• 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.

Ripper vs. Thunderbird

M

matthewthall

Sep 10, 2011
6
0
#1
Hey,

I've been thinking about trading my 1980 Ripper for a 1990 Thunderbird. I'm not too familiar with the thunderbirds, so what are the pros and cons in comparison to a Ripper? Tone? Feel? Versatility?

Thanks,

-Matthew
 
#2
The necks are similar. Tone wise the Thunderbird is more a warm growly, high output tone (Mahogany). The Ripper is much tamer. The Ripper however is more versatile, but the Thunderbird is versatile but not in the same way, just not the selection of tones the Ripper offers (varitone).Also don't forget about the lack of upper fret access on the Tbird.

Each is a totally different animal. I would get both.
 
#3
I dont think the necks are anything alike!

My tbird has a really thin jazz like neck even a bit thinner!
The Rippers i have played had big fat necks, a lot closer to my RD Artist, feels a lot more like a baseball bat P bass neck to me!

Regarding versatility im afraid i disagree to, the Tbird really is similar to an angry jazz bass tone wise and is a lot more versatile than people give them credit for!

The varitone on the other has IMO very few useable tones.
 
#4
I really like the looks of the Ripper/Grabber/G3 basses and would like to own another however given the choice between a Ripper and T-bird and I would take the T-bird everytime. They neck dive like crazy but they sound amazing. The necks are indeed a little slimmer than a Ripper and T-birds are usually lighter weight. Those Rippers usually weigh a ton.
 
#6
Johnny Alien said:
I really like the looks of the Ripper/Grabber/G3 basses and would like to own another however given the choice between a Ripper and T-bird and I would take the T-bird everytime. They neck dive like crazy but they sound amazing. The necks are indeed a little slimmer than a Ripper and T-birds are usually lighter weight. Those Rippers usually weigh a ton.
Click to expand...

I have heard comments about the weight before, and that's not my experience. My Ripper and Grabber are both 8.3 pounds. I had another Ripper which was light as well. My Ripper body is alder and I'm pretty sure my Grabber is alder too. The maple bodies must be weighty.

My Ripper had it's electronics swapped out by a PO, so I am free to customize w/out feeling guilty. The current pair of pbass pickups put out crisp low tones. Sounds pretty good as is, but I would jump at the chance of fitting it with Bartolinis.

74.ripper.front.jpg
 
#7
my 76' ripper has a neck similar to a C precision neck but not as fat front to back.. I played a vintage T-Bird once and not sure of the exact year but it had a skinnier neck and reminded me of an Ibanez shaped neck I used to have..... maybe the new ones being made now might have the same shaped necks to save on costs but vintage stuff I don't think so..

I
 
#8
RandyMolson said:
I have heard comments about the weight before, and that's not my experience. My Ripper and Grabber are both 8.3 pounds. I had another Ripper which was light as well. My Ripper body is alder and I'm pretty sure my Grabber is alder too. The maple bodies must be weighty.

My Ripper had it's electronics swapped out by a PO, so I am free to customize w/out feeling guilty. The current pair of pbass pickups put out crisp low tones. Sounds pretty good as is, but I would jump at the chance of fitting it with Bartolinis.

74.ripper.front.jpg
Click to expand...

Great looking bass. I owned 2 Grabbers and they were both pretty lightweight. The Ripper I owned (which was maple) and my friend's Ripper were/are boat anchors. I prefer the Grabber to the Ripper if I had my pick.
 
#9
I agree you should have both.The t bird has way more bottom end and growl. I think the t bird for me has the most comfortable playing neck. very thin and narrow, although the ripper I just bought feels thinner than my rd artist or my eb 3.
And i also found it untrue that the ripper is heavy at least mine isn't. I love the different tones i can get with ripper although i have to crank my amp up almost a quarter turn compaired to any other bass i play live
 
#10
I dont think the necks are anything alike!

My tbird has a really thin jazz like neck even a bit thinner!
The Rippers i have played had big fat necks, a lot closer to my RD Artist, feels a lot more like a baseball bat P bass neck to me!
Click to expand...
Could be they varied during production?

Both Rippers I have owned necks have been thin. Very close to my Tbird. They have both been great necks nothing like my RD (very P bass like). Best necks I have played in my opinion.

ripper.jpg


family.jpg
 
#13
matthewthall said:
Holy mackerel those are some gorgeous basses. I guess my question is, if at this moment in time, you only had enough money to have a ripper or thunderbird, what would it be, and why?
Click to expand...

Thunderbird for sound, appearance and resale value in that order.
 
#18
I'll chip in my .02 I guess.
I love T-Birds, but if I owned a 1980 Ripper I wouldn't trade it away.
I'd save my dough and buy a T-Bird, the Ripper is the rarer bass, post '88 Thunderbirds are not hard to find.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back