• 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

You're welcome. The body's only 1-1/4" thick, maybe you can do it solid.
So you would say that that thickness of 1 1/4" is too thin for a bookmatched top?

I've got a 3+' long slab of Padauk, and some lengths of Big Leaf Maple. I'm understanding this particular Maple is a relatively soft wood, maybe not the choice for a body unless it's decorative- it's got a cool grain to it. Was thinking about Padauk for the body, but it's heavy, so I'd do a 3/4 to 1" thick piece out of Padauk, with the BL Maple to finish the thickness of it.

Am I just being an oaf? It's certainly possible, likely even.
 
So you would say that that thickness of 1 1/4" is too thin for a bookmatched top?

I've got a 3+' long slab of Padauk, and some lengths of Big Leaf Maple. I'm understanding this particular Maple is a relatively soft wood, maybe not the choice for a body unless it's decorative- it's got a cool grain to it. Was thinking about Padauk for the body, but it's heavy, so I'd do a 3/4 to 1" thick piece out of Padauk, with the BL Maple to finish the thickness of it.

Am I just being an oaf? It's certainly possible, likely even.

BL maple isn't too soft for an entire body but the Padauk/BL will be a great combo!
 
So you would say that that thickness of 1 1/4" is too thin for a bookmatched top?

I've got a 3+' long slab of Padauk, and some lengths of Big Leaf Maple. I'm understanding this particular Maple is a relatively soft wood, maybe not the choice for a body unless it's decorative- it's got a cool grain to it. Was thinking about Padauk for the body, but it's heavy, so I'd do a 3/4 to 1" thick piece out of Padauk, with the BL Maple to finish the thickness of it.

Am I just being an oaf? It's certainly possible, likely even.
Big Leaf Maple is a bit of a pain to work in my experience. That said, I have a western maple (same thing) log cut into rough 4/4 boards that are the full width of the log. Whatever I get around to making out of it has to be big enough to take advantage of the edges and matched grain. Sometime after I have paid royalties for earnings on the trusty Theremin and oil can hit record. No way I would ever cut my twin out of her share. She's the bigger, scarier one, y'know.

Big Leaf Maple is fairly heavy, so I probably wouldn't use it to make a body, and it's soft, so I probably wouldn't use it to make a veneer. I would use eastern rock maple for that, especially because it can get some iridescence that western maple doesn't have. I have made furniture out of it, and it turned out kinda ordinary yellow wood looking.
 
Hey Thunderbird aficionados.

In searching the threads, I have seen some positive reviews of both the older Epiphone Thunderbird Classic Pro (not to be confused with the pro with the active electronics) and the new Thunderbird Vintage Pro. But can anyone actually compare them to each other? Does anyone own both? Apart from the obvious hardware differences, how would you compare the sound of them? I have listened to the reviews by Chris Catero on youtube, and it's hard to distinguish the difference. If anything, perhaps the new vintage pro sounds a bit brighter/harsher (not in a bad way). Maybe a little thinner compared to the classic pro with the actual Gibson pickups. I don't have a guitar store near me at which to compare them. Nobody around even has the new Vintage models in stock where I could try one out.

I know "better" is all relative and subjective, but what are your thoughts?

Thanks
 
My next ‘Bird is gonna look a whole lot like this...
F307188A-876F-45B2-8E87-3AEC6B1FBC69.jpeg
A8DBC721-7DB2-4D17-B258-47A1DF95C386.jpeg

Pretty stoked :)
 
Hey Thunderbird aficionados.

In searching the threads, I have seen some positive reviews of both the older Epiphone Thunderbird Classic Pro (not to be confused with the pro with the active electronics) and the new Thunderbird Vintage Pro. But can anyone actually compare them to each other? Does anyone own both? Apart from the obvious hardware differences, how would you compare the sound of them? I have listened to the reviews by Chris Catero on youtube, and it's hard to distinguish the difference. If anything, perhaps the new vintage pro sounds a bit brighter/harsher (not in a bad way). Maybe a little thinner compared to the classic pro with the actual Gibson pickups. I don't have a guitar store near me at which to compare them. Nobody around even has the new Vintage models in stock where I could try one out.

I know "better" is all relative and subjective, but what are your thoughts?

Thanks

Welcome aboard! I’m sure someone will be around shortly to help!
 
Big Leaf Maple is a bit of a pain to work in my experience. That said, I have a western maple (same thing) log cut into rough 4/4 boards that are the full width of the log. Whatever I get around to making out of it has to be big enough to take advantage of the edges and matched grain. Sometime after I have paid royalties for earnings on the trusty Theremin and oil can hit record. No way I would ever cut my twin out of her share. She's the bigger, scarier one, y'know.

Big Leaf Maple is fairly heavy, so I probably wouldn't use it to make a body, and it's soft, so I probably wouldn't use it to make a veneer. I would use eastern rock maple for that, especially because it can get some iridescence that western maple doesn't have. I have made furniture out of it, and it turned out kinda ordinary yellow wood looking.
Hmm. This grain is pretty spectacular...
 

Latest posts