Interesting the 9 ply neck-thru became a set neck. That’s bound to be a $$ cutting effort. That could make it a different sounding animal…
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.
What the heck is Gibson doing?
- Thread starter mdogs
- Start date
While I give Gibson some credit for actually changing something because they have traditionally been very resistant to change anything. I just did not care one bit for the sound of the T-bird in this video period. Of course I have never liked the sound of an orange bass amp anyways. To me they have always sounded nasally and this bass through an orange sounds exceedingly nasally to me. He talks about ergonomics and no more neck dive. but yet you notice through the whole video he never takes his hand off of the neck one time. And I'm sure if he took his hand and arm off the base it would dive like a submarine.
I know I might be in the minority here but I wish they would reintroduce the grabbers. Those were really nice bass guitars I wish I never would have gotten rid of the one that I had. Yeah, and I know Epiphone makes one but seriously look at the junk they put in it for pickups. The Victory would also be nice. Speaking of the victory base the headstock on this new T bird kind of reminds me of a reverse victory headstock. But at least they're trying But IDK it seems like Gibson has never really been deep in the base market if it's not a tea bird or an SG bass seems like they don't want to have anything to do with it. The new EB's were nice but alas, discontinued by Gibson after a very short time. Maybe they just weren't selling Who knows.
"The dreaded 3-point bridge we all love to drag through the mud", lol
That was a good review (by our own godofthunder59); makes me think even more favorably about the changes.
"Shakin’ all-uh ooo-ver!"
Last edited:
Hmm firebirds are cool but platypus is… an interesting choice. Not seeing a bill shape. I always thought the headstock on the firebird and t-bird was supposed to look like a bird beak. Am I imagining that?
Grabbers and G3s would be cool. Personally I’d be VERY interested in a proper accurate Ripper reissue more so than any other Gibson.
Excuse me while I slip into the guitar world.
Traditional reverse Firebird
The new Firebird Platypus
I play a little guitar, and I have always wanted a Firebird.
The new Platypus just appeals to me.
Traditional reverse Firebird
The new Firebird Platypus
I play a little guitar, and I have always wanted a Firebird.
The new Platypus just appeals to me.
Im not really a fan of his music but he is entertaining because he rubs people the wrong way like you.
Scotts also doing a promo from HOG most likely here too fwiw.
Sounds believable, but I bet there are other explanations for the headstock shape. I know for a fact that some mid-sixties Firebirds were built with the headstock end pointing downward, and some pointing upward. IICR, the downward pointing one may be the rarer version. No clue how that might relate to a bird's beak though, but I like the beak theory anyway.
^ I didn't know this about the Thunderbird headstocks, but I do remember The EB-0, and EB-3 headstocks.
Most were the normal, Gibson open book type, while a few had the slotted headstock, which I loved.
Mike
Most were the normal, Gibson open book type, while a few had the slotted headstock, which I loved.
Mike
I assumed the body wings and headstock silhouette are supposed to evoke the bird image on the pickguard and thats what the whole design is about. If not then Ill accept Im crazy
They screwed up the Thunderbird so much you'd think someone from Fender is working there undercover!
Sure, nove bridge, but the headstock is one of the worst things they've ever done.
Boring colors, uninspiring pickups.
I bet for every Thunderbird they sell, Epiphone sells ten.
Sure, nove bridge, but the headstock is one of the worst things they've ever done.
Boring colors, uninspiring pickups.
I bet for every Thunderbird they sell, Epiphone sells ten.
Last edited:
I'm super interested in the market research that goes into these Gibson releases. Seems like they aren't catering to vintage enthusiasts with this new Bird, but who is the target audience supposed to be then?
Tbh though if they put this Hipshot bridge and tuners and these pickups in an SG Bass, put a bit more thought into the original design flaws (maybe offset the body a bit?) I'd put in my preorder yesterday.
Tbh though if they put this Hipshot bridge and tuners and these pickups in an SG Bass, put a bit more thought into the original design flaws (maybe offset the body a bit?) I'd put in my preorder yesterday.
This is what still needs improving, imo: The body needs to un-reversed so the longer horn is on top to prevent neck dive, improve player comfort, and increase the bass tone from the heavier strings. The tuning pegs can stay on top, but clearly string tree(s) are needed for the D/G strings to have better break angle over the nut and reduce sympathetic frequencies.
I think they look pretty good. I'm not interested at $2500 but I'd like to play one. It's interesting reading this thread and comparing it to opinions from guitar players on Gibson's current lineup. There are always naysayers but most people agree current Gibson QC is better than it has been in years. Even at GC most of the Gibsons I pick up play well with nice build quality.
Yes. Please being back the Flying V - it’s been forever!
