Gibson making basses again

[Old Blastard]

It's people, I guess. Infell in love with the Starcaster but never read anything nice about it .I played one and it was an awesome semi hollow shortscale with amazing tone and felt like a Fender. China or not, I bought one at a stupid price and play the hell out of it when it's turn comes up. Jack is up next, though. Then my fretless MIJ Jazz special. Life is awesome!

 

[pineapplerobot]

Oh look, an ESP LTD.

 

[SanDiegoHarry]

Honestly, I wish they would just stick to their "Hollow Body/ES-335 Style/Old School EB Series" shapes. I feel like all these attempts at making a guitar with asymmetrical horns are turning out to look like really poorly designed Fenders.

My first thought when I read the thread title was "and nobody cared..." but yeah - funky, hollowbody basses, EB3s and T-birds. Don't try to get frisky doing a faux Fender or GL or MM.

 

[Stranger Danger]

It's very Cirrus-esque. I like the Sunburst. I'd like to try one. It should come with a HSC. I like the 24 frets and 12" radius.

 

[RBrownBass]

If it was made somewhere other than the USA, it would be badged as an Epiphone.

If it were made somewhere other than the USA or Europe, it would be badged as a "a great value"

 

[RBrownBass]

LOVE the body shape, can't stand the headstock. I bet it balances better than a T-Bird or LPBass or anything else Gibson's made since the Ripper/Grabber series. These last two editions of the EB series are the best basses Gibson ever made, period.

 

[GMC]

That has the weirdest neck to body joint ever...talk about making the joint over sized and bulky.

 

[Velocibasser]

Well, it seems to offer a lot at this price point, but after a year of no basses, I'm leary about this new offering. Style-wise, many people disliked the previous EB's looks, but it had good pickups and a coil tap, so pretty versatile, it would seem. New model doesn' t offer this. Also, Gibson finally got wise and offered a volute to strengthen the neck to headstock area. Don't see that here. So Tbird headstock and gig bag, what could go wrong?

 

[Gaolee]

LOVE the body shape, can't stand the headstock. I bet it balances better than a T-Bird or LPBass or anything else Gibson's made since the Ripper/Grabber series. These last two editions of the EB series are the best basses Gibson ever made, period.

Bass guitars with a longer upper horn balance like a Fender. If that's what you are used to and what you want, that's great. The reputation for neck dive is a relic of much earlier Gibson bass guitars. I have five Thunderbirds and they all balance better than my Precision, at least as far as I'm concerned. Same with the EB-2. They don't balance like a Fender at all, though, so that's an ergonomic fact. Neck dive and balance issues are really just due to their difference and the ubiquitousness of Fender knock-offs and bass guitars that balance like a Fender. I'm completely amused by the balance problem drum beat.

 

[RBrownBass]

Bass guitars with a longer upper horn balance like a Fender.

Well, basses with upper horns that reach the 12th fret (these include Fender) do have a similar balance, seems to fit into a better ergonomic position for actual playing. Basically, at 52 I've put my longstrap rock poses on ice, so no need for the Thunderbird or long-scale LP Bass that best necessitates those poses.

They don't balance like a Fender at all, though, so that's an ergonomic fact.

No, they sure don't.
But the EB5 comes very close because of the upper horn at the 14th fret. Feels a bit like a Spector that way, but still very playable. No dive at all.

I'm completely amused by the balance problem drum beat.

Grunge on, bro, or whatever it is they're doing these days.

 

[MrLenny1]

They should stick to Guitars.

 

[RBrownBass]

They should stick to Guitars.

Why? It's the resemblance to guitar bodies with bass necks and humbuckers up at the 21st fret or thereabouts that made so many of their early basses all divey and muddy. They've clearly learned something at this point, and it shows, because these basses reflect deliberate decisions favoring ergonomics and clarity over not wanting to admit that Leo just plain got it righter than they did basswise.

I'm just not understanding why Gibson is catching flak here for creating instruments that play well and look nice (IMO) because they don't adhere to the same guitar-specific ergonomics that cost them a bigger share of the US-made bass pie in the first place. I'm sure every instrument has probably had design detractors this early in its life, but we really should let Gibson grow with the evolution of the electric bass, the music it's used in, and the equipment we use to hear that music with.

 

[RedVee]

I quite like the look of the sunburst finish, and it seemingly is good value.

Not much to hate there.

 

[MegaSwing]

Gibson already have a widely popular bass: The Gibson Thunderbird.
Time will tell if this one will become as widely popular as the Thuderbird, but I doubt it.

As far as I know, Gibson isn't making new Thunderbirds for the time being. Go figure.

That's 'widely popular'?

 

[ThePresident777]

Considering that I never had a problem dialing in the 3-point or ever had a problem with intonation or anything else from those, it meant something to me. Babicz bridges are a bit easier to set and adjust than the 3-point. Both are equally solid once set. For the record, I don't have much problem with bent plate Fender bridges, either. I don't know why people hate the 3-point bridge so much, since it's just different. Now, the 2-point was indeed a pain to deal with, but it's another one that is plenty stable once you figure it out.

My point was that Babicz bridges are more than good enough (much more even) to replace a Gibson 3 point bridge.

You can see 3 point bridges running out of room for adjustment on the E string. Can you imagine a 3 point bridge for 5 strings following where the 4 string one left off?

 

[Perrygoround]

They might be content with the Epiphone TBird sales. Who knows? The Classic IV Pro is pretty close in spec to a Gibson and at a much lower price point.

Well, I own a Classic IV Pro -it´s been my main instrument for almost 3 years- and it is true that it is so good that I didn´t feel the need of "improving" to a USA made Gibson. Gibson pickups, neck through, thin neck, light enough, and little neck dive (it depends on the strap and my clothes).
If that is the reason why Gibson no longer making T-birds, that the Epi Classic Pro is so good that they can not improve a simple thing on it by doing it in USA and nobody will pay the price difference. OK, I can understand that... but being Epi Thunderbirds so good, I don´t see the reason why anyone will buy this new EB bass either

 

[jd56hawk]

Exactly. The Epihone Thunderbird Classic Pro can do everything the Gibson Thunderbid can do for 1/3 the price...you can always buy a Babicz bridge if you don't like the one it comes with.
It's very simple, Gibson will always have detractors when it comes to their line of basses...hell, the Fender Precision and Jazz basses have, detractors!
I just find it hard to believe that after taking a year off from making basses this is what they've come up with...someone designed this and someone else actually gave it the go-ahead?
As I said earlier, if they reintroduced the Victory bass I would've been the first in line to buy one. A Thunderbird or EB-2 in something other than Vintage Sunburst, Cherry or Walnut...something like their short-lived Negative line or maybe a Blue Royale line like Epiphone, count me in.
This new bass is simply uninspired and uninspiring. I'd have no reason to even pick one up when there are so many alternatives. Sure, it's all about the sound and how it plays but not one day goes by here without someone posting a pic of their new bass and post after post of someone saying how nice it looks.
Catch my eye or you're never going to catch my ear...and this is from someone whose first bass was an Epiphone Les Paul, the owner of three Thunderbirds, so I'm by no means a Gibson hater. To the contrary, I never even dreamed of picking up the rival Fender bass until a few years ago, but things change. Unfortunately, I just can't go with this Gibson change.
For all those who like it, fine...but I bet only 1 in 5 people who claim they like it will actually buy it.

 

[Gaolee]

Well, basses with upper horns that reach the 12th fret (these include Fender) do have a similar balance, seems to fit into a better ergonomic position for actual playing. Basically, at 52 I've put my longstrap rock poses on ice, so no need for the Thunderbird or long-scale LP Bass that best necessitates those poses.



No, they sure don't.
But the EB5 comes very close because of the upper horn at the 14th fret. Feels a bit like a Spector that way, but still very playable. No dive at all.



Grunge on, bro, or whatever it is they're doing these days.

I'm older than you are and don't do the rock and roll pose thing, either. I like the neck more vertical than a Fender will go. I can do that with a Gibson bass. Not a Fender. So, that's pretty much the long and short of it. You are either used to Fender ergonomics and think that anything that's not like a Fender is wrong. Or, you don't. I don't. No pose, just playing what fits for the ergonomics I like. I have a Precision, and I like it. But, it won't hang like a Gibson. So, it's unbalanced? By your logic, yes, or maybe I'm not doing the hiked up short strap pose right. I don't think so. It's just different. Take your pick. I play an upright bass as well. The way I can strap on a Gibson works more like upright ergos than a Fender can ever approach. That's why I like it.

I'm still amused by the whole balance thing when it comes to Gibson bass guitars. I'm easily amused. You doctrinaire Fender guys are really good at amusing me.

 

[Gaolee]

My point was that Babicz bridges are more than good enough (much more even) to replace a Gibson 3 point bridge.

You can see 3 point bridges running out of room for adjustment on the E string. Can you imagine a 3 point bridge for 5 strings following where the 4 string one left off?

Put that way, no, I can't.

 

[Stevis]

I recently bought a new 2015 Thunderbird. I haven't owned a Gibson bass for 40 years, back when I had a Grabber in high school. I had nothing but Fenders ever since. The T-bird was a bit of an impulse purchase, as it was at a crazy low price for this model. I agree with one of the earlier posts that it would have more of a cool factor in another color, as this is the only sunburst bass or guitar I own. Despite the stupid front strap knob position issue, it is really fun to play - the neck has a great feel and it has a cool sound (albeit not the classic T-bird pups). I have not encountered any QC issues with it. I would not have paid anything close to retail, however.

Given the # of variations in U.S. Les Paul models, color options and price points, it is sad that Gibson does not experiment more with its bass line. It is a nice bass but I can't fathom why the 2015 T-bird should be priced at $2k+?