Thunderbird Club

[Chucky Stiletti]

Paisley NR ‘bird? Do it! I think the equation for that is

Awesome + awesome = awesome

Would you go for a clear guard? Clear backed with paisley material? I’m not too sure what the routing is like on a NR.

this is getting a clear guard tomorrow and going back to the black hardware, stock pups and Hipshot bridge got some neat silver Bird stickers from Larry V....no routing on this NR....

 

[JIO]

it may be a Gibson copyright issue? As cool and close the BaCHs are to the 60’s NRs (definitely closer than the 12/13 RI) when compared side be side to a Gibby they are WAY off..bigger and heavier with equivalent proportional differences to those observed between that 64 and VP..

It must be a deliberate alteration. It just strikes me as excessive that they made a historically big/long bass bigger/longer. A little bit yes ... a lot?

 

[Chucky Stiletti]

looks like Chevy got it right, 2020 Corvette with mid engine configuration...first time in person..

 

[JIO]

looks like Chevy got it right, 2020 Corvette with mid engine configuration...first time in person..
View attachment 3901383

So is mid-engine considered the best design?

 

[D.M.N.]

Nice progress shots. I thought somebody else a few dozen pages back said that their BaCH NR had a mahogany veneer on it. Yours looks like solid mahogany.

I believe the 1st and 2nd were a bit piecemeal, with mahogany core but maple veneer tops. The 3rd run, while lacking the tummy contour and a bit thicker than the others, they were solid mahogany, and pretty nice pieces at that.

it may be a Gibson copyright issue? As cool and close the BaCHs are to the 60’s NRs (definitely closer than the 12/13 RI) when compared side be side to a Gibby they are WAY off..bigger and heavier with similar proportional differences to those observed between that 64 and VP..

Having not played an original NR, just the earlier reverses, I can't say I have that much of a basis of comparison, but I'm a bit surprised there's that much of a difference between the Bachs and the originals, as they were supposed to be based off measurements taken from the originals, although I knew there were some differences.

 

[TBird1958]

I would like to know/hear Epi's thinking about this - their marketing philosophy. Because if I were commissioned to make an authentic '63-'65 T-bird it would be to exact measured specs off of mine. You may be correct that they made it bigger so it wouldn't be passed off as a legit early '60s bird, but I would like to hear them say that to make sense of it. G&L did a bang-on RI of their early L-1000/L-2000 series basses from the early '80's and I very much doubt they are BIGGER than the originals.

I don't see how one couldn't notice the difference in body before the headstock, VP's at glance do look like a '60s Bird, but both the upper and lower 'bouts are quite differently shaped compared to the original.

 

[RedVee]

it may be a Gibson copyright issue? As cool and close the BaCHs are to the 60’s NRs (definitely closer than the 12/13 RI) when compared side be side to a Gibby they are WAY off..bigger and heavier with similar proportional differences to those observed between that 64 and VP..

It must be a deliberate alteration. It just strikes me as excessive that they made a historically big/long bass bigger/longer. A little bit yes ... a lot?

well isn’t there some rule about n% difference? But?:
1. Why would Gibson apply that to Epiphone ?
2. I thought that was on headstocks rather than bodies... yet... Dingwall changed the DBird body to make the DRoc ?

 

[JIO]

well isn’t there some rule about n% difference? But?:
1. Why would Gibson apply that to Epiphone ?
2. I thought that was on headstocks rather than bodies... yet... Dingwall changed the DBird body to make the DRoc ?

I am not privy to that info so I can't say - with Fender it's all about the hs contour/shape because they failed to register/copyright anything before that point. Not aware of Gibson's copyright rules regarding T-birds.

 

[Iristone]

Does anyone else set up his/her Bird for lots of clank? John Entwistle style. Mine is set up very low like all my basses (~1mm action). It gives a lovely clank, but the first fret sometimes frets out depending on the weather (the rosewood absorbs moisture and expands on a rainy day).

 

[JIO]

Does anyone else set up his/her Bird for lots of clank? John Entwistle style. Mine is set up very low like all my basses (~1mm action). It gives a lovely clank, but the first fret sometimes frets out depending on the weather (the rosewood absorbs moisture and expands on a rainy day).

My general rule-of-thumb is depressing the 3rd fret - the string should barely touch the first fret. This allows optimal height adjustment once you have the overall high adjustment set/dialed.

 

[Chucky Stiletti]

So is mid-engine considered the best design?

Sure, the balance (or front to back ratio in automotive terms and measured in percentage, 50/50 being optimum) is best when the engine sits between both axles instead of hanging over the front or rear one.

 

[JIO]

Sure, the balance (or front to back ratio in automotive terms and measured in percentage, 50/50 being optimum) is best when the engine sits between both axles instead of hanging over the front or rear one.

It sounds logical/optimal - but I didn't know the accepted design gestalt so thanks for confirming that.

 

[Chucky Stiletti]

I believe the 1st and 2nd were a bit piecemeal, with mahogany core but maple veneer tops. The 3rd run, while lacking the tummy contour and a bit thicker than the others, they were solid mahogany, and pretty nice pieces at that.



Having not played an original NR, just the earlier reverses, I can't say I have that much of a basis of comparison, but I'm a bit surprised there's that much of a difference between the Bachs and the originals, as they were supposed to be based off measurements taken from the originals, although I knew there were some differences.

Excellent point, I never played an earlier model....just going by mine which is of the vintage/batch that did not ship with the belly cut (which I later added)....that said, definitely different instrument..

 

[Miles_ONeal]

Asked mrs. slo if building a non reverse Tbird bass with a blue flower of pink paisley finish like on the old telecaster basses would be good. She said it would be just wrong. What say you Talkbass Tbirders?

View attachment 3900882 View attachment 3900883

The world needs this.

 

[JIO]

I don't see how one couldn't notice the difference in body before the headstock, VP's at glance do look like a '60s Bird, but both the upper and lower 'bouts are quite differently shaped compared to the original.

More reason to have a comparison vid.

 

[Miles_ONeal]

Sure, the balance (or front to back ratio in automotive terms and measured in percentage, 50/50 being optimum) is best when the engine sits between both axles instead of hanging over the front or rear one.

No room for a midship engine on the Miata, but Mazda does that balance brilliantly.

 

[Miles_ONeal]

it may be a Gibson copyright issue? As cool and close the BaCHs are to the 60’s NRs (definitely closer than the 12/13 RI) when compared side be side to a Gibby they are WAY off..bigger and heavier with similar proportional differences to those observed between that 64 and VP..

Gibson owns Epi.

 

[JIO]

The world needs this.

Exactly - it's how things evolve.

 

[Chucky Stiletti]

No room for a midship engine on the Miata, but Mazda does that balance brilliantly.

The engine doesn’t have to be behind the driver to qualify as mid engine...

 

[Miles_ONeal]

The engine doesn’t have to be behind the driver to qualify as mid engine...

I know, but it’s still pretty far forward. Or was on my 2001. But they did a whole lotta good engineering to make it work.