I checked on this once. I don't think it is, but it I can't find the info where I read about this bass. Jack also talks about this bass on his instructional video.
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.
Played a Gibson SG and hated it..
- Thread starter project_c
- Start date
I checked on this once. I don't think it is, but it I can't find the info where I read about this bass. Jack also talks about this bass on his instructional video.
Guess I got a good one. My 2007 limited edition SG plays great, sounds great and looks great. Sure the mudbucker is muddy, but that's fixed by dialing in a little of the bridge pickup. Sure it's a little neck heavy but nothing a wide strap won't fix. But if you want a non Fender tone, feel and look this is a great option.
Guess I got a good one. My 2007 limited edition SG plays great, sounds great and looks great. Sure the mudbucker is muddy, but that's fixed by dialing in a little of the bridge pickup. Sure it's a little neck heavy but nothing a wide strap won't fix. But if you want a non Fender tone, feel and look this is a great option.
Nice...how thick is that maple top?
I would think the maple top would add some brightness to the attack.
Just guessing but the flame maple top looks to be about 3/4" thick cap on a mahogany body. I suppose it could brighten things up a bit but probably not enough to make a significant difference.
I have a SG bass from the Worn series that I bought fully ready to spend the money on the standard but I liked the feel of the finish so much more.
About the balance - I am 100% with you. There is no way to make them balance on a lap. On a strap they are better but there is still neck dive.
The tone of the bridge mini-humbucker mixed with the neck thump is what keeps me coming back. But it is not my go-to bass.
About the balance - I am 100% with you. There is no way to make them balance on a lap. On a strap they are better but there is still neck dive.
The tone of the bridge mini-humbucker mixed with the neck thump is what keeps me coming back. But it is not my go-to bass.
They attempted to rectify the thud/boom/shudder of the neck pickup by moving it away from the end of the neck in the 70s.
I tried an Epiphone EB3 about 15 years ago, the finish quality was disgusting, the bridge came away and the wiring circuitry was poor especially the pots.
PS It looked great from a distance.
I tried an Epiphone EB3 about 15 years ago, the finish quality was disgusting, the bridge came away and the wiring circuitry was poor especially the pots.
PS It looked great from a distance.
Loving my Epiphone EB3. Especially loving the mudbucker! I've warmed to it much more than the Precision I bought about two years ago, which I'm now trying to get rid of.
Some of the negativity directed at Gibson/Epiphone basses on this forum reads even more like hyperbole now that I've had the chance to sit down with an SG-style bass. They're really not that bad.
Some of the negativity directed at Gibson/Epiphone basses on this forum reads even more like hyperbole now that I've had the chance to sit down with an SG-style bass. They're really not that bad.
As an owner of a 2014 Gibson SG Special and a Fender P I feel compelled to give input here. The Gibson is not for everybody. I took mine to a rehearsal and everybody loved the tone. They told me to keep using it. We are playing classic country and it sounds closer to an acoustic bass. I believe that is where this bass shines. I'm sorry but I love mine whether anybody else does or not.
I hear you, the whole point here was that I love the look and tone too, and I wanted to buy one, but the overall feel and lack of playability put me off. This is not an anti-gibson thread! I just wish they felt as good as they looked and sounded.
You're quite correct it is not an anti Gibson thread, the sad thing is that Gibson jumped on the bandwagon in the early 60s without much thought whereas Fender was a totally different story borne out by their continuing success.
i knew i always wanted an SG bass but the short scales just arent for me (although they are a blast cause with smaller strings you can fly on those things). i got that one for a great deal because the bridge is the hipshot replacement (which id have swapped anyways haha). shes a pig but i love her, and that pickup is what youd expect, flaming hot mud thunder, but id assume most people know what theyre getting when they snag these basses.
when i got her, she had flats on her, and as everyone knows, its 100% pure jack bruce tone. i think i played sunshine of your love at least 200 times before taking the flats off because the tone was so exact i just couldnt stop playing it haha.
I agree with this too.
I've tried the SG bass and didn't care for anything about it. It had bad neck dive, an awkward profile, and the sound was meh. I don't care for the ergonomics of the T-Bird either. I wouldn't mind trying out the new EB but I haven't seen them anywhere yet.
Gibson just doesn't understand bass.
I understand completely. Some people like chocolate some like vanilla or raspberry.
It's all good. I am not here to defend Gibson but it is an American made option that deserves a look if you want a short scale bass.
i 100% disagree.
RDs, Rippers, Grabbers, T-birds, EBs are all kick ass basses. very unique bodies, unique tones, its just different strokes for different folks.
its all preference, but to say gibson doesnt understand bass is a stretch, considering how prolific their instruments have been in rock music over the past 60+ years.
Like the 60s Fender Bass Six the SG and Epihone EB3s are dumbed down with less features than the originals so an already poor bass is even less attractive.
