Thunderbird Club

[Blazer]

So what did I do today?

Well spent my time modding two strats into matching twins.

So what are they?
- The Blue one is an SX Traditional series
- The Red One is Squier Classic Vibe series

So what did I do to them?
They now have Matching mods in the fact that they have a switch that can add in the neck pickup no matter where the selector is. I also removed the string tree for the D and G strings, both guitars have their whammy bars set on floating and I replaced the SX's stock pickups with 1985 Fender japan pickups in the neck and middle position and a Dimarzio HS-1 at the bridge.

Eagle eyed people might have noticed that my Squier doesn't have its stock bridge pickup either, that's also a DiMarzio, an SDS-1.

So how do they compare?
Well, the SX is heavier in weight and has more chime than my Squier, the Dimarzio gives it a good deal of twang but it sounds a little too bright for my taste when distortion is used. I might switch that one in favor for an SDS-1 like my Squier has.

The Squier sounds fatter, the DiMarzio really adding bark, I also like the neck profile of my Squier better.

 

[GonePlaid]

@MCF Look what I found on Reverb(no affiliation). And it already has a bridge cover.
Gibson Thunderbird II Non Reverse 1967 Blue | Spacetone Music | Reverb

 

[GBassNorth]

@MCF Look what I found on Reverb(no affiliation). And it already has a bridge cover.
Gibson Thunderbird II Non Reverse 1967 Blue | Spacetone Music | Reverb

That one has been there for quite a while now. IIRC @D.M.N. was trying to snag it. I think he researched it pretty well, not sure if he changed his mind or not.

 

[GonePlaid]

That one has been there for quite a while now. IIRC @D.M.N. was trying to snag it. I think he researched it pretty well, not sure if he changed his mind or not.

Two things I noticed in the pics that remind me of my 67: Gibson guys were really messy at soldering back then, and no serial number on the HS. Mine was lost to a graft when it was repaired in ~76. I had the foresight to write it down but, of course, that ain't proof. And I have no idea wutinnahell I might've done with the sales slip.

 

[Chucky Stiletti]

Two things I noticed in the pics that remind me of my 67: Gibson guys were really messy at soldering back then, and no serial number on the HS. Mine was lost to a graft when it was repaired in ~76. I had the foresight to write it down but, of course, that ain't proof. And I have no idea wutinnahell I might've done with the sales slip.

saw this there too...pretty sweet...
Gibson Thunderbird II Sunburst 1965 | Reverb

 

[GBassNorth]

Two things I noticed in the pics that remind me of my 67: Gibson guys were really messy at soldering back then, and no serial number on the HS. Mine was lost to a graft when it was repaired in ~76. I had the foresight to write it down but, of course, that ain't proof. And I have no idea wutinnahell I might've done with the sales slip.

I don't know enough about the vintage ones to know if it's legit or not. About all I can offer is from a collectible standpoint - generally speaking, a total refin significantly reduces the market value of the bass. However, that one looks to be priced below normal market value, so really what it appears to be at this point is a sweet looking vintage player that might go up in value in time but not like an all original one (that's nearly doubled in value in the last few years).

 

[MCF]

@MCF Look what I found on Reverb(no affiliation). And it already has a bridge cover.
Gibson Thunderbird II Non Reverse 1967 Blue | Spacetone Music | Reverb

Right. That’s the one @D.M.N. was trying to work a deal on. The seller is firm on the price. I can’t spend that much on a bass. But I’m ready to pounce on the new NR as soon as it’s released.

 

[GBassNorth]

saw this there too...pretty sweet...
Gibson Thunderbird II Sunburst 1965 | Reverb

Saw that one also. If there's good provenance and this was celebrity played on a released recording or on stage during a tour it's a nice score. Otherwise it's just an over priced but awesome bass.

 

[MCF]

I got my Goth and fell in love. Then a week or so later the blackbird landed on eBay! I have to admit it wasn’t listed quite right. It didn’t say Epiphone anywhere in the listing. Or blackbird so I don’t think it got noticed. It also didn’t say thunderbird.
Basically I got it at a ridiculously low price in my opinion. Just over £200!! it’s fantastic! So I went from no tbirds to 2 within a couple of weeks. Couldn’t be happier.
what do people think of the price I paid
Be good to get some reassurance I got a good deal.

A very nice pair! Great score.

 

[MCF]

Not a Goth but I’ll give a little love to my bolt on.

Thunderbird IV Metallic Red

Beautiful! Congrats.

 

[MCF]

saw this there too...pretty sweet...
Gibson Thunderbird II Sunburst 1965 | Reverb

Looks wonderful! But ouch.

 

[GonePlaid]

Right. That’s the one @D.M.N. was trying to work a deal on. The seller is firm on the price. I can’t spend that much on a bass. But I’m ready to pounce on the new NR as soon as it’s released.

Hmm. Maybe he doesn't really wanna sell?

 

[D.M.N.]

@MCF Look what I found on Reverb(no affiliation). And it already has a bridge cover.
Gibson Thunderbird II Non Reverse 1967 Blue | Spacetone Music | Reverb

That one has been there for quite a while now. IIRC @D.M.N. was trying to snag it. I think he researched it pretty well, not sure if he changed his mind or not.

Right. That’s the one @D.M.N. was trying to work a deal on. The seller is firm on the price. I can’t spend that much on a bass. But I’m ready to pounce on the new NR as soon as it’s released.

Hmm. Maybe he doesn't really wanna sell?

Yep, that's the one I was trying to work on. Short story long, the store apparently paid far too much for what it is, and even at that price they're evidently not going to break even. It's pretty, but it certainly isn't all original, pickguard, wiring, finish, etc. It's not worth what they're asking, really, especially not when you add taxes, and they wouldn't do a cash deal either ("It's up in reverb so we have to sell it there" or some similar line).

 

[PillO]

Saw that one also. If there's good provenance and this was celebrity played on a released recording or on stage during a tour it's a nice score. Otherwise it's just an over priced but awesome bass.

I do not understand and can't value the "mojo" of "celebrity" ownership. To my mind, any premium over expected selling price is a result of the greater fool theory - that is, it is worth more because it can be sold for more than the purchase price. But at some point, the item reaches the greatest fool.

Yep, that's the one I was trying to work on. Short story long, the store apparently paid far too much for what it is, and even at that price they're evidently not going to break even. It's pretty, but it certainly isn't all original, pickguard, wiring, finish, etc. It's not worth what they're asking, really, especially not when you add taxes, and they wouldn't do a cash deal either ("It's up in reverb so we have to sell it there" or some similar line).

Ladies and gentlemen, this bass has found its greatest fool.

 

[Larry V]

I do not understand and can't value the "mojo" of "celebrity" ownership. To my mind, any premium over expected selling price is a result of the greater fool theory - that is, it is worth more because it can be sold for more than the purchase price. But at some point, the item reaches the greatest fool.


Ladies and gentlemen, this bass has found its greatest fool.

I completely understand the premium given to a celebrity owned instrument. Les Paul's Les Paul is worth considerably more than the one my son owns and for good reason.

 

[PillO]

I completely understand the premium given to a celebrity owned instrument. Les Paul's Les Paul is worth considerably more than the one my son owns and for good reason.

I understand that it is something that people do - ascribe value to the provenance of an instrument - but it isn't something I can do. I have no math to describe the value added by ownership by "celebrities". Unless it were autographed.

As there is a viable market for autographed items (various sports memorabilia etc.) I can put a number to value-added by an autograph. But, prior ownership has many problems; most significant is the problem of proof. Were I to buy the items from the celebrity themselves, I would know; but how to prove to others? It gets difficult and there is plenty of potential for fraud.

The exception might be factory limited edition signed by the artist instruments. As there are several, there is a viable market, and (assuming the manufacturer keeps good records) a good audit trail of ownership.

But don't go by me; I'm not "normal".

 

[GonePlaid]

I do not understand and can't value the "mojo" of "celebrity" ownership. To my mind, any premium over expected selling price is a result of the greater fool theory - that is, it is worth more because it can be sold for more than the purchase price. But at some point, the item reaches the greatest fool.


Ladies and gentlemen, this bass has found its greatest fool.

On the hill?

Yep, that's the one I was trying to work on. Short story long, the store apparently paid far too much for what it is, and even at that price they're evidently not going to break even. It's pretty, but it certainly isn't all original, pickguard, wiring, finish, etc. It's not worth what they're asking, really, especially not when you add taxes, and they wouldn't do a cash deal either ("It's up in reverb so we have to sell it there" or some similar line).

So they have wall art.
It occurs to me they can sell it for less and write off the loss. Better than sitting on it forever. Maybe.
ADDENDUM: And that part about it "being up on Reverb". Reverb wouldn't know if they sold it to someone who "walked in their door".,, nudge, nudge.

 

[GonePlaid]

I completely understand the premium given to a celebrity owned instrument. Les Paul's Les Paul is worth considerably more than the one my son owns and for good reason.

May be, but I can't play either one.("I got A and E and I'm workin' on D")

 

[GonePlaid]

I understand that it is something that people do - ascribe value to the provenance of an instrument - but it isn't something I can do. I have no math to describe the value added by ownership by "celebrities". Unless it were autographed.

As there is a viable market for autographed items (various sports memorabilia etc.) I can put a number to value-added by an autograph. But, prior ownership has many problems; most significant is the problem of proof. Were I to buy the items from the celebrity themselves, I would know; but how to prove to others? It gets difficult and there is plenty of potential for fraud.

The exception might be factory limited edition signed by the artist instruments. As there are several, there is a viable market, and (assuming the manufacturer keeps good records) a good audit trail of ownership.

But don't go by me; I'm not "normal".

 

[superdick2112]

Right. That’s the one @D.M.N. was trying to work a deal on. The seller is firm on the price. I can’t spend that much on a bass. But I’m ready to pounce on the new NR as soon as it’s released.

+1
Can't decide between the blue or the burgundy though...