thunderbuckers to put in one of them just for the hell of it, and that will be an interesting comparison.
Click to expand...

I love the look of the Vintage model. I've always been more of a vintage look guy myself. Probably because I'm old. Mid-life crisis and all. Which is also probably why I feel the need to buy another bass. Especially a Thunderbird, which I'll likely not ever play in church. It's cheaper than a convertible.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Miles_ONeal, ghostinthemach, BlueAliceOasis and 8 others
#15
I dont have both but from what Ive read the only real differences seem to be looks and the better bridge on VP. Sound-wise people claim the VP is brighter (while still retaining that solid low end of the Classic) and closer to the 60's ones but my Classic with new strings has crazy amounts of treble already and quite close to Entwistle's TBird tone, contrary to what one might expect from most talkbass reviews/YT demos (maybe it's because of the tweeter on my amp?)

This leads me to believe that although there is a difference in sound, the rigs through which you put them will be the main factor, and that you couldnt tell them apart if each was on a different one (unlike something like a MM and a P, which you could tell even through different rigs).

Of course, take this with a grain of salt (or 2 tons)
 
  • Like
Reactions: GBassNorth and byoung93888
#16
The rig you play will most definitely play a role in how any bass sounds. A crap amp can make my Lull P sound like, well, crap. I'm current running ampless, though, and go straight-to-board at church with a preamp and some subtle effects. So I don't have to worry about a rig coloring either bass. That being said, having never played either bass - let alone ANY kind of thunderbird - I would imagine that the VP would have a bit more mid-range bite due to the alnico magnets vs the ceramic magnets of the CP. All else being equal. But I have no experience with which to back that up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bassistcool and hillerup
#17
jacoby75 said:
Hey guys,

In searching the threads, I have seen some positive reviews of both the older Epiphone Thunderbird Classic Pro (not to be confused with the pro with the active electronics) and the new Thunderbird Vintage Pro. But can anyone actually compare them to each other? Does anyone own both? Apart from the obvious hardware differences, how would you compare the sound of them? I have listened to the reviews by Chris Catero on youtube, and it's hard to distinguish the difference. If anything, perhaps the new vintage pro sounds a bit brighter/harsher (not in a bad way). Maybe a little thinner compared to the classic pro with the actual Gibson pickups. I don't have a guitar store near me at which to compare them. Nobody around even has the new Vintage models in stock where I could try one out.

I know "better" is all relative and subjective, but what are your thoughts?

Thanks
Click to expand...
Your best bet is to stop by the Thunderbird Club here on TB. I'm sure someone has/had both and can give you a detailed breakdown. I'd be interested to see what they say. I have a Classic Pro and want a Vintage Pro.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hillerup, jacoby75 and byoung93888
#20
"Dukeorock" summed it up this way:
". . . I have spent a fair amount of time with the Embassy Pro (supposedly the same #760 pickups as the VP Bird) and I have two Gibson’s from the 2,000’s (supposedly the same pickups as the Epi Classic Pro). The Gibson pickups are more muscular and dark (not in a bad way) and the #760’s are a little more open and snappy. That’s about the best I can do and some might even disagree with that little contribution."
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nocturnal and hillerup

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back