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.
New Gibson Thunderbird
- Thread starter dryheat666
- Start date
Same design (mini humbuckers, so another one of their "it works for guitar, it will work for bass" ideas, but just generally made with less care and attention. Possibly with cheaper, poorer quality materials as well.
The trouble is, by spending say $100 on pickups (not many people make direct fit pickups for them) you have already spent a quarter or so of the basses price to make it sound half decent. You shouldn't have to make it sound good.
In my opinion, most Gibson/Epi basses are flawed from the design stage, but try one and make your own decision. It may be the perfect bass for you.
The trouble is, by spending say $100 on pickups (not many people make direct fit pickups for them) you have already spent a quarter or so of the basses price to make it sound half decent. You shouldn't have to make it sound good.
In my opinion, most Gibson/Epi basses are flawed from the design stage, but try one and make your own decision. It may be the perfect bass for you.
- Mar 13, 2008
- 18,908
- 142,368
- Disclosures
- Endorsing Artist Mike Lull T Bass pickups, The Bass Shop, Seattle WA.
I'm continually amazed at some people's utter ignorance.......
Obviously somebody here has never owned a Gibson or Epi 'Bird.
Wow, just wow.
Flame on bro!
Obviously somebody here has never owned a Gibson or Epi 'Bird.
Wow, just wow.
Flame on bro!
Never owned, because I am still at school so I don't have the money to spend on a bass I don't like. Seems like good logic to me.
However, I have heard them in some settings, and they do sound great for some sounds. However, I still feel you can get much better for the money (Gibson and Epi versions), with my playability and tonal preferences. I have tried them out many times over the years I have played. Never liked them.
However, I have heard them in some settings, and they do sound great for some sounds. However, I still feel you can get much better for the money (Gibson and Epi versions), with my playability and tonal preferences. I have tried them out many times over the years I have played. Never liked them.
Agreed. Lots of disinformation here. I'm always amused and/or disappointed by the opinions given about a bass that some posters here have apparently never played. Doesn't do much of a service to the people seeking relevant information about a choice of instrument.
I've played the Epi version 3 or 4 times and the Gibson twice. None of them appealed to me. Maybe it's just the opposite of what I look for in a bass. I'm just offering my opinions on the bass.
What is the point in asking for opinions if everyone who gives negative feedback is to get attacked for it? I have have had bad experiences with them, and I don't normally like the sound of them in recordings. Why shouldn't I give my opinions?
I still encourage people to try it. It's a bass with a bit of a niché, and it may just be that I don't like that sound and feel.
What is the point in asking for opinions if everyone who gives negative feedback is to get attacked for it? I have have had bad experiences with them, and I don't normally like the sound of them in recordings. Why shouldn't I give my opinions?
I still encourage people to try it. It's a bass with a bit of a niché, and it may just be that I don't like that sound and feel.
I think you are being sincere and it's obvious you know a lot. Furthermore, I think you're providing a valuable service by clearly spelling out what you feel to be deficiencies of the T-Bird. On the other hand, you have admitted that you've only played a Gibson T-Bird twice. Yet you are on the same thread with some people who probably have more of a reputation than you realize. Some of them have played Gibson T-Birds literally millions of times more than you, are accomplished bassists, and know quite a lot about the technical aspects of basses. By the way, I have only played an Epi T-Bird for a few minutes and have never even played a Gibson T-Bird. So, I want to make that clear. But that makes me all the more interested in hearing from people who really do know a lot about these particular basses. You've pointed out about the neck dive issue, the mid-range tonal issue, and the issue with reaching the upper frets. However, these things are actually pretty well-known already, although I do think you are right in bringing them up. Obviously, other people do agree with you on this and so when you point this kind of thing out, it should be taken seriously. Personally, I do take it seriously. But if these same criticisms are all that people can come up against the T-Bird, it actually has the effect of making me be even more interested in the bass. Up until I started reading this thread, buying a T-Bird was something I wasn't even thinking about. Now I'm really wanting one. I am sure you are an accomplished bassist. That isn't even the issue. But it's obvious your taste in the way a bass should sound is different from some other accomplished bassists. I think that's all that this really gets down to. It's all a matter of taste.
Ok, it may not be a massive number of flaws, but what are the flaws in a MIA Fender Jazz, which coincidently cost less (IIRC).
The fact they don't produce left handed models shows their attitude to basses IMO.
The fact they don't produce left handed models shows their attitude to basses IMO.
You absolutely should give your opinions especially if you've played the bass in question.
It wasn't just you I was talking about here, Jack. TB seems to have a lot of kneejerk posters who will crow about how sh***y Thunderbirds look/sound but have either never played one or have played the Epiphone T-Bird thinking that the Gibson version is the same thing. It is not, and misleading someone who might find it's the right bass for them (or not) is not fair to them. Again, not that you did that. Here's my 2 cents.
Once you get past the quirks with the bass (neck dive is always mentioned, the dreaded 3 point bridge is a hassle but once you get it set it's fine and anyway there are replacement bridges) you'll find that it's a great bass with a unique sound and look. I'm talking about the Gibson bass here.
I've had an Epi Bird as well as various Gibson Birds and though the Epi is a budget version of the Bird with completely different electronics, woods and build based on its price point it's a good beater or backup bass. Sounds more like a Precision than anything resembling a Gibson T-Bird. QC on both versions vary so if you want to get one play as many as you can until you find the one.
That's for sure, you either love it or you hate it, kind of like Warwicks.
The Fender Jazz really isn't the topic here, but since you brought it up, I'll go ahead and comment. The last three gigs I played, I played a Jazz. It worked out very well. I will say that I didn't pick out that bass to play on purpose. I was in a hurry to get a bass, and that's the one I ended up with. But I was very pleased with it. But just because a Fender Jazz bass is a good bass, that doesn't mean that a Gibson Thunderbird can't also be a good bass. I'm getting more intrigued by the T-Bird all the time the more I think about it. I would like to find out for myself what the deep growl is all about that the T-Bird is supposed to be so famous for.
As for the Gibson company, I think it is well-known that they don't even try to pay great attention to their basses. Obviously, the focus is more on Gibson guitars. Also, I'm sure people might like their basses to cost less. But the same can be said for other companies as well. Certainly, the selections for Gibson bass guitars aren't great. As far as I know, they are only currently offering the T-Bird and SG Reissue. But just because all these things are so, I don't see really why it would be necessary to display hostility to Gibson basses themselves or to create a Fender vs. Gibson false dichotomy.
I've owned several older Gibsons in the past and I find them to not be very ergonomically friendly.
They do dive, yes, which makes playing faster runs a pain in the ass since I'm holding up the neck. I've found them to be fragile as hell too.
I hate the 3 point bridge. With a passion. I've had saddles fall out and I've had them slide around. Gibson couldn't give 2 ***** about playability else they would've swapped out the design 40 years ago.
Upper fret access is poor. A lot of the things I play require me to jump all around the neck to play things in different registers and runs all the way up and down the neck. Thats a no go for the T-Bird since reaching the highest frets are a technique unto itself.
The tone doesn't lend itself well to a quite a few genres and it sticks out like a sore ugly thumb.
I think they're like Rics in my opinion, obsolete design ideas that only sound good with a pick in a rock setting.
PS I also hate Gibson as a company. How could you take faith in a company that blatantly abuses its customers? Their business model is to charge more for the same things since, in a consumer's mindset, if they pay more for the same item, it must be better.
They do dive, yes, which makes playing faster runs a pain in the ass since I'm holding up the neck. I've found them to be fragile as hell too.
I hate the 3 point bridge. With a passion. I've had saddles fall out and I've had them slide around. Gibson couldn't give 2 ***** about playability else they would've swapped out the design 40 years ago.
Upper fret access is poor. A lot of the things I play require me to jump all around the neck to play things in different registers and runs all the way up and down the neck. Thats a no go for the T-Bird since reaching the highest frets are a technique unto itself.
The tone doesn't lend itself well to a quite a few genres and it sticks out like a sore ugly thumb.
I think they're like Rics in my opinion, obsolete design ideas that only sound good with a pick in a rock setting.
PS I also hate Gibson as a company. How could you take faith in a company that blatantly abuses its customers? Their business model is to charge more for the same things since, in a consumer's mindset, if they pay more for the same item, it must be better.
I've owned several older Gibsons in the past and I find them to not be very ergonomically friendly.
They do dive, yes, which makes playing faster runs a pain in the ass since I'm holding up the neck. I've found them to be fragile as hell too.
I hate the 3 point bridge. With a passion. I've had saddles fall out and I've had them slide around. Gibson couldn't give 2 ***** about playability else they would've swapped out the design 40 years ago.
Upper fret access is poor. A lot of the things I play require me to jump all around the neck to play things in different registers and runs all the way up and down the neck. Thats a no go for the T-Bird since reaching the highest frets are a technique unto itself.
The tone doesn't lend itself well to a quite a few genres and it sticks out like a sore ugly thumb.
I think they're like Rics in my opinion, obsolete design ideas that only sound good with a pick in a rock setting.
PS I also hate Gibson as a company. How could you take faith in a company that blatantly abuses its customers? Their business model is to charge more for the same things since, in a consumer's mindset, if they pay more for the same item, it must be better.
I own three Gibson T birds and I don't have a problem with anything you said.
I also use them to play Rock with a pick. So they are just fine for me.
I play my Waterstones for my 50s and 60s Rock/Pop band, and frankly don't need a real versatile sonic palette to do what I do.
I someone wants all that, they should get a bass that has active electronics, and an amp with a complex EQ system.
That's just not what I need. I love my T birds!
I play a Gibson Thunderbird in a metal band and in my opinion it is the perfect bass for anything heavy. I've tried dozens of basses with this band, from a Fender Jazz to a CB with Darkstars, and nothing comes even close. The tone is very low mid heavy and I have absolutely no problem being heard. We're a power trio and the Thunderbird really fills out the sound nicely. Thunderbirds aren't muddy at all, especially with a pick. A lot of my bass lines are pretty intricate and every note thunders with authority and clarity. The only issue I have is that it is a little awkward on a strap. I've had basses with better playability, but none that sound better in this band. I used to own another one and sold it. It's the only bass I've ever replaced after selling one and I've owned a lot of basses.
Mike
Mike
Yep, upper fret access is a pain sometimes especially when I try to hit those high notes on "All Right Now".
Otherwise not a problem. The bass isn't for everyone, it's an unusual design for sure. But for me it works right alongside my Fenders and G&L's.
- Mar 13, 2008
- 18,908
- 142,368
- Disclosures
- Endorsing Artist Mike Lull T Bass pickups, The Bass Shop, Seattle WA.
"PS I also hate Gibson as a company. How could you take faith in a company that blatantly abuses its customers? Their business model is to charge more for the same things since, in a consumer's mindset, if they pay more for the same item, it must be better. "
How is this different from say, Fender?
Do they not charge more for their comprable U.S product than they used to? Mind you I don't personally have a problem with paying for a U.S. built guitar regardless of the company, doemestic wages are higher etc, so I have no problem.
How is this different from say, Fender?
Do they not charge more for their comprable U.S product than they used to? Mind you I don't personally have a problem with paying for a U.S. built guitar regardless of the company, doemestic wages are higher etc, so I have no problem.
