I like G&L's take on the Tele headstock (ASAT) and that it's the same HS on the Strat (Legacy)
oh yeah... THUNDERBIRD!
oh yeah... THUNDERBIRD!
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.
I'd always been intrigued by the Dan Armstrong clear basses. Reverb has a story about them(and the guitars)and they have a few listed. According to the prices, their owners are very proud of them.
When you are a hammer, everything looks like a nail. 7ender is successful selling strats, teles, Js and Ps. Gibson is successful selling LPs, SGs, explorers, firebirds, and THUNDERBIRDS. When something is working, it is best not to mess with it. But that doesn't mean that there can't be some innovation on the sides. How much is a function of the board of directors and management.Fender has been about tradition and nostalgia since their reshuffle in the 80's. The CBS years only cosmetically evolved most models. They rarely innovate, just keep refining/honing their blue-chip product. It's understandable to a point as so much popular music was recorded on a Fender guitar/bass/amp - people trust/want that indelible/historic sound. Gibson has been only slightly more adventurous also being about their tradition. The more recent flip-flop of Fender making Gibson-esk product was amusing (ala Dimension) but Fender's w/buckers were initiated in the early CBS years (70-) on guitars and basses. It didn't stick as much with basses, but Fender guitars used buckers more and still produce them. For comparison think Ibanez (or most MIJ brands) who never stop innovating - way more adventurous and willing to test new product. Both Fender and Gibson are pretty conservative comparatively.
When you are a hammer, everything looks like a nail. 7ender is successful selling strats, teles, Js and Ps. Gibson is successful selling LPs, SGs, explorers, firebirds, and THUNDERBIRDS. When something is working, it is best not to mess with it. But that doesn't mean that there can't be some innovation on the sides. How much is a function of the board of directors and management.
Henry J. thought too much about innovation and came up with the Firebird X. Funny thing is that onboard effects have been around since forever, so it wasn't exactly an innovation as far as I know. Then there were the automatic tuners that got removed right away. Sometimes innovation works. Sometimes not so much. I have to give Gibson credit for coming up with the new EB in 2013. I don't know why they changed it, but since they did, it seems to be holding its own. Same with some of the other semi-traditional bass guitars they have come up with lately. There were a number of different bass guitars and guitars in the '70s and '80s. They don't make most of them now. They don't make mudbuckers any more, but they make something else that looks the same. My take is that Gibson guitars and bass guitars are a bit more labor intensive than Fenders, which are essentially CNC products with a bit of wood selection involved. Gibson certainly uses plenty of automation where they can, but you don't build an archtop with CNC. Maybe a Les Paul or Thunderbird could be done with more automation than less.no debate - the bottom line sets the rules
It was fortunate that Henry J owned the company. Otherwise, he would have been fired and sued for breach of fiduciary duty several times over with his bizarre bet the company strategies.Henry J. thought too much about innovation and came up with the Firebird X. Funny thing is that onboard effects have been around since forever, so it wasn't exactly an innovation as far as I know. Then there were the automatic tuners that got removed right away. Sometimes innovation works. Sometimes not so much. I have to give Gibson credit for coming up with the new EB in 2013. I don't know why they changed it, but since they did, it seems to be holding its own. Same with some of the other semi-traditional bass guitars they have come up with lately. There were a number of different bass guitars and guitars in the '70s and '80s. They don't make most of them now. They don't make mudbuckers any more, but they make something else that looks the same. My take is that Gibson guitars and bass guitars are a bit more labor intensive than Fenders, which are essentially CNC products with a bit of wood selection involved. Gibson certainly uses plenty of automation where they can, but you don't build an archtop with CNC. Maybe a Les Paul or Thunderbird could be done with more automation than less.
However it works, it's a somewhat different approach, especially since Gibson doesn't do much with bolt on necks.
it's those slab bodies i could never get used to...I know it's shallow(what else is new), but I've never liked the looks of the Tele HS.![]()
I’m pretty sure he played a IV when I saw them in the 80’s as well. I remember coming away thinking he was the best part of the show!the only mainstream basses i’ve never seen Hamilton with, are Ricks and non TBird Gibsons, seemed to have everything else....played a IV all night with fingers when I saw them in the 80’s
It was fortunate that Henry J owned the company. Otherwise, he would have been fired and sued for breach of fiduciary duty several times over with his bizarre bet the company strategies.
That pickup is really close to the bridge!Probably not.
If I was signed to Fender I would have used a Fender for both the studio recording and live promotional performances of the song. If the Jazz bass Hamilton is playing in the YouTube clip is good enough for the tour promoting the song then it should have been good enough for the studio work recording the song. Or from the flip perspective, if a Thunderbird was good enough for the studio work recording the song then a Thunderbird should have been good enough for the live tour promoting the song.
Again, I suspect (but have no certain knowledge) that Hamilton was signed with Fender and probably had a clause in his contract at the time that required stage and live appearances to be Fender only. If that assumption is correct, it potentially says a great deal about his opinion (and mine as well) of the Humbucker equipped Thunderbird being a much better fit for that particular song than a couple of Jazz single coils or a split P pup.
I've only ever played one Fender that can hang note for note with the Thunderbird, the Fender Telecaster Modern Player which is also equipped with Humbuckers. Fortunately I bought mine before they were discontinued. If you ever see one for sale for less than $600 snag it! It's the Eppi VP of the Fender world - and it doesn't even have Tort as an option.
Here's a steal...
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
Pretty sure you’ll pay the shipping to your local store regardless - unless they’ve changed their policy.It's a Fender (not Squier) made in China.
Quality and fit and finish are top notch. It is a heavy bass at about 9 pounds, and I believe the wood is a departure from the typical Fender ash or alder, it's either maple or pine (I'll need to look that up to confirm). The neck is maple/maple and wider than a TBird, closer to a P bass size and shape and is finished in gloss.
The sound is pretty amazing, tons of low end grunt, not overly muddy at all, very authoritative sounding, not a weak or thin tone. Sounds very much like my Anniversary Bird but much much louder with a tiny bit less mids but a bit more top and bottom end if wanted. They only made them for a couple of years and are getting harder to find. Most Fender folks weren't too interested in the sound but if you're a Humbucker oriented player they're one of the Best Buy's out there in the sub $1000 range.
The Guitar Center deal is a steal especially considering their return policy. Just have it delivered to your nearest GC for an in store pickup. Then if you don't like it, you can return it to the store and you don't have to pay any return shipping fees. Its full refund and zero out of pocket if you return it. Not much down side in that.
I read that too - pretty interesting. Bottom line they are boat-anchors as acrylic is HEAVY. They mentioned Geezer Butler using one but the backstory is they were touring in the US and his bass was stolen, so he went to a local music store (in Michigan somewhere) and they didn't have much to choose from but did have one of the Lucite basses. He said he hated its sound and complained about how heavy it was. They conveniently left out that part. But then, the bassist from Death From Above is a big fan preferring it in every way. He's a big guy so the weight isn't an issue and he likes 24 frets and its sustain. I've always liked the way they look - but would never own one to play. Plus, there are mountains of cheap clear basses/guitars (some with imbedded LED's) from China if anyone wanted one for any reason.
..I’ve played them and I have a copy. Mine is very articulate. Plexiglass is a great tonewood. The only drawback is the weight.I'd always been intrigued by the Dan Armstrong clear basses. Reverb has a story about them(and the guitars)and they have a few listed. According to the prices, their owners are very proud of them.
it's those slab bodies i could never get used to...
those headstocks are a bit of a mystery.....seems fairly evident the inspiration came from this;
View attachment 3571552
to create this..
View attachment 3571556
instead of this? seems azzbackwards...
View attachment 3571570
Yes it is. But I never ever solo a bridge pup on any bass. On all my two pup basses I always run the tone knob less than half up, the neck pup at least 75% up and then dial in the bridge pup as needed to add definition and clarity to the notes (usually well under 50% up). And I usually play over the neck pup and up to the last fret. So that pup location works perfect for me. I like my bass to sound like a bass, not a baritone guitar.That pickup is really close to the bridge!
more like "Death from Below".....
Steve Blanco the bass player rocked a modified Squier J.If that was Henry J.'s contribution, then he's mostly forgiven for all the other nonsense. Now that he's gone of course.One thing you thank Henry J. for: Thunderbird re issue in 1988.
It was a good idea that worked out commercially, so I suspect it was a decision made despite Henry J.If that was Henry J.'s contribution, then he's mostly forgiven for all the other nonsense. Now that he's gone of course.
And a left-handed Thunderbird in 2013. Not sure how much of that was his decision, but it was certainly under his watch.One thing you thank Henry J. for: Thunderbird re issue in 1988.