Gibson CS NR Thunderbird

[Denis]

That is what the Non Rev Birds would most likely sound a lot like: The meanwhile deleted Rev Studio Birds. Those were fine basses - bit more thud than a neck-thru TBird - and aggressively priced (for Gibson), but much to my surprise tanked in the market.

People tend to forget that the Non Revs so worshipped here today were in fact a cost-saving measure by Gibson trying to get away from the more-expensive-to-craft and wood-wasteful neck-thru concept of the original Ray Dietrich concept.

I always read that the NR was the result of complaints and (maybe) a lawsuit filed by Fender against Gibson claiming the reverse Thunderbirds were too similar to their products. You know much more than I do, but if either is true, how much weight did that carry in causing Gibson to design the NR?

[uwe]

That thing is covered in myth and lore and whether it was ever really a serious dispute ... IIRC Fender thought the four-tuners-in-row too close for comfort and recognized the shape of the Rev as its Jaguar/Jazzmaster turned upside down plus Gibson's sudden change on a bass to Fender type long scale. But none of that was changed with the Non Revs, if anything they were even more Fenderesque and a set neck is closer to a bolt-on than a neck thru is to a bolt-on.

The original reverse Fire- and TBirds were upmarket creations for mature serious players of jazz, not that fleeting pop or rock thing. They were priced accordingly - more expensive than any other Gibson or Fender stringed electric instrument -, but it was still soon realized that the neck-thru construction was a real cost item.When the Fire-/Thunderbird line failed to set the world on fire, Gibson gave it a facelift (or faceturn!) and cut the etravagant neck-thru in the process. But then the Non Revs did even worse.

I'll say it again: The Rev is a design classic and icon with a touch of Art Deco, the Non-Rev an accidental ugly duckling with a cult following (among bassists, in guitar circles it does not meet the worship it does here). Ask any non-guitar or non-bass player whether they prefer the Rev or the Non Rev shape and you'll always get the same answer. Not for the Non Rev. Nobody (except the knowing who appreciate their rarity) has ever said that my Non Revs look good, with my Revs I hear that all the time, the chick singer in my band insists that I play only them.

[drbassman]

It's hell being a member of a cult!!!  We don't get any respect!!!! 

[OldManC]

I'll say it again: The Rev is a design classic and icon with a touch of Art Deco, the Non-Rev an accidental ugly duckling with a cult following (among bassists, in guitar circles it does not meet the worship it does here).

I've said this here before as well, and it still makes me laugh...

In the early 80's, 70's Thunderbirds were going for between $450 and $500 all day long. I saw a Non Reverse bird sit in the Recycler (think Craigslist free Classifieds in newspaper form) for week after week and never move. It's price? $150. Nobody wanted a non reverse Thunderbird. Including me. Things sure have changed!

[Barklessdog]

If they do a modern version, it could be cool, similar to the three pickup LP not long ago.

[jumbodbassman]

I had one of the red Bach TH-2's, and it definitely did not have a maho/sipo body. The neck was for sure - the grain pattern matched and the reddish / brownish color of the wood was clearly visible in the TRC screw holes. The body however, was different. All of the pickguard screw holes revealed a very yellowish/whitish wood. Same with the exposed areas inside of the control cavity. I even drilled an "exploratory" hole with a long and very small diameter bit in through the tail strap lock hole - and same result. My guess would be that it was basswood - as the dust removed matched most closely what I've seen in my Ibanez SR-800's.   Beautiful bass - but the body wasn't Mahogany.  If Gibson could put out an NR to match the build & quality of the Studio Birds - I'm in!

i drilled my TH-1 over the weekend for a new strap lock hole and i agree.  a very light colored and very soft wood.  drill bit went in so easy i almost thought it felt like a hollow spot except where it was (dovetail) i knew better.  but the grain doesn't look like basswood either.  acoustically it is a little more resonant than my bicentenial bird.  Whatever it is once i get a case that fits i will give it the real  "with a band"  test...  IMHO a great bass for the money.  can't wait for the lull pup.  weren't the early birds laminates.  Maybe this one is also??

[godofthunder]

 I have always said the Non reverse was a happy accident. For whatever reason Gibson changed the construction and shape weather Fender sued or not doesn't make any difference. In the 60's manufacturers in many respects viewed the electric guitar (and bass) a fad, their goal was to produce and sell product and cash in as long as the trend lasted. The Nonreverse is clearly a example of that mind set. For years I had them all to myself oh for the good old days.

[Highlander]

Excuse my ignorance here - thru or set neck...?

[TBird1958]

Excuse my ignorance here - thru or set neck...?

Set.

[gweimer]

My first real bass was a '66 NR Thunderbird II that cost me something like $350 back in the mid '70s.  The reverse style was more than double that.

[Dave W]

I believe the only new honduras available now is supposedly from fallen trees.

That's true of Honduras mahogany from Honduras and just about anywhere in Central America, has been that way for years. But that's just the popular name to differentiate it from Cuban mahogany. The species is actually bigleaf mahogany and it grows well down into South America. I'm told by a hardwood dealer that most Honduran on the market for the past 15 years has actually been from S. America and that there's still plenty of old-growth logging going on in Peru.

OTOH it's now being grown on plantations in Fiji and India. This is now working its way into the market. For that matter, some Cuban mahogany is also grown in Fiji. These are "genuine mahogany" species. They're probably fine for furniture, and they may be fine for musical instruments. But there's no way plantation-grown wood could possibly have all the same characteristics of old growth wood from the original area half a world away. Different soils, climate etc.

Too bad Gibson can't be straightforward about exactly what they're using and from where. Even the custom shop offerings just say mahogany. Makes me suspicious.

[Barklessdog]

That's true of Honduras mahogany from Honduras and just about anywhere in Central America, has been that way for years. But that's just the popular name to differentiate it from Cuban mahogany. The species is actually bigleaf mahogany and it grows well down into South America. I'm told by a hardwood dealer that most Honduran on the market for the past 15 years has actually been from S. America and that there's still plenty of old-growth logging going on in Peru.

OTOH it's now being grown on plantations in Fiji and India. This is now working its way into the market. For that matter, some Cuban mahogany is also grown in Fiji. These are "genuine mahogany" species. They're probably fine for furniture, and they may be fine for musical instruments. But there's no way plantation-grown wood could possibly have all the same characteristics of old growth wood from the original area half a world away. Different soils, climate etc.

Too bad Gibson can't be straightforward about exactly what they're using and from where. Even the custom shop offerings just say mahogany. Makes me suspicious.

I would think weight would be the giveaway. Honduran is heavier, not much grain, Indonesian is light weight a very soft with more grain pattern, that I  have seen. I guess there are always exceptions. My local hardwood place has a Honduran Mahogany bin they regularly stock.

[Dave W]

I would think weight would be the giveaway. Honduran is heavier, not much grain, Indonesian is light weight a very soft with more grain pattern, that I  have seen. I guess there are always exceptions. My local hardwood place has a Honduran Mahogany bin they regularly stock.

I don't think we're talking about the same thing. The plantation grown stuff is being sold as Honduras mahogany, which it technically is. Not to be confused with other SE Asian mahogany-looking substitutes.

[the mojo hobo]

For years I had them all to myself oh for the good old days.

You think that only because you didn't know me back then. I bought my much used and many times broken NR for $90.00 in 1969, and it was one-owner and unbroken back then  

[uwe]

Many times broken?! You klutz!!!