Epi Thunderbird Classic-IV Pro now on their site ...

[wagdog]

Just found this, why is the bridge moved so far forward?

Good eye!  And why does he keep saying it's a set neck?

[planetgaffnet]

It's pretty amazing...have a look at my initial post here about the mock-ups on the Epi-site and the Secret Squirrel guy (sorry don't know his name) holding the two models.  The bridge placement certainly looks well off and the pickup locations look a tad skewed as well, so I guess the defining thing here is that it's just another interpretation of the design rather than an exact copy of real thing.  I have to say I'm a little disappointed, but then hey, at the price these are selling for, it'll work better for Nikki Sixx to smash one of these at the end of a show rather than an Affinity range Precision bass.

In closing, I'm glad I didn't jump all over this.  My money is going towards a pelham blue NR reissue, which for the ££s is only about twice the price of this.
P

[maxschrek]

Yep, if that's what they're gonna look like then I'm glad I waited too.
I'd rather have another Orville than that.


T

[Dave W]

It doesn't look like the bridge position is any different from the NAMM pic on page 2 of this thread.

Epi's site says neck through, Sam Ash video says set neck, Sam Ash website says bolt-on. Who's taking bets?

[uwe]

Just found this, why is the bridge moved so far forward?

Scott DSa(w)sson did it. No joke. At 16 seconds into the Sam Ash vid you get a good glimpse of the cutaway which is set almost two frets deeper into the lower part of the body. Deeper than on any previous Epi or Gibson Rev Bird.  The deeper cutaway forces the pg to be moved back and everything else looks farther forward in relation. So Epi have created a TBird with high register access without making the neck stick out more (and corresponding suffering of ergonomics - they once brought out a bass that was too long in the neck, the Gothic "Batman" bass, they are not going to repeat that mistake).

It's what Martin Turner always wanted - a Tbird for the high bits. And this post wouldn't be complete if I did not mention that his band, the mighty Wishbone Ash, got their recording contract with former DP-producer Derek Lawrence on the strength of a recommendation of he who may not be named in every thread. After Andy Powell of WA had aped his solos in joke at a mutual soundcheck and the two guitarists "duelled" for a while, Powell's dexterity and chuzpah leaving a lasting impression on Richard Harold.

I find the idea interesting and commendable. Kinda compensates for the ugly chromeling hardware.   As usual the traditionalists here may stone me now.

[maxschrek]

Uwe, that was exactly what I was worried about, the neck sticking too far out. Now that I'm aware of the deeper cutaway, I can see the new design provisions in the video....I'm kinda stoked about it again now. If it just looks funny I can get past that, maybe put one of Scott's tailpieces on it to balance it out .


T

[godofthunder]

"Sawsson" LMAO

[TBird1958]

Herr Moderator I probably have some excess black hardware I could have fitted to yours when it arrives     

[dadagoboi]

...you get a good glimpse of the cutaway which is set almost two frets deeper into the lower part of the body. Deeper than on any previous Epi or Gibson Rev Bird.  The deeper cutaway forces the pg to be moved back and everything else looks farther forward in relation...

Same thing Peter Cook did with the first Fenderbird way back when.  Only he was smarter and made the body slightly more compact so the tailpiece was toward the end of the body and neck dive minimized, not to mention making it case friendly.

Here's my take with the 21 fret REV.  Pickups are in the 60s Thunderbird positions in relation to the 12th fret.

[uwe]

It maketh sense IMHO. And I don't find it that intrusive for the overall look. There is really no good argument for designing a bass with 20 frets of which only the first 15 are decently playable. Ray Dietrich was an auto designer not a luthier, Detroit rest his soul.

Anyway, Madam Mim Fräulein Rommel will receive a specimen and then enlighten us all with how deep her tender fingers can get into this bass' recessed underside. You can't beat experience coupled with a daring character.

[wagdog]

The problem with Epi's change is they ended up with the bridge pickup hard against the bridge.  Call me picky but you lose the growl and it sounds thin in that position.

[TBird1958]

It maketh sense IMHO. And I don't find it that intrusive for the overall look. There is really no good argument for designing a bass with 20 frets of which only the first 15 are decently playable. Ray Dietrich was an auto designer not a luthier, Detroit rest his soul.

Anyway, Madam Mim Fräulein Rommel will receive a specimen and then enlighten us all with how deep her tender fingers can get into this bass' recessed underside. You can't beat experience coupled with a daring character.

You're killin' me!  

You guys and your "upper register access"..................
I care much more about how it plays and feels on the money frets, than some brief excursion to solo territory.... who's playing the bass  

[uwe]

The problem with Epi's change is they ended up with the bridge pickup hard against the bridge.  Call me picky but you lose the growl and it sounds thin in that position.

That too might be a conscious move, let's not forget that we are a dying breed here and that closer to the bridge is popular. I remember a bass test in a German bass mag where the Epi bolt-on TBird came out better than the Epi Explorer because of the closer-to-the-bridge position of the pups. "the TBird is more versatile and sounds more modern, the Explorer sounds like you expect a Gibson bass to sound" it said. I don't subscribe (other than that the regular bolt-on Epi Birds do sound a bit P'ish), but that is the way it is. Perhaps Epi wanted a worthy TBird lookalike with some current taste twists. Traditionalists are likely to be older and have more money to buy the Gibson original.  Younger players might be looking for something that looks cool but doesn't have overt drawbacks in comparison to the umpteenth P Bass knock-off. And if your rig isn't the greatest and loudest you are always glad for a little extra treble to cut through.

To this day I believe that a Stingray would have benefitted greatly from the one pup being moved one or two inches forward. 

[Dave W]

I find it hard to believe that a pickup practically right on top of the bridge would be considered more modern. Putting it there just makes it thin-sounding, not modern.

Maybe they designed it that way to achieve a certain sound. I doubt it though. More likely they don't understand what a bass needs.

[Pilgrim]

I find it hard to believe that a pickup practically right on top of the bridge would be considered more modern. Putting it there just makes it thin-sounding, not modern.

I strongly agree.  Placement right next to the bridge does the bass no favors.