Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
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 vs Rickenbacker again..
- Thread starter rocknrolo
- Start date
Both fantastic basses, but as the owner of several models of each, here's my 50 cent;
-Both have a kind of famous "sound", but that doesnt make em one trick ponies. I forget the english word, but they have several uses
-The word I was looking for here was versatile.
-They are BOTH fairly "un-ergonomic", making them hard for some people to play. You 100% need to try them both in person before comitting to one. (make sure shop has return policy if u buy online).
-The thunderbird is abit more "thunder" than the Rick. IE, rick is a bit more treble heavy. Take that info into account. Especially if buying an older rick, as they need a bridge swap or mod to handle strings over 100 well.
-There are different models of each!! There's a big difference between the availible Tbird models. A vintage pro Epiphone is closer to the old Tbird than the Gibson one, You also have reverse or non-reverse. And up to 5 strings. RICKENBACKER is the same, with the 4001 (mroe of a jazzy neck, bigger body), the 4003 (smaller body, fatter neck) and the 4001S/4003S and special models. (The S's have more contoures on the body and are more ergonomic).
-They are both high level eye-catchers! Depending on you, thats either a + or a -
I'll say this; Personally I prefer the Ricks. I love Tbirds, but ergonomically they kinda mess with my playing. So I might or might not use one, depending on the situation. If I'm playing advanced stuff it's mostly on the sidelines. But when you want those deep rumbling roots, like a shaging landslide slowly working its way out of your amp to consume the crowd in a mess of mud and dirt, the thunderbird is the shaging king.
-Both have a kind of famous "sound", but that doesnt make em one trick ponies. I forget the english word, but they have several uses
-The word I was looking for here was versatile.-They are BOTH fairly "un-ergonomic", making them hard for some people to play. You 100% need to try them both in person before comitting to one. (make sure shop has return policy if u buy online).
-The thunderbird is abit more "thunder" than the Rick. IE, rick is a bit more treble heavy. Take that info into account. Especially if buying an older rick, as they need a bridge swap or mod to handle strings over 100 well.
-There are different models of each!! There's a big difference between the availible Tbird models. A vintage pro Epiphone is closer to the old Tbird than the Gibson one, You also have reverse or non-reverse. And up to 5 strings. RICKENBACKER is the same, with the 4001 (mroe of a jazzy neck, bigger body), the 4003 (smaller body, fatter neck) and the 4001S/4003S and special models. (The S's have more contoures on the body and are more ergonomic).
-They are both high level eye-catchers! Depending on you, thats either a + or a -
I'll say this; Personally I prefer the Ricks. I love Tbirds, but ergonomically they kinda mess with my playing. So I might or might not use one, depending on the situation. If I'm playing advanced stuff it's mostly on the sidelines. But when you want those deep rumbling roots, like a shaging landslide slowly working its way out of your amp to consume the crowd in a mess of mud and dirt, the thunderbird is the shaging king.
Don't expect a Ric to be a one trick pony. The neck pickup actually works, as does the tone control for the bridge pickup. You'd never know it by how most players use them, though. 
Can we stop with the "faster neck" stuff? This is 100% personal. Has nothing to do with a particulat neck or its specs. What makes a "fast neck" for you is not the same for me, or anyone else. I hate really thin necks. The only reason I do not have an Ibenez. I find them hard to play. My RIC is easier to play with its bigger neck.
So in my work, the RIC neck is "faster" than the Ibby neck.
Both are fantastic in their own rights. Out of the box (with the factory strings and with a flat EQ), the Thunderbird is a much "thicker/denser" tone, IMO. But McCartney's Ric tone certainly isn't what I'd call "thin." I got rid of my Ric because it was uncomfortable to play. The T-Bird (for me) is vastly more comfortable. In hindsight, I wish I had kept my Ric and found a "workaround" to play it comfortably. But if I were gonna buy either one or the other, it would definitely be the Thunderbird, hands down.
To each their own. I've got quite large hands, and still find the skinny Thunderbird neck easier to play than the chunky Rick.
Honestly whichever one I've been playing recently is the one that's easier. The difference between the two necks is huge. If I'm playing one today, it's gonna be hard to play the other tomorrow.
About the original post, they have very different sounds but both are great. If I want to play around with effects I grab the Rick. The Tbird though... Love that sound.
Yeah, that's one thing in favor of the T-Bird, its special quick-release headstock feature.
Absolutely, if one is a fan of a certain Alfred Hitchcock film.
Yeah, that's one thing in favor of the T-Bird, its special quick-release headstock feature.
Absolutely, if one is a fan of a certain Alfred Hitchcock film.
Great movie! The newer T-Birds have volutes which makes the quick-release feature pretty much obsolete.
Last edited:
They never did exactly tell why the birds were attacking. My guess is they didn't like that the two lovebirds were caged up.
Yes, that is the whole point i was making. It is personal...each their own.
The bass/neck has nothing to do with it. Saying a certain bass has a "fast neck" as its some sort of spec is assinine.
