Author Topic: 1964 Thunderbird at Norman's  (Read 3824 times)

uwe

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 21516
  • Enabler ...
    • View Profile
Re: 1964 Thunderbird at Norman's
« Reply #30 on: June 21, 2021, 04:01:32 PM »
That Animals performance is lovely!
We've taken too much for granted ... and all the time it had grown ...
From techno seeds we first planted ... evolved a mind of its own ...

Dave W

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 22259
  • Got time to breathe, got time for music
    • View Profile
Re: 1964 Thunderbird at Norman's
« Reply #31 on: June 21, 2021, 09:40:06 PM »
That Animals performance is lovely!

Yes, it is. The mudbucker played with a pick can be heard clearly enough. It shines in an uncluttered song like this.

amptech

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1511
    • View Profile
Re: 1964 Thunderbird at Norman's
« Reply #32 on: June 21, 2021, 11:50:54 PM »
There's nothing wrong with a Gibson mudbucker. They can be pretty versatile if you turn the volume knob down on the bass.

Agree 100%

The band I'm in have started booking, and I have no plans using other basses than EB3's with muds and flats🙂

My main bass do have an overwound bridge mini humbucker, but then I can have the mud on 10. No trouble getting a great sound through my musicman stack or in the mixer. People love to hate stuff, but I think the mud is great if you just pay some attention when using it.

Pilgrim

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9989
    • View Profile
    • YouTube channel
Re: 1964 Thunderbird at Norman's
« Reply #33 on: June 22, 2021, 11:52:56 AM »
The bass line in that Animals tune is pretty compelling...it sounds clear and moves the tune along.

I saw Eric Burden here in Colorado in the early 2000's.  He isn't a big guy, but he has a big voice.
"A computer lets you make more mistakes faster than any other invention with the possible exceptions of handguns and tequila."

uwe

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 21516
  • Enabler ...
    • View Profile
Re: 1964 Thunderbird at Norman's
« Reply #34 on: June 22, 2021, 06:24:19 PM »
With some spit and tweaking, you can even get an expensive Alembic to sound like an EB2!

We've taken too much for granted ... and all the time it had grown ...
From techno seeds we first planted ... evolved a mind of its own ...

ilan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3908
    • View Profile
Re: 1964 Thunderbird at Norman's
« Reply #35 on: June 23, 2021, 04:42:19 AM »
Don't get me started on Alembic.
The guy who bought the same bass twice — first in 1977 and again in 2023

uwe

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 21516
  • Enabler ...
    • View Profile
Re: 1964 Thunderbird at Norman's
« Reply #36 on: June 23, 2021, 06:48:24 PM »
I've never played one!
We've taken too much for granted ... and all the time it had grown ...
From techno seeds we first planted ... evolved a mind of its own ...

ilan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3908
    • View Profile
Re: 1964 Thunderbird at Norman's
« Reply #37 on: June 24, 2021, 05:25:05 AM »
I have, and was both underwhelmed and outweighed. '79 Jazz/T-40-heavy, zillion impractical sounds that make you wish it had an "instant P" switch. But that's just my experience, and they're built like a tank, and the woodwork is really superb. Although I'd rather have my bass painted fire truck red and not looking like a coffee table. Again, just my own poor taste and tacky aesthetic preferences. Are we done discussing that lovely '64 TBird and are now talking about Alembics?
« Last Edit: June 24, 2021, 05:30:08 AM by ilan »
The guy who bought the same bass twice — first in 1977 and again in 2023

Stjofön Big

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 885
    • View Profile
Re: 1964 Thunderbird at Norman's
« Reply #38 on: June 24, 2021, 06:19:39 AM »
Back to business! First time I ever saw a T-bird was in 64. The bass picture was printed in a Hagstrom folder with the usual suspects of Gulds, Gibsons, Hagstroms, and Hofners. The T-bird looked fantastic! But my wallet couldn't afford it. So I got me a Hofner violin shape. Cost aboout $ 60.00. Which was affordable, as I just started working at a power plant. Doing boring work, but it got me almost where I wanted. A violin bass. But not the one I was a sucker for. A T-bird. Took me another twenty years before I realised the importance of making dreams come true. A couple of years the thrill was gone...

gearHed289

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4448
    • View Profile
    • Book of faces...
Re: 1964 Thunderbird at Norman's
« Reply #39 on: June 24, 2021, 08:28:17 AM »
Don't get ME started on Alembics! I actually love them. I definitely do feel that the original style Series basses are an ergonomic nightmare. Why is the neck way out THERE? And what's all this body mass behind the tailpiece for? And yes, very heavy. But they've got a lot of newer designs that hang much better. Woodworking and finishing is spectacular, and their electronics are unmatched. A lot of people don't get the concept of a low pass filter, but once you figure it all out, they sound amazing. Those who turn everything up to 10 and engage every switch will have a tough time.  :mrgreen:

Highlander

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12542
  • There Ken be only one...
    • View Profile
Re: 1964 Thunderbird at Norman's
« Reply #40 on: June 24, 2021, 01:00:44 PM »
   Any idea where I can find those undies? Damn!  :-*

Can of paint...? :mrgreen:
The random mind of a Silver Surfer...
If research was easy, it wouldn't need doing...
Staring at that event horizon is a dirty job, but someone has to do it; something's going to come back out of it one day...

Alanko

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1671
    • View Profile
Re: 1964 Thunderbird at Norman's
« Reply #41 on: June 26, 2021, 03:19:41 PM »
I've never played one!

I've played two. Both were heavy. For all the fancy wood going on, the business is all in the electronics. They designed the wood out of the tone, so the preamp does all the work really.

Rob

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1817
    • View Profile
Re: 1964 Thunderbird at Norman's
« Reply #42 on: June 27, 2021, 05:18:10 AM »
I've played two. Both were heavy. For all the fancy wood going on, the business is all in the electronics. They designed the wood out of the tone, so the preamp does all the work really.
Yes

ilan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3908
    • View Profile
Re: 1964 Thunderbird at Norman's
« Reply #43 on: June 27, 2021, 08:29:43 AM »
For all the fancy wood going on, the business is all in the electronics. They designed the wood out of the tone, so the preamp does all the work really.

I'll stick my neck out here and say that in my experience the wood used for the body makes very little difference to the overall tone. I have never met anyone who could tell, for example, an alder body bass (or guitar) from an ash one without looking. Fretboard material OTOH makes a noticeable difference. 
The guy who bought the same bass twice — first in 1977 and again in 2023

Rob

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1817
    • View Profile
Re: 1964 Thunderbird at Norman's
« Reply #44 on: June 27, 2021, 08:44:31 AM »
I'll stick my neck out here and say that in my experience the wood used for the body makes very little difference to the overall tone. I have never met anyone who could tell, for example, an alder body bass (or guitar) from an ash one without looking. Fretboard material OTOH makes a noticeable difference.
Let's have an Amen on that one.