Completely agree. I like my NR, so I'm not bashing, but as you said, if you are attempting something of a recreation, how does changing something that important/fundamental even come up? You know they made a few and some got to play them. But, "here's the thing" (Monk), they sound great at home, it's only in a live setting they lack some mid and typical thunderbird sound. Maybe no one got to use them in a mix. Stupid on Gibson if that's the case. I am so curious to know the reasoning that led them to say, "This is better or as good as the original!" I assure you those words were never said. I still wonder if they were thinking there must be some differences so the value stays up on vintage, or the new NRs aren't modified and passed off as originals. Far fetched I know, but no more so than, "Hey, let's move the PUs from those perfect spots."
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.
Thunderbird Club
- Thread starter TBird1958
- Start date
-
- Tags
- club thunderbird
Ooh! Is that Burgundy Mist Metallic?The new and improved Shelby GT.
The new and improved Shelby GT.
don't shaging laugh, but I saw a Geo Metro convertible on the road last week.
- Jun 30, 2010
- 49,588
- 221,967
- Disclosures
- musician/artist/owner - Gildaxe
That's the accepted explanation but still not believable because any 50yr old vintage instrument no matter how pristine will be different in many ways than a brand new instrument. So it's more like - how can we do this as cost effective as possible not caring if it's not accurately recreated. Probably they just plopped the N pu wherever it looked 'right' w/o measuring a vintage NR.
Serious question: Did Gibson say they were aiming to recreate the original?
Or...the spacing on the CSN was the same for current Reverses and they didn't want to reprogram anything. I realize the body is different, but possibly something about routing the pickups was easier to left alone. You realize that no matter how we try to apply logic, that's going about it all wrong since logic clearly wasn't used in the design process.
A very legitimate question. It's certainly possible the goal was to not recreate anything other than the general body shape. Why that would be, who knows. They don't seem to do that with new versions of LPs and SGs as far as PU placement goes. They change a lot of things, but placement is never one of them as far as I know. Seems to be the one of the very few things that can't be tinkered with (for good reason). You may be on to something, but with all the clamor for a NR over the years, why finally make what people want--but make it differently from what they want and expect? We will never know and even if we did it could still be something of a head scratcher.
I enjoy thinking about the thinking process (how a person--company in this case), arrives at a given conclusion. That's interesting...even fascinating, and at times completely baffling. I know with my work when I or someone mentions a change, I ask things like: "Why? For what purpose? What problem are we addressing? Is it a problem or a preference? Is it a fix or just a different or favored way or doing something?" Among other questions. Maybe indicating I should seek professional help!
All good questions! Including, of course, the need for professional help.
Since cars always get talked about here, this makes me think of the New Beetle. Front-engine and water-cooled.
Had a moment and looked at Gibson's site and noticed the heading said, "Always Moving Forward." Doesn't sound like PR for a close recreation, but one incorporating a number of innovations and changes.All good questions! Including, of course, the need for professional help.
Since cars always get talked about here, this makes me think of the New Beetle. Front-engine and water-cooled.
I haven't seen much on the VWs yet.
That was in the late '90s I think.
with the heart in the right place however…All good questions! Including, of course, the need for professional help.
Since cars always get talked about here, this makes me think of the New Beetle. Front-engine and water-cooled.
- Mar 13, 2008
- 18,897
- 142,236
- Disclosures
- Endorsing Artist Mike Lull T Bass pickups, The Bass Shop, Seattle WA.
I don't think there will ever be a truly accurate re-issue of any '60s Bird. They are beautiful instruments, but to expect them to recreate the frail headstock, the dodgy bridge etc........Won't happen.
Ah, I thought there was talk of something more recent. Maybe that was years ago with the second version. I definitely don't keep up with recent car trends unless it's something I own.
I just measured quickly and I think it's purely visual as much as anything. From the neck to the first PU is exactly the same from first PU to the ring on the second (bridge "lead") pu. Some OCD person (I can be that person at times), possibly couldn't stand to see them not more evenly spaced nor over come the urge to put them where they were originally. Still a cool bass. Same with my '06, which I assume are in the same locations.
I suspect so.
Good point. Is that your way of saying don't expect to catch lightening in a bottle twice?
Wasn't the Aztec one of Mr. Whites cars early on in Breaking bad?
