• 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

#174,604
Chucky Stiletti said:
Great band! Saw them live in Spain back in the day(91?).....sh1t hot live show..
Click to expand...

Cool, watch that Doc when you get a chance, super cool band and I love how they hung together to finally "make it"
 
  • Like
Reactions: GBassNorth, PillO, MCF and 1 other person
#174,605
I have a history question for all you T-bird enthusiasts. Why did Gibson never made a "reversed-reversed" T-bird? I.e. if you flip a reversed T-bird upside down, you get a longer top "wing" = better balance The "Non-reverse" t-birds just seem to eliminate the bottom wing. Wondering if this was a conscious ergonomic choice or simple a "cool factor" choice.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rocker47, RedVee, Miles_ONeal and 6 others
#174,606
Old_Noob said:
I have a history question for all you T-bird enthusiasts. Why did Gibson never made a "reversed-reversed" T-bird? I.e. if you flip a reversed T-bird upside down, you get a longer top "wing" = better balance The "Non-reverse" t-birds just seem to eliminate the bottom wing. Wondering if this was a conscious ergonomic choice or simple a "cool factor" choice.
Click to expand...
because Greco did...
upload_2021-4-26_14-43-39.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: Butcherboy, Rocker47, RedVee and 7 others
#174,611
Old_Noob said:
I have a history question for all you T-bird enthusiasts. Why did Gibson never made a "reversed-reversed" T-bird? I.e. if you flip a reversed T-bird upside down, you get a longer top "wing" = better balance The "Non-reverse" t-birds just seem to eliminate the bottom wing. Wondering if this was a conscious ergonomic choice or simple a "cool factor" choice.
Click to expand...

There have been versions of that over the years, but not from Gibson. (or Epi) I think they would have canceled themselves by making a reversed-reversed (non-non-reversed?) Just too confusing semantically. But what is funny/baffling/confusing is that by reversing the so-called "reverse" T-bird (which was the first iteration - so that's already a dichotomy) Gibson made it look more like a Fender than it did in its first version. But from what I've recently read, they didn't reverse it because of Fender (as was commonly thought - but is incorrect), but instead because it wasn't selling, so by reversing it (their logic) it would look more 'conventional' (more like a Fender) and sell better. One could consider its design "ahead of its time"... but instead I feel it just wasn't overwhelmingly popular with players that were earning a living as a bass-player with neck snapping issues, lack of ergonomics and being less repairable (neck-thru and then set-neck) than an indestructible Fender bass.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Rocker47, Larry V, RedVee and 5 others
#174,612
Old_Noob said:
I have a history question for all you T-bird enthusiasts. Why did Gibson never made a "reversed-reversed" T-bird? I.e. if you flip a reversed T-bird upside down, you get a longer top "wing" = better balance The "Non-reverse" t-birds just seem to eliminate the bottom wing. Wondering if this was a conscious ergonomic choice or simple a "cool factor" choice.
Click to expand...
Because Gibson had other important designs on their minds?
KbT6T9pZEg&riu=http%3a%2f%2fcdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net%2f66256633085388a257e1c6e6d449e5f8-1200-80.jpg

f%2fi1-news.softpedia-static.com%2fimages%2fnews2%2fU-G-L-Y-The-Gibson-Reverse-Explorer-Guitar-2.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rocker47, GBassNorth, Engle and 6 others

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back