I like my Gibson basses.
2019, 1966, 2012, 1965, 2016.
2019, 1966, 2012, 1965, 2016.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
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.
Gibson basses
- Thread starter vivaknoxvegas
- Start date
Is that a 3-point bridge on your EB-2? Never saw an EB-2 with that bridge (especially not a '66).
I both agree with this AND think it misses the point.
If Gibson wants to take basses seriously, they need to pay attention to the "Gibson owner/players" and keep the shapes and sounds that those people expect.
On the other hand, I think the problem Gibson has is that there aren't enough of those "Gibson owner/players" to sustain a product line. They need to grow their customer base. So, they probably need to tweak things a bit, refine their ergonomics, and have some "same old same old" pickup and electronics options. My D-Roc proves (to me) that there is room to update/refine some of Gibson's concepts.
This sounds to me like they could have a "classic" series and a "modern" series, even if Moderne isn't the best name for Gibson to use for this.
I think the above is the crux of the issue. Because with the exception few periods of genuine innovation back in the 70s and 80s, there’s little to indicate Gibson has ever been all that committed to getting into the bass market seriously. Or at least not if you look at their lackadaisical marketing efforts to promote their basses compared to the full court press they put on when it comes to their guitars.
The other problem is that Gibson under Henry J. basically abandoned innovation in favor of Henry’s decision to focus the company on Gibson’s “heritage” and “tradition” and “history.” In short, he turned the company’s focus firmly on its past achievements.
And the new management has apparently doubled down on that vision.
Hard for innovation to flourish in a company that’s obsessed with its former glories rather than its future. .
Yes, innovation and the likes... but... It's not that Fender is scoring big with their innovations (Dimension bass for instance. High quality instrument, very versatile, stylish, a joy to play... and not really a bestseller (and that's me being mild). Those heritage-brands (Gibson, Fender, Rickenbacker,...) attract a clientele that mainly wants instruments firmly rooted in the heritage of where they came from, that's also the reason why the vintage reissues and vintage inspired models are selling like absolute hot cakes. Also because there are plenty of brands out there that do the "inspired by the big brands but with a modern twist"-stuff, or boldly make their own models.
I for instance am not waiting at all on a singlecut 5-string bass with fanned frets and fancy electronics, with an open-book headstock and the Gibson name on it... A reissue of the Thunderbird (non rev & rev) with the 2-point bridge and growly passive chrome humbuckers, that's where money can be found.
I for instance am not waiting at all on a singlecut 5-string bass with fanned frets and fancy electronics, with an open-book headstock and the Gibson name on it... A reissue of the Thunderbird (non rev & rev) with the 2-point bridge and growly passive chrome humbuckers, that's where money can be found.
I was thinking the wings would take care of the strap connection point, this bass wouldn't look like a T-Bird.
Sorry, I lost you there. Now I have no idea about what your actual proposal should look like.
I secured this Ripper 7-8 months ago, thinking I'd find pups and a harness for it, well I've lost interest and have moved on to a couple of vintage MM stingray restorations. I cleaned it up and tested the truss rod with LaBella flats, the neck held true but needs a good fret leveling. I contacted Gibson and a couple of Ripper experts about the serial #. Gibson's serial # database is all over the place in the 70s, the only way to really date one is with potentiometer codes....they're long gone. The Ser# states it's a late '73-"74, but due to it's alder body and lite weight I suspect it's a 1975 model. My guess is that it's 8.5 lbs fully loaded. I'd like to move this bass either "as is" or loaded with Seymour Ripper pups and a proper replica harness. Anyone have any idea what this bass in it's present condition worth? Or should I finish it off with after market parts before selling it? Have you seen the prices on Reverb????? Sheesh they're rediculous!
Attachments
Always liked these, heard a guy playing one in a music shop around '84. Plus, the headstock looks like it could lift a manhole cover... cool
First things first, that's an absolutely lovely husk...
In regards to pricing...while you'll see asking prices in a variety of nonsensical brackets, the actual selling price for a good original Ripper is around $1800-2200 depending on a number of things. When I say "good original" I mean reasonably worn/used and by no means a closet queen collector-grade-example.
My best guess is that the bass in current state could possibly yield $1000-1200, or $1500-1600 loaded with aftermarket parts.
Your Ripper, your call.
My $0.02 only...
Gaolee
Official leathers tester and crash dummy
Interesting that your EB-2d is a 1966. I have been trying to figure out how old mine is, and have never succeeded. I was told it was a '65 when I got it almost 40 years ago. Mine has an adjustable two point bridge with nylon saddles, which would indicate more like a late '67 or later. It never had a mud button, so I guess it was a custom build from the factory. It has clover tuners instead of the later Ys, which means it is probably earlier than 1969 or 1970, but who knows what Gibson did. The serial number gets me results from all over the place, depending on who decodes it. The mystery is kinda fun. It's a red EB-2d, and it isn't stock. The pickup is a Dimarzio One that appears to have been put in when the bass was quite young. No pick guard, but I did put the bridge cover back on. It was my only bass for 25 years or so, but it is now semi-retired.
Thanks,
I remember seeing him in a band called Asia and I read he was in Crimson but that was a long time ago, memory fades as fast as good looks.
I was getting my Ripper ready to sell when I noticed a slight twist in the neck. I loosened the tension on the truss rod and removed the strings, no change.....headstock is still sitting at an angle. I removed the slanted nut and strapped the bass to my neck leveling jig. With the body being level I checked the angle at the platform where the nut sits....it's level. Then I placed the level at the end of the headstock and it's not level. What gives? Has anyone seen this on Gibson basses?
I've owned 2 Gibby's. In over 35 years of being around any bass, I've never considered looking at a Headstock for parallelism. If it plays good, just keep that fact to yourself before you sell. There is really nothing you need to disclose here. You would probably only scare off a noob.
I have no idea. And, to be perfectly honest? I don't much care. Whatever Gibson does this year, bass-wise; dollar to a donut it won't include the words "left handed". Based on past performance, Gibson remembers that there really are left handed bassists that a) like Gibson stuff, and b) can actually afford the stupid Lefty Surcharge they seem compelled to impose on us for the privilege, every 5 years or so. Even then, lefty Gibsons are usually limited to a T-Bird and an SG. But, they do offer color choices - which is more than I can say for some other companies...
So, re-issues this year? Don't know; don't care. 2018 was the last year for lefty Gibson basses (and my black '18 T-Bird is a honey); wake me up in 2023 and we'll talk...
Latest posts
-
-
-
Vintage German parlour looks classical but needs steel strings?
- Latest: bass player 53
-
-