• 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

#113,306
dukeorock said:
Because I’m the curious sort. I’m sure they have their fans, though clearly you ain’t one of them :)
Lol definitely not. My 76 Thunderbird bought new in 76 was one of the most disappointing basses I ever bought it sounded thin, weak and anemic one pickup was so microphonic all it did was sequel, took Gibson years to send me a replacement . These days most who try or own a 76 haven't owned or played a 60's Thunderbird and they think because a 76 sounds like a Jazz bass it's a good thing.


Great info, thanks!
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: GBassNorth, GonePlaid and Dadagoboi
#113,307
  • Like
Reactions: GBassNorth, GonePlaid, PillO and 7 others
#113,312
Chucky Stiletti said:
agreed....makes one wonder...
Click to expand...
The pickups that were stock in the 1991 that is getting new paint were embedded in epoxy. There was nothing but a smooth plastic surface with a wire sticking out on the bottom of those pickups. They sounded ok, but with all the potting, I decided to go with Chinabuckers instead of peeling off the black covers. I asked Veronica about them, and the answer was that peeling them was probably not a great idea. I have wondered what is really under there for a long time. There is no telling what Gibson might have done.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MCF, RedVee, GBassNorth and 5 others
#113,313
Chucky Stiletti said:
Thanks V. Figured that'd catch your eye. It's called Roaring Camp. You'd love it there, used to be used for hauling lumber to the coast or even access to the coast before the highways. There's also a narrow gauge steam engine that goes up into the hills. The setting in the redwoods is beyond breathtaking....

View attachment 3391511

View attachment 3391512

wow.....same one on wiki..
Invalid Link Removed
Click to expand...
I rode that when I was a kid, I had a ear ache at the time so it was a bad experience.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GBassNorth, GonePlaid, Miles_ONeal and 2 others
#113,314
Gaolee said:
The pickups that were stock in the 1991 that is getting new paint were embedded in epoxy. There was nothing but a smooth plastic surface with a wire sticking out on the bottom of those pickups. They sounded ok, but with all the potting, I decided to go with Chinabuckers instead of peeling off the black covers. I asked Veronica about them, and the answer was that peeling them was probably not a great idea. I have wondered what is really under there for a long time. There is no telling what Gibson might have done.
Click to expand...

I have to ask cause i easily forget. Does your '91 have the bridge pu'p mounted in the neck position?
I also have CBuckers in one of mine and thinking of switching p'up positions. Just curious.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GBassNorth, fasterpussycat, GonePlaid and 1 other person
#113,315
Gaolee said:
The pickups that were stock in the 1991 that is getting new paint were embedded in epoxy. There was nothing but a smooth plastic surface with a wire sticking out on the bottom of those pickups. They sounded ok, but with all the potting, I decided to go with Chinabuckers instead of peeling off the black covers. I asked Veronica about them, and the answer was that peeling them was probably not a great idea. I have wondered what is really under there for a long time. There is no telling what Gibson might have done.
Click to expand...
I remember that discussion, truth is, I don't really know if these are even real Gibsons....what I do know is that they sound fantastic...they measure in at about 3.2k which points at ceramic poles....they definitely don't have the output drive of a 60's or Thunderbucker......my next experiment is to swap these (currently in my '13) for the Thunderbuckers in my BaCH..
 
  • Like
Reactions: ToddOfThunder, GBassNorth, GonePlaid and 5 others
#113,316
I loves my '76s just the way they are, the two of them are slightly different in tone, it's due to variations in the pickups, Gibson was all over the place with the QC on them. My green one's bridge pup is very hot and the neck position is cranked down a lot, the purple one is more balanced in terms of output between the pups and I like it a little better overall, truthfully though I'd never change them out as they're unique basses and rightfully as historic as the '60s ones, 40 odd years old is vintage enough for me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ToddOfThunder, MCF, Gaolee and 13 others
#113,317
TBird1958 said:
I loves my '76s just the way they are, the two of them are slightly different in tone, it's due to variations in the pickups, Gibson was all over the place with the QC on them. My green one's bridge pup is very hot and the neck position is cranked down a lot, the purple one is more balanced in terms of output between the pups and I like it a little better overall, truthfully though I'd never change them out as they're unique basses and rightfully as historic as the '60s ones, 40 odd years old is vintage enough for me.
Click to expand...
imo, you can't really compare the two vintages...totally different basses...almost, like built by different manufacturers....
 
  • Like
Reactions: dagrev, ToddOfThunder, GBassNorth and 5 others
#113,318
Chucky Stiletti said:
imo, you can't really compare the two vintages...totally different basses...almost, like built by different manufacturers....
Click to expand...

Exactly.

Since '60s repro pickups are readily available from multiple sources I place a high value of the'70s ones - but that's just me :laugh:
 
  • Like
Reactions: ToddOfThunder, Gaolee, RedVee and 9 others

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back