• 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 freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Thunderbird Club

Golf courses look like a great place to ride a 2-stroke dirt bike with big knobbies. Launching out of a sand trap and landing in full roost mode on the green would be the proper use of a golf course. Turf everywhere, especially in the air.

That would be an excellent use of a golf course!

Have I explained the only way I can see really enjoying golf?
 
I'll never do that again: Bought a toy hauler, equipped same, took it to UTV Takeover in Sand Hollow UT (18-23 Oct), up at 6 AM (not by choice), day and night rides, usually by campfire til 2:30AM, 3 days to clean when we got home due to sandstorm, rainstorm, snowstorm, here's proof:
View attachment 4863170
View attachment 4863171
Bottom line was too exhausted and busy to follow this thread, was over 1,800 behind, just caught up. Don't let yourself get that far behind.

I see there's a Texan in there...
 
You shouldn't focus much on Youtubers, most of them are heavily biased. So their opinions have as much worth as dung on the side of the street. I personally have nothing against NR's, though personally I just don't like the aesthetic, I prefer Reverse Thunderbirds.

Agreed. I also suspect a lot of it's bias; most Gibson basses don't get too much love on YT.
I much prefer reverse Thunderbirds, but there are a couple of NRs owned by TB groupies that get my heart beating faster. My biggest beef with the new NRs is the bigger neck; my short fingers prefer the thin necks. Still, if I were looking for another bass, a red NR would be a contender if the price was right.
 
... The Gibby three point is perfectly functional, robust and reliable. Can it fall off the bass if you remove the strings? Sure. It was designed so that the strings hold it in place, the fender bent plate was designed so the screws hold it in place. If you remove the screws on the bent plate it falls off the bass as well....

Except that basses are expected to have routine string removals. They are not expected to have routine bridge removals. Especially by the player.
There's an acknowledged and acceptable possibility of string breakage, which on a three point leads to a saddle falling / going flying. That's not the case with a bridge. (While the three point has been known to do this, I doubt more than a dozen people would consider it acceptable, and Gibson hasn't (AFAIK) acknowledged the possibility.)
 
Except that basses are expected to have routine string removals. They are not expected to have routine bridge removals. Especially by the player.
There's an acknowledged and acceptable possibility of string breakage, which on a three point leads to a saddle falling / going flying. That's not the case with a bridge. (While the three point has been known to do this, I doubt more than a dozen people would consider it acceptable, and Gibson hasn't (AFAIK) acknowledged the possibility.)
String changes aren’t an issue as long as you don’t flip over the bass with the strings off. Now, breaking a string at a gig, hadn’t thought of that.
 
Except that basses are expected to have routine string removals. They are not expected to have routine bridge removals. Especially by the player.
There's an acknowledged and acceptable possibility of string breakage, which on a three point leads to a saddle falling / going flying. That's not the case with a bridge. (While the three point has been known to do this, I doubt more than a dozen people would consider it acceptable, and Gibson hasn't (AFAIK) acknowledged the possibility.)
I have about a dozen three point equipped basses. I’ve changed the strings on them many many times. Never once have I removed the strings and had the bridge jump off the bass. The reason is probably because like any sane person, I typically unstring and restring the bass while it’s laying flat on a table. Im sure that if I picked it up vertically or flipped it over on its belly I’d experience the dreaded bridge ejection, but why would I do that. It’s really a non issue if you know what you’re doing, the issue never comes into play. I consider the easy removal of the three point a feature, it allows me to lift it out of position, easily clean under the bridge and then simply slide it back in place with out having to reset intonation or action.

Now the occasional string break on a three point is a different story and could be an unmitigated disaster on stage, and a PITA at home. In 25 years of playing bass I’ve only broken one or two strings and they were both while tuning up to pitch, not during a performance. So the saddle didn’t fall out, but easily could have. Just lucky I guess.

On the other hand, I have had at least two occasions where one of the grub screws on my Fender bent plate saddle fell out, during a performance. Screws up tuning, intonation and action and it’s impossible to find one of those little buggers once they are gone. I’ve had a few also strip out at the hex head while adjusting and I’ve had a number that decided to self adjust while playing (probably from some previous owner replacing a lost one with the wrong size new one).

Bottom line - neither bridge is perfect. Both are adequate. One has just as many faults as the other. Both are Butt Ugly.

Give me a Warwick two part bridge on a Warwick, an Alembic two part bridge on an Alembic, an Epiphone two part bridge on a Gibson, and a High Mass bridge on a Fender, and I’ll be completely satisfied.
 
Except that basses are expected to have routine string removals. They are not expected to have routine bridge removals. Especially by the player.
There's an acknowledged and acceptable possibility of string breakage, which on a three point leads to a saddle falling / going flying. That's not the case with a bridge. (While the three point has been known to do this, I doubt more than a dozen people would consider it acceptable, and Gibson hasn't (AFAIK) acknowledged the possibility.)

I have about a dozen three point equipped basses. I’ve changed the strings on them many many times. Never once have I removed the strings and had the bridge jump off the bass. The reason is probably because like any sane person, I typically unstring and restring the bass while it’s laying flat on a table. Im sure that if I picked it up vertically or flipped it over on its belly I’d experience the dreaded bridge ejection, but why would I do that. It’s really a non issue if you know what you’re doing, the issue never comes into play. I consider the easy removal of the three point a feature, it allows me to lift it out of position, easily clean under the bridge and then simply slide it back in place with out having to reset intonation or action.

Now the occasional string break on a three point is a different story and could be an unmitigated disaster on stage, and a PITA at home. In 25 years of playing bass I’ve only broken one or two strings and they were both while tuning up to pitch, not during a performance. So the saddle didn’t fall out, but easily could have. Just lucky I guess.

On the other hand, I have had at least two occasions where one of the grub screws on my Fender bent plate saddle fell out, during a performance. Screws up tuning, intonation and action and it’s impossible to find one of those little buggers once they are gone. I’ve had a few also strip out at the hex head while adjusting and I’ve had a number that decided to self adjust while playing (probably from some previous owner replacing a lost one with the wrong size new one).

Bottom line - neither bridge is perfect. Both are adequate. One has just as many faults as the other. Both are Butt Ugly.

Give me a Warwick two part bridge on a Warwick, an Alembic two part bridge on an Alembic, an Epiphone two part bridge on a Gibson, and a High Mass bridge on a Fender, and I’ll be completely satisfied.


I change strings reasonably often as on most of my basses I prefer the brightness and clank, when that goes away I want new strings. Having changed strings many times on a lot of different basses one thing I've never done is flip it over, who does that?
Having broken E and A strings onstage a few times I can say that it's not a big deal, your broken string holds the saddle in place.........I finished the song and picked up my spare - Playing live 1 bass = 0, 2 basses = 1.
Re Lobster, I think he's mostly apeing Gibson haters, it's a popular thing to do and he's obviously on YT to make some $$$ and be some sort of celeb, he's a much better bassist than I am, I'm a hack with a pick that plays too hard, but as it turns out the NR seems to sound great when I flog it.
Regarding the QC on his bass - yes, Gibson should do better, the bow in the PG and bubbling paint should not have left the factory - My simple fix is to buy my new Gibson basses from Sweetwater, they check everything and don't ship basses with flaws, my 2021 arrived perfect, no paint flaws, nicely set up and at the same price all the major dealers were selling at.
 
I know there are gonna be folks in this particular club that obviously like the NR. I'm trying to figure out why the consensus of most YT reviewers seem to feel similarly. I do tend to wonder if the same would hold true if there were a different name on the headstock. There's a couple vids (I think several folks from here) that are actually favorable, but otherwise it seems heavily slanted towards negativity.
It is really us. We do what we can to keep the legends alive - neck dive, muddy sound, one trick pony, poor quality, fragile headstock. What did I miss? That is the thing. If we don't slag 'em, other people might get in on the secret. That would be bad.
 
The ES125 is the guitar George Thoroughgood uses?


A club member was selling one quite recently. Good luck with your search.
I don't know what George Thorogood used. An ES125 is an archtop hollowbody with no sou d block and no cutaway. I doubt he used one because there is poor access to upper frets and they feed back at high volumes.
 
Agreed. I also suspect a lot of it's bias; most Gibson basses don't get too much love on YT.
I much prefer reverse Thunderbirds, but there are a couple of NRs owned by TB groupies that get my heart beating faster. My biggest beef with the new NRs is the bigger neck; my short fingers prefer the thin necks. Still, if I were looking for another bass, a red NR would be a contender if the price was right.
I'd like to find a 2021 NR to "play" on a little(doesn't need to be plugged in to anything, I just wanna see how it feels). No place within practical driving range has one-I've called the GCs near me. They say they'll order one and if I don't like it they'll take it back. I'm not in the position to tie up ~$2354($2200 +FL sales tax). And, until the 67NR explodes*, I'm OK with what I gots.

*again
 
I don't know what George Thorogood used. An ES125 is an archtop hollowbody with no sou d block and no cutaway. I doubt he used one because there is poor access to upper frets and they feed back at high volumes.

I think it may be. I remember reading that it is an ex ‘students level’ guitar model he bought at a second hand store and that was the best feel for him coming from being an acoustic guitar player.
My guitar teacher has a ES175 and it looks pretty much like GT’s guitar.
Whatever it is, it looks pretty cool. :)