• 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.

Epiphone Thunderbird Vintage Pro vs Classic Pro

The old classic pro with the Gibson Pups is more aggressive sounding, because the Pups are hotter than the Vintage ones. If you’re into rock or metal, I would prefer the old one. But the New one is definitely a keeper too.

C57FADD1-848A-4F9B-B8AF-FEEA2EF4B4E6.jpeg
 
The old classic pro with the Gibson Pups is more aggressive sounding, because the Pups are hotter than the Vintage ones. If you’re into rock or metal, I would prefer the old one. But the New one is definitely a keeper too.

View attachment 3148931
I can't compare it to the Classic Pro, but I have the Vintage Pro. I know hotness is all relative, but compared to my passive P and J, the Vintage Pro pickups are very, very hot. I can't run it at full volume with my drive pedals because it makes them fart out (in my direct-only, ampless pedalboard setup). I even tried lowering the pickup height . . . like all the way down, but they're still too hot. Not that it's an issue, really. They sound fantastic, and there are other ways to compensate for hot pickups. YMMV.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Miles_ONeal
The old classic pro with the Gibson Pups is more aggressive sounding, because the Pups are hotter than the Vintage ones. If you’re into rock or metal, I would prefer the old one. But the New one is definitely a keeper too.
But to the comparison, based on what I've heard in videos online, I would agree that a classic would be better for certain types of rock, and certainly metal, because in my opinion it has a darker, more mid-scooped sound. The vintage is more for classic rock type vibes, IMHO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Miles_ONeal
But to the comparison, based on what I've heard in videos online, I would agree that a classic would be better for certain types of rock, and certainly metal, because in my opinion it has a darker, more mid-scooped sound. The vintage is more for classic rock type vibes, IMHO.

The TB Classic Pro is from all my passive Basses the loudest one. I think the Vintage Pro comes close to that. IMO the best option is to get both types . One in white and one in black. Compared with a Gibson TB you can get 4 of them and the difference isn’t a big issue.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RedVee
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.
 
I have a 2016 Goth Thunderbird IV which I only paid $200 for. I almost bought a Vintage pro from Sweetwater but realized if you already have one Thunderbird why buy another?

What makes them special anyway is the shape and their legacy regardless of what model TB so decided I'd just buy a set of hipshot clover tuners (like the ones on the Vintage) but smaller of course to fit the headstock to give it it's own character. I prefer the black satin paintjob anyways and the base pickups are dark, heavy and thunderous. I could always throw on some EMG TB pickups some day.

There is a difference in wood too. The Goth has a maple neck/rosewood fingerboard and the Vintage pro uses Mahogany/Walnut neck with a rosewood fingerboard. Both have Mahogany body.

Instead of paying $699 for a "Vintage" Thunderbird. I'd rather get a Rickenbacker with walnut body for that vintage rock sound. Just my opinion.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Miles_ONeal
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
 
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
 
I have both of them. Regarding quality, they are on par with Gibson imho. The Classic sports original Gibson pickups, thus it sounds pretty dark and rock- typical punchy . On the other side, the Vintage Pro sounds a little brighter, which makes it more versatile. But both are indeed real Thunderbirds in feel, look and sound. Beside that, both are great and I would'nt miss them at all. I use them depending on the song and my current feels.
Thunderbird.jpg
 

Latest posts