NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! I submit.
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
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! I submit.
- Mar 13, 2008
- 18,898
- 142,256
- Disclosures
- Endorsing Artist Mike Lull T Bass pickups, The Bass Shop, Seattle WA.
Isn't he Canadian?
I thought it appropriate
I think Canada has refused to accept him back.. kinda like Oglethorpe in Slapshot.
Isn't he Canadian?
I thought it appropriate
Ha! I'm really neither for nor against him. I think once you hit international pop star status, your point of origin is moot. As a Canadian, we're all pretty much "good for you Beebs, Nickleback, Drake, etc. way to break through the Maple Syrup Ceiling into the American Money Music Machine" but this Beiber guy strikes me as not the best human in the world, but you can't blame him for being a young man with millions of dollars at his disposal for his actions.
Long story short, I don;t care who you are or what you do as long as you're a good person.
You, my friend, are a good person.
For the record, understanding there is likely no joint filler used at all prior to applying the gold, and assuming you can't feel the joint through the clear, I would grade the finish itself as 100% correct.Yeah, I hear ya!
I was a little concerned about a couple of the close up pics being misinterpreted because the grain and open pores are so visible. Its very hard to photograph but once you see it in person and feel it its actually quite striking. As I noted in the comparison, the gloss coat over the gold paint is smooth as glass, you don't actually feel any of the grain or pores. Its a specific look they were going for and they achieved it in spades in my book. The finish has an unbelievable depth to it.
After going over my bass with a magnifying glass the only finish flaw I could find was an inadequate filler job on one end of one joint (which was shown in the photo). For all I know my bass might be a blem. I don't know if others have the same visible joint on theirs. But I'd imagine the bullion finish is incredibly hard to do, trying to get enough filler to hide joints without using so much that you fill all the grain and pores. Had it not been for the one joint finish error the Gibson would have won that category. [...]
BTL - thanks for weighing in with an honest opinion! I did go back to the round two post and edited the descriptions on a couple of the pics to help clarify what was being shown. Your comments and others will help fine tune this shoot out.
Unfilled pores on mahogany are like a box of chocolates...you never know what you're gonna get.
Hipshot Lollipops are 1 7/16" across.
- Mar 13, 2008
- 18,898
- 142,256
- Disclosures
- Endorsing Artist Mike Lull T Bass pickups, The Bass Shop, Seattle WA.
Ha! I'm really neither for nor against him. I think once you hit international pop star status, your point of origin is moot. As a Canadian, we're all pretty much "good for you Beebs, Nickleback, Drake, etc. way to break through the Maple Syrup Ceiling into the American Money Music Machine" but this Beiber guy strikes me as not the best human in the world, but you can't blame him for being a young man with millions of dollars at his disposal for his actions.
Long story short, I don;t care who you are or what you do as long as you're a good person.
You, my friend, are a good person.
Since I'm not a 9 year old girl I've never understood what the big fuss was about Beebs.
Your "Unfilled pores..." line is sig worthy! Run Forrest, Run!Actually, not only can you not feel the joint, but you can only see it if the light hits it just right (I had to take several photos before I could get one that it even showed up in).
As far as scoring in round two goes, if it were a diving competition the Gibson would have won hands down. The degree of difficulty in their build is significantly higher than the Spector build. When you look at the compound angle the neck runs to the body, the wing joining process, and the taper on the center block and wings, then try and imagine how they could put all that together with tolerances tight enough to minimize the need for filler and then encase the entire thing in an absolutely perfect block of nitro gloss, its really quite impressive!
Was the Spector finish flawless? Yep. But I have $250 Squier basses with flawless finishes. If you take a simple design and repeat it enough you can eventually get pretty good results.
Isn't he Canadian?
I thought it appropriate
Late to the party but not all canadians back down....
....except if led by a great Queen, then we always back down. IF attacked by opposites, we stand guard!
While we are coming clean.
My family wanted to buy me a special bass when I retired six months ago.
Always wanted a 55-57 single coil P Bass or a TB II.
Couldn't find a TB II in Australia and this lovely 56 came along.
My family wanted to buy me a special bass when I retired six months ago.
Always wanted a 55-57 single coil P Bass or a TB II.
Couldn't find a TB II in Australia and this lovely 56 came along.
OK - here's a prelude to Round Two of the battle of the birds... Gibson vs Spector
Recall round one was all about the Specs and in my scoring Gibson edged out Spector. Round two is all about the look and feel and fit and finish. The blow by blow chart will be posted shortly with more detailed pics but here's four shots of the two basses side by side.
Full frontal splendor...
Two sexy backsides...
Close up frontal (note the Spector color shift vs the first photo, its always changing)
And an interesting side by side with both basses perfectly aligned at the 12th fret (note the different pickup placements and probable right hand positioning) (and another color shift)
Thing about the comparison is you're really comparing apples and oranges. I say this because in MHO, TBirds are Mahogany, neck through, with Thunderbird humbuckers. These are the features that constitute a Thunderbird bass. None of which the Spector has. Only the body shape is TBird on the Spector. Cool to compare them, but they are very different animals.
I think the effort and organization that went into this comparison is really great. When I think of spectorbirds however, I think of the original ones that Nikki Sixx played, both reverse and non reverse. Now that is the comparison I'd like to read.
They are very different indeed. However, there are buyers out there that really love the Tbird look or sound but might not be able to afford a Gibson. Spector may be a viable option for those individuals. There are many other options as well - Epiphone, Schecter, Dean, Cataldo, etc. Unfortunately I didn't have any of those to add to this comparison, so I did the next best thing - I put together and posted a scoring sheet so that anyone who has or wants a different option can see how their choice stacks up against a full fledged Gibson Thunderbird or Spector Rex5 Pro and even more importantly, they can assign winners for each measured category based on their individual preferences, not mine.
I'd seriously appreciate seeing folks like yourself take the scoring sheets and enter the data for your bass to see where it falls out compared to the Gibson 50th anniversary bass in the shoot out. That kind if data might answer potential buyer questions around - should I pay more for the anniversary edition than a regular Gibson, or does the Epi classic come close enough to a Gibson Tbird in the categories important to me, or how far can I wander from the Thunderbird formula (34" mahogany neck thru passive dual Humbucker design) before I lose the Thunderbird vibe.
The first two rounds of the comparison didn't produce any hands down knockout winners or losers. In my mind they actually highlighted a number of areas where the two basses are very well matched. In some cases both manufacturers took the same approach and in others they took drastically different approaches. Round three should reveal if those different approaches result in drastically different outcomes. I haven't started round three yet and I have never played the two basses back to back so I don't know for sure how its going to come out. But I can say that I've had no issues that I can recall using either bass to get the same job done.
So in short, you're very correct. These basses are very different. That's a fact, its not good or bad. And if I've set this test up properly anyone should be able to draw their own conclusions (and not just parrot mine) as well as drop their own contender into the fray to see where it comes out. At least that's my goal.
