Owners what do you have and can you give me the pros n cons of what you have....Im thinking about getting either a Ripper or a Grabber. Thanks.
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 DirtbagDan
- Start date
pros: they look awesome... they are different... they smell nice? (apparently)
cons: they are ridiculously overpriced
cons: they are ridiculously overpriced
pros: can produce many different sounds, nice balance, fast thin neck
cons: pretty heavy
pros: comfy neck, deep thick lows
cons: bridge pickup is hard to blend with neck pickup
pros: great sound, nice neck
cons: took a little time to get used to the flat top (don't know why)
pros: nice neck, string through body option
cons: pickups are kind of tame - they sound better with the way I wired it, big body
cons: pretty heavy
pros: comfy neck, deep thick lows
cons: bridge pickup is hard to blend with neck pickup
pros: great sound, nice neck
cons: took a little time to get used to the flat top (don't know why)
pros: nice neck, string through body option
cons: pickups are kind of tame - they sound better with the way I wired it, big body
I own this one:
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
I wanted a Grabber, but this one came up for sale, and I couldn't pass it up. Very unique bass. It is a great live bass, and has a tone like no other, it's like all mid, all the time, and it cuts through the mix like a flamming sword through butter. But, recorded, I was less than impressed with the results. I did one tune with it, and with my settings as eq'd for live playing the sound was very honky. I ended up going back and re-recording those parts with my jazz later because the tone just didn't fit the recorded mix. Amazing live bass though, and really stands out. I don't think I've played it at a show where I didn't get at least one other bass player wanting to check it out because the sound was awesome.
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
I wanted a Grabber, but this one came up for sale, and I couldn't pass it up. Very unique bass. It is a great live bass, and has a tone like no other, it's like all mid, all the time, and it cuts through the mix like a flamming sword through butter. But, recorded, I was less than impressed with the results. I did one tune with it, and with my settings as eq'd for live playing the sound was very honky. I ended up going back and re-recording those parts with my jazz later because the tone just didn't fit the recorded mix. Amazing live bass though, and really stands out. I don't think I've played it at a show where I didn't get at least one other bass player wanting to check it out because the sound was awesome.
I've always had an affinity for Gibsons because of the way they "look"
. I wanted the Gene Simmons experience so I tried a few Grabbers and Rippers. My Ripper's neck ended up looking like the road-course at Watkins Glen
. The Grabbers can be light and they can be HEAVY, and beware the dreaded NECK-DIVE on some.:scowl: I also had a Victory Standard back when they first came out in 1981. This was a decent playing and sounding bass, but, OH!, was it heavy. Also had an EB-0 back in the day, but never cared much for the small scale neck and the BOOOOM-y sound.
But you gotta try 'em for yourself, ya know? I personally always end up back in the Fender camp, however...
. I wanted the Gene Simmons experience so I tried a few Grabbers and Rippers. My Ripper's neck ended up looking like the road-course at Watkins Glen. The Grabbers can be light and they can be HEAVY, and beware the dreaded NECK-DIVE on some.:scowl: I also had a Victory Standard back when they first came out in 1981. This was a decent playing and sounding bass, but, OH!, was it heavy. Also had an EB-0 back in the day, but never cared much for the small scale neck and the BOOOOM-y sound. But you gotta try 'em for yourself, ya know? I personally always end up back in the Fender camp, however...
- Mar 13, 2008
- 18,897
- 142,236
- Disclosures
- Endorsing Artist Mike Lull T Bass pickups, The Bass Shop, Seattle WA.
I've had a few Rippers, always played well, the body was kind of big though. Sound was great on all of them. Also had an LP money abss which I only sold because of financial issues, great bass, awesome neck. The LP smelled pretty nice, one of the Rippers was kind of musty though.
The only Gibson bass I own (because it's the only model I can recall that they bothered to offer left handed) is my '74 EB3. I've recently found that flatwounds are the way to go with this bass.
Gibsons get a bad rap for their basses, but I personally like them. They're not necessarily the most versatile, and I don't recall any model that would sonically compare to the more modern, snappy bright tones along the lines of a Stingray, for example, but I think most of their basses typically have a signature Gibson tone, which tends to be in the deep, fat, and dark territory.
Gibsons get a bad rap for their basses, but I personally like them. They're not necessarily the most versatile, and I don't recall any model that would sonically compare to the more modern, snappy bright tones along the lines of a Stingray, for example, but I think most of their basses typically have a signature Gibson tone, which tends to be in the deep, fat, and dark territory.
I have two Gibsons, a 69 eb2, and a 77 triumph. The best sounding bass i have ever owned, and I mean ever, is my triumph (athough it is heavy...). The tone is amazing. That being said.
I am probably going to sell the eb2, if that says anything. Very tubby sounding, and I am not sure what I would use it for musically, meaning I can't think of a situation I would be in where that bass, is THE bass to use.
I have a friend that has a ripper (vintage, but don't know what year) and I have played it. I liked it, but it didn't make me go get it. But that's just me.
I am probably going to sell the eb2, if that says anything. Very tubby sounding, and I am not sure what I would use it for musically, meaning I can't think of a situation I would be in where that bass, is THE bass to use.
I have a friend that has a ripper (vintage, but don't know what year) and I have played it. I liked it, but it didn't make me go get it. But that's just me.
I borrowed a Grabber for a few months before I bought my Jazz. In comparison, the Grabber was super heavy and the neck was like a Louisville Slugger. The controls were nice and simple since you only have one pickup and with rounds you could get a nice bright tone. Sounded a little muddy compared to the Jazz, but comparing a humbucker to single coils is like comparing apples to oranges. I was more comfortable playing it standing up since the body was so huge. The Jazz is much more ergonomic in my opinion.
My '72 SB-450 is my baby. Granted, it's nowhere near stock, as it was refinished and gutted when I bought it, but I've yet to play another bass that feels as good. The body is actually quite light, and the neck is a bloody miracle. It does neck dive, but it's so light that I can hold it in place with my picking hand without any discomfort for a long time. I can't vouch for the pickups, as they were long gone when I bought it.
Vintage or reissue ?
Vintage ones, the Ripper is much more versatile and tamer sounding where the Grabber is more raucous sounding , but not a lot of variations in the tone. The G-3 might be the best of all G series basses.
Vintage ones, the Ripper is much more versatile and tamer sounding where the Grabber is more raucous sounding , but not a lot of variations in the tone. The G-3 might be the best of all G series basses.
Not an owner, but I was a Gibson dealer (as well as Fender, Guild, and a lot of others) for 11 years, 1977-1988. I liked the Rippers a lot- well thought out, and nicely made instruments. The Grabber was a cool idea, but didn't really work all that well. The EB-0 wasn't useful for me, and I'm not a fan of the short-scales but I still kinda have a hankering for an EB-3 just because of Jack Bruce...
The Les Paul Triumph bass was a cool thing, but I thought the neck was a bit too much like a toothpick. They were heavy, and the gazillion knobs and switches didn't make it real friendly on stage. But a good friend of mine used one (through an Acoustic 370!!) and Carl sounded great when HE played it.
The best ones? The original Thunderbirds with those unique pickups! They LOOK RAWK 'N' ROLLLLL!!, they sound great, and it's not a Fender. See, that's the thing about Gibson basses- they don't sound like Fenders and that's a good thing, unless you're wanting a Fender sound. Me, I just gravitate towards Fenders more than Gibson's sound so it's Fenders and Fender-inspired basses for me. But whenI I got my first StingRay back in 1979, two of the finest bassist in town and my good friends played it at gigs and we all hung out together talking about. Tom said "it's like the best Gibson sound ever, but it plays like a Fender!"
And don't forget the Victory- the first time Gibson really came up with a Gibson bass that could really appeal to the Fender player. Good hardware, great electronics, and a nice neck- excpet they weighed more than ash Fenders!
There was also the RD series (I swear "RD" stood for "research and development" without any musicians involved...). Expander, compressor, active stuff and a big body. The RD actually was pretty cool, excpet stupd expensive and not enough people who wanted that unique body shape.
As for the EB-2, I find the Guild Starfire, especially the ones with the original Hagstrom PUPs, to be MUCH better basses. But I might be prejudiced, as I find Guilds pretty much always are better isntruments than Gibsons.
jte
The Les Paul Triumph bass was a cool thing, but I thought the neck was a bit too much like a toothpick. They were heavy, and the gazillion knobs and switches didn't make it real friendly on stage. But a good friend of mine used one (through an Acoustic 370!!) and Carl sounded great when HE played it.
The best ones? The original Thunderbirds with those unique pickups! They LOOK RAWK 'N' ROLLLLL!!, they sound great, and it's not a Fender. See, that's the thing about Gibson basses- they don't sound like Fenders and that's a good thing, unless you're wanting a Fender sound. Me, I just gravitate towards Fenders more than Gibson's sound so it's Fenders and Fender-inspired basses for me. But whenI I got my first StingRay back in 1979, two of the finest bassist in town and my good friends played it at gigs and we all hung out together talking about. Tom said "it's like the best Gibson sound ever, but it plays like a Fender!"
And don't forget the Victory- the first time Gibson really came up with a Gibson bass that could really appeal to the Fender player. Good hardware, great electronics, and a nice neck- excpet they weighed more than ash Fenders!
There was also the RD series (I swear "RD" stood for "research and development" without any musicians involved...). Expander, compressor, active stuff and a big body. The RD actually was pretty cool, excpet stupd expensive and not enough people who wanted that unique body shape.
As for the EB-2, I find the Guild Starfire, especially the ones with the original Hagstrom PUPs, to be MUCH better basses. But I might be prejudiced, as I find Guilds pretty much always are better isntruments than Gibsons.
jte
I've played some vintage T-birds and currently own one thats been in need of a repaired headstock. I had an EB2 and traded it for a Jaco Pastorius.
My opinion of Gibson basses is that they're mostly afterthoughts from their guitar models. Their new models were overpriced, but I guess now that prices of everything else went up, a new Gibson is more in line with everything else. I think they suffer from poor QC. There was an SG RI bass (puzzling since there was never an SG bass to reissue) with a huge gap between the pickups and the body at GC Manhattan for a long while.
In general I find Gibson's basses to be ergonomically flawed (ever try to play in the upper register on a T-bird?) and many of the older ones suffered from neck dive. For those that say the new ones don't, the brand new one I tried made a dive for the floor once my hand left the neck. I also think the Gibson bridge design is one of the worst out there.
With all that said, I still want a Gibson Grabber or a Ripper... if only their bodies weren't so hulkingly huge and heavy.
My opinion of Gibson basses is that they're mostly afterthoughts from their guitar models. Their new models were overpriced, but I guess now that prices of everything else went up, a new Gibson is more in line with everything else. I think they suffer from poor QC. There was an SG RI bass (puzzling since there was never an SG bass to reissue) with a huge gap between the pickups and the body at GC Manhattan for a long while.
In general I find Gibson's basses to be ergonomically flawed (ever try to play in the upper register on a T-bird?) and many of the older ones suffered from neck dive. For those that say the new ones don't, the brand new one I tried made a dive for the floor once my hand left the neck. I also think the Gibson bridge design is one of the worst out there.
With all that said, I still want a Gibson Grabber or a Ripper... if only their bodies weren't so hulkingly huge and heavy.
pros:
-they have or might i say had quite a big bass selection,as to fender only have 3 different bass styles.
-perfect basses for rock and metal
-all of their basses have their own unique tones,and didn't sound anything like the run of the mill fenders
cons:
-they aren't versitle enough for people who slap,and even for people who only play w/fingers to a certain extent.i don't know about you guys,but i have an epi thunderbird and that thing isn't finger friendly at all.gibson basses seem ideal only for rock
-alot of people complain that their basses tones can be rather muddy
-body flaws,like neck dive,and how alot of their basses can be super heavy.alot of people claim that some of the body shapes can be "inconvenient" to them
-they have or might i say had quite a big bass selection,as to fender only have 3 different bass styles.
-perfect basses for rock and metal
-all of their basses have their own unique tones,and didn't sound anything like the run of the mill fenders
cons:
-they aren't versitle enough for people who slap,and even for people who only play w/fingers to a certain extent.i don't know about you guys,but i have an epi thunderbird and that thing isn't finger friendly at all.gibson basses seem ideal only for rock
-alot of people complain that their basses tones can be rather muddy
-body flaws,like neck dive,and how alot of their basses can be super heavy.alot of people claim that some of the body shapes can be "inconvenient" to them
pros: nice neck, string through body option
cons: pickups are kind of tame - they sound better with the way I wired it, big body
is that a real ripper that you just modded a bit,or a lawsuit copy?
i wasn't sure,cause i know that regular ripper controls don't totally look like that
- Oct 7, 2000
- 18,619
- 38,939
- Disclosures
- Endorsing artist: Musicman basses
