Except it's maple basses, RD, G-3, Ripper, Victory. They are well built bullet proof basses. That's saying a lot with an RD's complex electronics.
The LP Carved top Standards are their best built modern basses that I have seen
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's going on with Gibson?
- Thread starter Precision2600
- Start date
Except it's maple basses, RD, G-3, Ripper, Victory. They are well built bullet proof basses. That's saying a lot with an RD's complex electronics.
The LP Carved top Standards are their best built modern basses that I have seen
They still do ES models. They just moved it to a seperate section.
Invalid Link Removed
Gibson still does limited edition/ custom varieties of Firebird guitars.
Invalid Link Removed
What I'd really like to see is a Non-reverse Thunderbird (II or IV), built to original specs...none of this black hardware or Incredible Shrunken Headstock stuff. (Does anyone else hate those stupid-looking Y-shaped tuning machines as much as I do?)
Even a regular Thunderbird like the old Orville/Epiphone Elitist models would be amazing...that guitar was more Gibson than the actual Gibson. Oh, and some color options would be nice.
I was never a real fan of the EB0, EB3, or "SGs," but I do like the carved-top Les Pauls, and also the double cuts and the "Money Bass" (what was the difference besides a little dollar sign on the truss cover?). I can't speak for the RDs, Grabbers, G3s, Victories, Explorers or any of the other '70s Wonders, other than I always thought the RD and Victory looked cool and the others were kinda disgusting-looking
.
An EB2 would be cool. Or how about an EB6? (No dice? Drag.)
Anyway, I hope this recent cut-back in Gibson's lineup will prove to be a calm before a storm. Maybe in the next year they'll hit us with so much stuff we won't know what to do with it? That's probably exaggerating, but any signs of life at all would be swell.
Even a regular Thunderbird like the old Orville/Epiphone Elitist models would be amazing...that guitar was more Gibson than the actual Gibson. Oh, and some color options would be nice.
I was never a real fan of the EB0, EB3, or "SGs," but I do like the carved-top Les Pauls, and also the double cuts and the "Money Bass" (what was the difference besides a little dollar sign on the truss cover?). I can't speak for the RDs, Grabbers, G3s, Victories, Explorers or any of the other '70s Wonders, other than I always thought the RD and Victory looked cool and the others were kinda disgusting-looking
.An EB2 would be cool. Or how about an EB6? (No dice? Drag.)
Anyway, I hope this recent cut-back in Gibson's lineup will prove to be a calm before a storm. Maybe in the next year they'll hit us with so much stuff we won't know what to do with it? That's probably exaggerating, but any signs of life at all would be swell.
I'd like to see them make a commitment to the bass. the RD was really innovative stuff---and the victory. Their old line EBs were really great for their time. They ought to reintro a hollowbody like the EB-2. But no damn robot sh##.
The Money Bass has a thin walnut tone plate under the maple cap. The double cut did not. Does it make a big difference????
I heard that it makes the $$ bass a bit darker sounding.
Jim Carr
Dr. Jim
- Jan 21, 2006
- 16,223
- 7,614
- 76
- Disclosures
- fEARful Kool-Aid dispensing liberal academic card-carrying union member Musicians Local 72-147
I wonder if it could ever happen. An EB-2 would get my money. I would pay a lot if it was the equal of the 60's models. The vintage prices are too high and the condition of most of them is terrible.
I also agree that a real original Thunderbird would be attractive. Maybe it is just my age...
As would I friend...so I asked them. They said no.
A year later, I called the custom shop. the price they gave me for the one-off was so rediculous I never considered asking them again.
I suspect the answer is that they've been moving their bass lines to Epiphone. Maybe they don't feel that all of their models can compete at Gibson price levels.
Jim Carr
Dr. Jim
- Jan 21, 2006
- 16,223
- 7,614
- 76
- Disclosures
- fEARful Kool-Aid dispensing liberal academic card-carrying union member Musicians Local 72-147
Jim Carr
Dr. Jim
- Jan 21, 2006
- 16,223
- 7,614
- 76
- Disclosures
- fEARful Kool-Aid dispensing liberal academic card-carrying union member Musicians Local 72-147
Jim Carr
Dr. Jim
- Jan 21, 2006
- 16,223
- 7,614
- 76
- Disclosures
- fEARful Kool-Aid dispensing liberal academic card-carrying union member Musicians Local 72-147
Jim Carr
Dr. Jim
- Jan 21, 2006
- 16,223
- 7,614
- 76
- Disclosures
- fEARful Kool-Aid dispensing liberal academic card-carrying union member Musicians Local 72-147
I don't think that Gibson can make that much money on basses. There aren't that many people playing SG basses out there, and there aren't many more playing T'Birds. Who wants to pay thousands of dollars/pounds/euros etc for an unbalanced one-trick-pony? I know that people pay loads for vintage Fenders and stuff, but not new ones. I think that their problem is that they have never done anything new with them. They have pretty much stayed the same since they first made the reverse body model. Maybe they need to design some new models or something?
Also, they do have quality control issues. I was in a shop a couple of weeks ago, and there were a whole load of Gibsons and Epiphones up on the wall. I was having a look at them, and two models caught my eye. One was a Gibson and the other was an Epiphone. There were both pretty much the same spec (Les Paul, carved top, mahogany body + set neck, flamed maple top, amber finish). The flame on the Epiphone was a LOT nicer than the flame on the Gibson. It was lovely and consistant, while the Gibson top was not matched very well, and had many defects in it. If Gibsons budget guitars have nicer tops than their top of the range mega bucks instruments, then what does that say about them?
Also, they do have quality control issues. I was in a shop a couple of weeks ago, and there were a whole load of Gibsons and Epiphones up on the wall. I was having a look at them, and two models caught my eye. One was a Gibson and the other was an Epiphone. There were both pretty much the same spec (Les Paul, carved top, mahogany body + set neck, flamed maple top, amber finish). The flame on the Epiphone was a LOT nicer than the flame on the Gibson. It was lovely and consistant, while the Gibson top was not matched very well, and had many defects in it. If Gibsons budget guitars have nicer tops than their top of the range mega bucks instruments, then what does that say about them?
I assume this includes the Thunderbird "Studio" models? That's a real shame, those are really nice set neck versions of the Tbird, between the real neck through model, and the bolt on Epi. What's going on here?
I hope gibson doesn't discontinue the studio model, if they do i hope they bring back the tbird elitist at least (or made the epi t-bird set neck, but that's not going to happend)
it would be nice if the made the silver one a production model... but i guess it won't be cheap
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
(that pic is fron namm, any imput on those basses would be apreciated)
The signature basses I referred to earlier in the thread.
The Blood Red one is the new Nikki Sixx sig. - basically a T-bird with Flamed Maple wings, a master volume, master tone, and a three way switch.
The Flat Grey one is the Shavo sig. - same as above with Ash wings.
The Sixx looks nice, but they're still just T-birds any way you slice it!
The Blood Red one is the new Nikki Sixx sig. - basically a T-bird with Flamed Maple wings, a master volume, master tone, and a three way switch.
The Flat Grey one is the Shavo sig. - same as above with Ash wings.
The Sixx looks nice, but they're still just T-birds any way you slice it!
