• 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.

tobias experience

#81
Your'e still going on about this...:eek:

You are just wrong - there is no 'fear' as you put it!

People don't care about what you are talking about - the false distinction you are making - what they do care about is whether an instrument was hand-built by a small crew like Mike's and all the Tobias basses up to 2,044 were made in this exact same way and that's all people care about!

Easy enough for you! :eyebrow:
 
#82
The Penguin said:
Like how I showed over and over how Tobias says you have a Gibson?
.
Click to expand...

WRONG again!!

I sold that bass about a year and half ago for £1800 - double for $ !! :)


Sorry - you are just so wrong in everything you have said!! :p

I didn't want to make a big thing of showing you up in a public forum but you asked - so you got it!! :D
 
#83
Penguin:

Why can't anyone see that's two different things? Have we really gone past the level of complexity available at just 2? Pre or post Gibson refers to the ownership.
Click to expand...
Serial numbers up through #2044 seem to be referred to as "pre-Gibson" everywhere but in your posts. Even Mike Tobias said the bass we're talking about was "one of the good ones that he built himself."

Tobias can handle the term Gibson Tobias, why does it cause so much fear here?
Click to expand...
I can suggest two reasons. The emotional reason (which I think is probably more important) is what I'd call the "Munjibunga reason" - that if the instrument is associated with Gibson in any way, it magically becomes not "real" anymore. The human mind is a dichotomizing device - the bass is EITHER built by God Himself (or reasonable facsimile thereof), OR it was built by drunk monkeys. Bruce Lindfield hears you trying to tell him his bass was built by drunk monkeys, and this is simply not acceptable. His defense is that The Angel Michael personally warded off the demons of the Evil Empire and preserved his bass in heavenly perfection.

And the second reason, less emotional, is resale value. Just the whiff of association with Gibson, however technical and not associated with the construction of the bass at all, STILL probably lops a grand off the resale price. That grand represents fear (or mythology).

I'm aware that Gibson's quality control, perhaps imperfect today (too many reports of imperfections to ignore), is widely regarded to have been just terrible at one time. Mike Tobias himself, nice and generous as he is, admitted that Gibson had some initial difficulties. For Mike Tobias to say this probably means Gibson produced firewood for a few years. I think Gibson has their quality control issues much more under control over the last 2 years (though perhaps no longer). The Tobias operation clearly isn't getting the corporate attention it requires.
 
#84
Flintc said:
Penguin:

Serial numbers up through #2044 seem to be referred to as "pre-Gibson" everywhere but in your posts. Even Mike Tobias said the bass we're talking about was "one of the good ones that he built himself."
Click to expand...

Yup - I have been on this board since 1998 - getting on towards 10 years ( :eek: ) and in all that time with many discussions about the various Tobias basses, with people who have owned many of them - this is the first time that anybody has tried to argue that anything below #2,044 is not necessarily a pre-Gibson ....:confused:
 
#85
Bruce:

But as Penguin points out, basses after #1094 are *technically* Gibsons, because Tobias had already sold out to Gibson after that time, and the revenues for all basses from 1095 on went to Gibson. I think the term "pre-Gibson" is highly misleading. What we really need is the term "post-Mike".

This reminds me a lot of the time during which AMF owned Harley Davidson - big arguments about whether those bikes were "real" Harleys. And the answer is, well, yes and no.

Meanwhile, what started this thread was a discussion of *brand new current* Tobias basses, straight from the factory in Arkansas. What has been our experience with the current (within no more than 2 years, I'd estimate) output? Mike clearly has no involvement with these. What matters here, as I've read it, is Juszkiewitz's policy decision that Gibson shut down the Toby lines, discontinue all overseas production, and transform Tobias (back?) into a strictly top-dollar top-quality boutique line. To what degree has this decision been realized?

My tentative thoughts, based on both my experience and the reports of others, is that this "let's make it a boutique line" decision didn't overnight magically turn the Arkansas factory into a producer of top-quality basses, nor did it magically transform the employees there into master luthiers. Instead, it seems to have been a gradual process.

Today, Tobias basses seem almost all very good. But quality is a management decision. I seriously doubt Gibson can effectively raise their prices. I think they CAN improve their quality control, and they can most definitely improve their customer support of Tobias basses.

But these improvements cost money, and that money must come out of Tobias revenues, lowering profits. Gibson would have to sink a bundle of money into the Arkansas operation. Today may not be a good time to do this, considering the very large number of luthiers producing expensive top quality basses. And corporate Gibson may be constitutionally unable to have someone show up here at talkbass wearing a hair shirt and asking for - AND TAKING - advice about improvements to their product. I just don't see the organizational commitment Gibson would need to rescue what's become of their reputation.
 
#86
Let's go back to the "Tobias Experience", shall we?

I've had my brand-new "MIA" Tobias Bassic 5 for about a month or so. After I set it up, it played great. As for tone, it is without a doubt the meatiest, baddest sound I've worked with. I've been playing for over thirty years and in that time I've owned or extensively played in gigs Fenders, Smiths, Ricks, Warwicks, Kubickis, Conklins, Alembics, Yamahas, Moonstones and G&Ls (I miss those), I'm probably forgetting some. The "MIA" Tobias has a midrange punch that will just knock you down...For the first time I feel not just comfortable, buy FRICKIN' BAD playing in the upper registers, it like a punch in the face! The bass is very responsive, I can easily go from a clean sound to a nasty growl just by digging in a little harder :). Here'a how good it sounds...I was playing at a jam night list week when a fellow came up and tipped me $40.00 because of my playing????

So, you guys can argue that an instrument is somehow diminished because Gibson got the profit, but as for me, I (and apparently my audience) will enjoy playing (and listening to) this tainted instrument.

BTW, next on my list is a Sadowsky Jazz 5, NYC...red sunburst and maple fretboard...YUMMMM...

Dave
 
#88
After I set it up, it played great. As for tone, it is without a doubt the meatiest, baddest sound I've worked with. I've been playing for over thirty years...
Click to expand...
Just out of curiosity, what wood is your basic model body made of? I've tried the four different woods Tobias offers on this model (bubinga, mahogony, ash, and walnut) and I think the bubinga is distinctly more meaty and rich sounding.

Mine was enough of a special order (I wanted highly figured bubinga for the body instead of the standard straight grain, bubinga stringers in the neck to match the body instead of purpleheart, and black hardware instead of the standard chrome. It's also a 6-string, not so easy to find) so I had it built and shipped straight from the factory.

It arrived last November 30th, in tune and ready to play. Right off, I didn't like the strings Gibson put on it, and I immediately replaced them with DR Black Beauties, then had the neck and bridge set up with the new strings for exact intonation throughout.

As for the Tobias experience itself, it's one I hope everyone has with their own favorite bass - something you can't wait to pick up, hate to put down, and that first note you play every day makes you grin ear to ear and makes life worth living.

What's even more addictive than the sound is the shape of the neck. It's an asymmetric neck that kind of puts your thumb exactly where it belongs and keeps it there so comfortably you can wank for hours without getting tired. After a while, this neck makes all other basses feel klunky and wrong.

There are some things I'd change about it, though. It has no passive mode, and I'd really like to have one. As it is, I set all the controls to the neutral detent and leave them there (and use the head for equalization). I do change volume and pickup pan; I'd prefer if these were the only onboard controls.

Also, I'd prefer (since I have no choice about active mode) a separate and easily accessible battery compartment. Gibson uses three wood screws to hold the cover of the electronics cavity, and getting that cover off the first time is an adventure. (Not the second time, because I got some fine-grit sandpaper and shaved just enough off the plastic cover). Do this too often, and the screw holes strip out. For a bass this expensive, this is cheap and disappointing. Exactly the same problems with the truss rod cover - screwed into wood, too tight to get out without damaging something. Quality control strikes again.

But as I've said, I'd order another from the factory without hesitation. I'm thinking seriously of a fretless. Yes, they make a fretless; you have to order it special.
 
#89
My Bassic's body is mahogany, and everything else about it is stock. I LOVE the asymmetric neck, it really rewards proper playing position! I agree with you about the control compartment cover (and the truss rod cover, too...) they are TIGHT! I've been a DR guy for years, but I've kind of enjoyed the strings that came with, even though they are sort of dead. I've only been playing at blues jams lately (I'm new to the area), so the old ones are OK. I'll probably put some Fat Beams on it here soon, though.

I don't miss a passive mode, personally. I'm good about keeping my batteries changed, and anytime I've had an axe with a passive mode, I always switch back to active tout suite! I get addicted to that big low end :). I do my eq backwards from you, too... I get a decent sound with the amp, but I'll do a lot of fussing with the guitar controls. BTW, have you fooled with the pots inside? I haven't yet; I figure those guys know what's going on. BUT... sooner or later I'll open it up and see what's up.

As for mid punch, the Kubicki I had didn't come close to this Tobias....probably the Warwick Streamer was the closest, with a Smith BT close behind. The Kubicki did a lot of other things I really liked, though, but I kind of grew out of it after a while.

But, I agree with you, I would recommend these basses to anyone seeking a high end bass. They're well-built play great, sound great...I even like the looks of mine, personally... I don't know what else I would want.

Dave
 
#91
#950 lives with me. Signature Six. Top of the line. Probably took me 5 years to pay off my credit card when I originally bought it however many moons ago. I remember the day I had gotten my first Mastercard in the mail, and I recall walking straight from the mailbox that morning to the phone to order the bass from Mike.

Walnut core, Goncolo Alves top and back (and three maple stringers, two light, one dyed black). Wenge/purpleheart/walnut neck (all separated by light maple stringers), and an Ebony FB. Stack knob option (special ordered) for added passive tone control.

One bass that I will never sell. Nearly everything else I own (some 25+ basses) is replaceable. Plays itself. Pure butter. A most incredible instrument.
 
#94
Basshole said:
#950 lives with me. Signature Six.

Walnut core, Goncolo Alves top and back (and three maple stringers, two light, one dyed black).

Wenge/purpleheart/walnut neck (all separated by light maple stringers), and an Ebony FB. Stack knob option (special ordered) for added passive tone control.
Click to expand...

Sounds like a real beauty.

I have a Classic 5 with a goncalo alves top (#72x) and I've always been particularly interested in Tobias basses made from this hardwood. Do you happen to have any pics?
 
#96
Soma666 said:
jeez, so much arguing, all i wanted to do was point out that i played one and thought it was very nice, very very nice.
Click to expand...

Hey I'm with you on this one all the way. I have a "post-Mike"... or is it "Gibson era"... err... whatever... Classic 6 and it is hands down the single best playing (and looking) bass I have ever picked up. Some of the other high end basses I've owned include an early custom Warrior 6 string and Ken Smith 5 string. Both were great basses. I had no plans to sell my Warrior... but then one day I saw the Classic 6 hanging on the wall... and decided to play it. The rest is history. I couldn't get the thing out of my mind. I came back and played the Classic 6 no less than 6 times... and couldn't forget it. My custom Warrior was soon traded in.

The Tobias neck is just so smooth and fits my hands perfectly. I love the spacing of the strings and the action. The tonal variety is much greater than what I had with my Ken Smith or the Warrior. If I want bright an punchy... no problem. If I want warm and smooth... no problem. Need some quick growl... easy. All with the onboard eq and determined by how much you "dig in". I don't really play with many effects anymore. Just roll the pick up pan knob back behind the center position towards the bridge and just sit back and let the thing "growl".

The other thing I love is how tight and "growly" the B string is. Much better than my Warrior and very much on par with my Smith. But all around the Tobias is easier to play than both.

As far as quality goes I can't find a single flaw in mine. There is none of this "bad fret work" or knots in the wood stuff. The neck is beautifully aligned. The woods are beautiful. All the wood is super smooth and there are no uneven areas etc. Honestly the quality of workmanship seems better to me than what I had with Ken Smith or the Warrior. The Tobias is totally balanced.

Yep, mine is a Gibson era bass. I suppose I better not even think about my serial number because it might depress me.... Ok... NOPE. Not for a second. I'm confident that what I had is the best bass for me. And so far nobody who has played mine has had anything negative to say about it.

Anyway here's some pics to add some eye candy to this thread. :)

Hope this min-review has helped someone. :)

t1.jpg


t2.jpg


t3.jpg


t4.jpg


t5.jpg
 
#97
Bruce Lindfield said:
WRONG again!!

I sold that bass about a year and half ago for £1800 - double for $ !! :)


Sorry - you are just so wrong in everything you have said!! :p

I didn't want to make a big thing of showing you up in a public forum but you asked - so you got it!! :D
Click to expand...
My bad, I said you have it but you sold it, you're now king of the world again and Mike didn't call your bass, excuse me, the bass you sold, a Gibson Tobias.

And it's textbook fear :)
 
#98
Flintc said:
Penguin:

Serial numbers up through #2044 seem to be referred to as "pre-Gibson" everywhere but in your posts. Even Mike Tobias said the bass we're talking about was "one of the good ones that he built himself."
Click to expand...
So have I, but both myself and Mike also refer to them as Gibson Tobias' from the Burbank period. Mike never calls Burbank basses pre Gibson, he calls them Gibson Tobias. Mike on his website does give a number for what he calls pre Gibson. If Mike says "The first Tobias Gibson serial number was 1094." how hard is it to understand what Mike Tobias calls a pre Gibson? Shouldn't we take Mike's word for it before someone just trying to inflate a sale price? Since you're suggesting taking Mike's word why doesn't that apply when he directly addresses the question and gives an exact number?
I can suggest two reasons. The emotional reason (which I think is probably more important) is what I'd call the "Munjibunga reason" - that if the instrument is associated with Gibson in any way, it magically becomes not "real" anymore. The human mind is a dichotomizing device - the bass is EITHER built by God Himself (or reasonable facsimile thereof), OR it was built by drunk monkeys.
Click to expand...
Am I the only one who can see past that binary thing?
Bruce Lindfield hears you trying to tell him his bass was built by drunk monkeys, and this is simply not acceptable. His defense is that The Angel Michael personally warded off the demons of the Evil Empire and preserved his bass in heavenly perfection.
Click to expand...
So it's a fear of monkeys then :)
And the second reason, less emotional, is resale value. Just the whiff of association with Gibson, however technical and not associated with the construction of the bass at all, STILL probably lops a grand off the resale price. That grand represents fear (or mythology).
Click to expand...
That would only apply if someone wasn't going to keep the bass. ;)

And this whole Gibson wasn't involved thing during the Burbank years is just more wishful boasting. Gibson built and paid for the Burbank shop. They had full ownership of Tobias the entire time. Who's idea do you think it was to move to Nashville? It wasn't Mike's, it was the owners of Tobias.
 
#99
Flintc said:
Bruce:

But as Penguin points out, basses after #1094 are *technically* Gibsons, because Tobias had already sold out to Gibson after that time, and the revenues for all basses from 1095 on went to Gibson. I think the term "pre-Gibson" is highly misleading. What we really need is the term "post-Mike".
Click to expand...
I've suggested that many times over the years.
This reminds me a lot of the time during which AMF owned Harley Davidson - big arguments about whether those bikes were "real" Harleys. And the answer is, well, yes and no.
Click to expand...
But the AMF label is so simple, especially for the weekend warriors who can't tell a panhead from a flathead.
Meanwhile, what started this thread was a discussion of *brand new current* Tobias basses, straight from the factory in Arkansas. What has been our experience with the current (within no more than 2 years, I'd estimate) output? Mike clearly has no involvement with these. What matters here, as I've read it, is Juszkiewitz's policy decision that Gibson shut down the Toby lines, discontinue all overseas production, and transform Tobias (back?) into a strictly top-dollar top-quality boutique line. To what degree has this decision been realized?
Click to expand...
I guess we'd need to know how many they sell. I watch the newer ones on ebay with their optimistic prices but I don't really see any sell. They often have gold hardware and big gold knobs and they look gaudy to me. I haven't played any from the last 2 years but I don't think I've seen a post Mike bass that met the quality of his earlier work. I just picked up a Peavey Foundation that's built much better than either of my Gibson Tobias'.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back