Q. What makes the perfect Thunderbird...? Discuss...

[Highlander]

I have never ever handled a Gibson Thunderbird, in fact the only Thunderbird I have ever played is my PC...

There are reverse and NR; through, fixed and bolt-on; "stealth" 'birds - those with a T'Bird pup in another body; the copys - my PC will only ever be a "tribute" to the original article.

There are those that play them for the look and those that play them for the sound...

I know there are envious comments about the white TBII that migrated from George to Uwe; I have heard comments about specific eras of production and variants, about attempts to recreate that "vintage" sound, but what makes perfect for you...? My interest here is from a players point of view, not a collectors point of view... to me, the sound and feel of an instrument are what count so I'm going to be fin-ist here

Conversely, what about the failures, the variants that just don't work, the issues (neck weakness, low output pups, that sort of stuff), etc

My PC could be considered a "stealth" EB3L with an alternate bridge pup to give a more "modern" sound mix but to me it has those magical qualities - mahogany and a through-neck...

I'd like to hear what you think...

[godofthunder]

Kenny back in '78 when I started playing NRs you couldn't give the things away. I clearly remember the first time I plugged one in at the House of Guitars, the sound just blew me away. It was ungainly long, the neck was thick and hard for me to get around on but I just had to have just because of the sound. I think NRs sound the way they do for several reasons. First is the thin but one piece mahogany body it is very resonant, notes sing on these basses. Second is the one piece set neck, more solid wood vibrating freely, no neck laminations. Third is the pickup, hotter than early '63-'65 Thunderbirds it really turns the bass into a F****r slayer. More later.

[Highlander]

Interesting that you mention the laminations...

Most of the through-necks have 7...?
That one-off "TBVI" that Uwe has has 13...?
The PC has a 3-piece neck (excluding the board of course) but has a section glued on the back to match up the body profile

More interesting is what I suspect to be the key to this - the sound - the heart of the equation is the sound...?

We both have a preference for a specific valve amp too...

[TBird1958]

I really like Reverses and for me '76s are best, why? I love tone! the look and I can afford them
I must be lucky, because while I've read many comments about QC and pups my 3 are certainly great players and thru my rig produce tone I really like.

But I'm lucky enough to have some clones and Ho's too, and they each have a charm, my Greco TB II is the loudest, raunchiest bass I've ever played, the pup on that thing just rawrs. The Lull is a bit better mannered and plays with a sweetness no other has - I don't like NR's quite as much, but still thru Rob's good effort's I have 2 BaCH's, (and Joe's glorious 8 string) wonderful basses and as Scott says almost as good as the original issue. 
Epiphone's "Standard" is likely my least fave, I've owned 2, one that got flipped in adeal for my first '76 and the other is my beater "Fenderbird"

Not sure if there really is a "perfect" 'Bird for me

[Bionic-Joe]

My only two  4 strings I own are  both 1965 Thunderbird II's. One is an original Sunburst and the other a Pelham Blue refin. Both unbroken. I have had No Reverse T birds as well. They are kick ass....But for me...the Reverse is the one. I've owned Iv's as well. I think one pickup is all you need...especially if you play it through a 200 watt Hiwatt!!! The 76's are cool...but I have outgrown them. The tuneomatic bridge, Pickups and BIG headstock do it for me.

[Stjofön Big]

The first time I understood the raw charm of a T-bird was in a rehearsal space my band shared with an American/Swedish band called Wedge. The year was -74. For reasons I do not remember, my Epiphone Rivoli and Acoustic amp was not in the place. So I borrowed what I needed from Wedge. Which was a reversed T-bird through a Fender Dual Showman, and 2x15" cabinet.
Wow!
That sound, like thunder with barbed wire on top! I was blown away! In a couple of months I went to Dual Showman, and started looking for a T-bird. When one passed my way, several years later, it was a -76 with only pieces of what I had heard in that first T-bird. Sold it, went for the closest thing to the 63-65 Bird - Epiphone Embassy. As late as my latest gig, Saturday last week, I still heard that roar. Never got that out of my old P-bass.

[jumbodbassman]

Now from the other end of the spectrum.    I  have been a Fender guy for 39 years so my opinion is very different from those above.  I have about 25+ gibson basses including some birds.  In general i have the Gibbies because i can ( or used to be able before the economy shit the bed) but i always go to a fender or clone first.  For me the fenders just feel  and play better all around. More versatile sound that will fit with any type of music.   Better balance,  tougher neck,  less reach.  Maybe a tbird would feel better if i was pick player or over 6 foot tall but i am neither.  That being said i have seen the light the last few years on the pickup side.  The 60's tbird pup IMHO is the best sounding passive pup ever made for rock.  I love my 60 pbass pup and 75 jbass pups  and they are clearly more versatile and cleaner sounding but the tbird pups just sound great in rock.  Think Who's next/quadrophenia sound.  I have put a Lull in my bach bird and it rocks great too.  I also like my 76 bird pups,  very clean almost piano like e string sound but not the same  roar of the 60's pups.  IMHO the perfect bass would be a pbass or even better a clone ( smaller body ,more frets, better access,  neck thru or set neck - kind of like one of my fodera monarchs with mahog body)  with a set of 60's tbird pups.  63 or 66 depending on level of roar you want.  

As a followup the new jaebird Carlo is buildig may be the answer to my dreams.  thunderbucker (Gib)  pups,  mahog body , better access, balance?? neck pulled in more like a fender - only thing missing is the extra few frets which is probably more in my head as i very seldom get past a high E.

[eb2]

A perfect Tbird, for me, is a 60s one that hasn't been broken, is original (moving the G string bridge saddle north is fine), and doesn't way a ton.  The best one I ever played was a 67, and I should have bought it.  $750 in 1990. I have been kicking myself since, although I have made worse mistakes. 

The best playing rev birds have all been broken and repaired, and I never wanted to pay a lot for a repaired instrument back a couple of decades ago.  The best balance of weight and tone and feel I have ever played were Epi Embassy basses, which I consider to be Tbirds the way I consider a Ravioli to be an EB-2. After the Bicentennial birds, which have the horrid flaws of three point bridge and speed knobs, I have little to no interest.  The more recent ones are fine, but I think you can do better for the money.

So, I never did buy one, but I will one of these days. 

[gweimer]

For me the perfect Thunderbird is one that is an Epiphone Embassy.

But I think you expected that from me.   

[Highlander]

The Embassy gets a second vote...!

I'm starting to get the impression I've suspected for a long time - the secret is the sound...

Jumbo mentioned JAE and his answer was to have his preferred D profile P neck with a body styled on the 60's T'bird body and the key part - the Gibbie T'bird pups...

Does anyone know the heritage of the pup/s fitted to the Embassy's?

[dadagoboi]

Does anyone know the heritage of the pup/s fitted to the Embassy's?

Exactly the same as an NR TBird, ditto the bridge, tuners and tailpiece.

[godofthunder]

 I love the way the '63-'65 Reverse Thunderbirds look, but you can't get to the upper register, deal breaker for me. I had a '76 new when they came out. The bass itself was well executed the bridge and pickups sucked ( imho of course, I know there are those who like the pickups). Now I have a Black  '76 with repro Thunderbird pups under NOS covers, it scratches the reverse itch but I still can't get to the upper register   As for Epiphone Thunderbirds I don't like to muddy the waters and include them, fine for what they are but they are Thunderbirds in name only..........................again imho.

[Highlander]

So how can a JAE Bird/PC Fender Bird be so right and the original article (in a bolt-on style aka the basic Epi) be so wrong...?

Are the 60's pups starting to show up as a fave here...? Carlo has gone a long way in assisting in their recreation...

[godofthunder]

So how can a JAE Bird/PC Fender Bird be so right and the original article (in a bolt-on style aka the basic Epi) be so wrong...?

Are the 60's pups starting to show up as a fave here...? Carlo has gone a long way in assisting in their recreation...

There is no question the pickups are a huge part of the equation. The Epi has questionable mahogany content, heavy poly finish, and no more than serviceable pickups and is made by Epiphone, don't get me wrong I like Epiphone stuff but Thunderbirds are Gibson made in USA, again no intent to flame just my opinion. The Fenderbird has the pickups, bridge and mahogany of the original.............................I can forgive the bolt on neck. Part of the magic of the Fenderbird is the mahogany body/maple neck combo.

[Stjofön Big]

Gotta get back to the Epi Embassy. Never thought of it, but as I read these lines above, a question grows on me: The T-birds changed their pickups when the turn came to the nonrev. But, did anything happen with the pups at the same time in the Epi camp?