Pictures! 2012 Gibson Non Reverse Thunderbird

[Muzikman7]

I have a Sunburst on order, according to my shop Gibson told them it will be 6 months so maybe Feb.

[uwe]

Most, not all. Unless they were all refins, I've seen pics of supposedly original ones that had a black headstock (but only with Non Revs, not Revs). If Gibson had black headstocks finsihed, you can bet they did not refin them.

My hunch is also that they would have given that pelham blue one a pelham blue headstock if that had been the only way they had done it in the past.

[patman]

I like that alot.

[Hörnisse]

Very nice!  I recall 6 years ago (2006) my band played at the local Gibson showcase room here in Austin.  I talked to the Gibson rep back then and told him they should reissue the non reverse 'Bird.(and that I knew quite a few people who would order one!  )  Glad to see Gibson has come to their senses!  He was probably less impressed when I played my '89 SR5 bass instead of their Epiphone Embassy 5 string. 

[the mojo hobo]

Most, not all. Unless they were all refins, I've seen pics of supposedly original ones that had a black headstock (but only with Non Revs, not Revs). If Gibson had black headstocks finsihed, you can bet they did not refin them.

My hunch is also that they would have given that pelham blue one a pelham blue headstock if that had been the only way they had done it in the past.

I'd bet the blue one has a black headstock because it fits in their current manufacturing scheme, and it costs money to change things.

[dadagoboi]

I'd bet the blue one has a black headstock because it fits in their current manufacturing scheme, and it costs money to change things.

Bingo

[Denis]

Boo, still can't see pics.

[chromium]

Boo, still can't see pics.

Denis, the link to that photo is here if it helps.  I can never see the pics posted here on my Blackberry either.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v102/godofthunder59/2012NRThunderbirds.png

Looks like they did the NR justice!  I like it.

[Denis]

Cool, I'll try it. Thanks, Scott!

[Pekka]

Don't like it but that's not a surprise since I don't like the modern reverse-birds either. They make Firebird with all the right parts but can't do the same with their basses?

[uwe]

I'd bet the blue one has a black headstock because it fits in their current manufacturing scheme, and it costs money to change things.

As they have to paint the pelham blue on the back of the headstock already (as they have done on the reissue EB LP Junior), I doubt that cost is an issue, Gibson products just in general have black headstock faces so maybe they try to keep things in line - Henry J has an eye for that. He scrapped the Continental V because it looked like a Tobias not a Gibson bass.

[eb2]

I am most curious on how it will compare in quality and feel vs the Bach.  I think I would prefer the two piece bridge and chrome.  Gibson has always put the chowder heads to work on the basses, so as always, they can screw it up.

[stiles72]

Scott - I didn't see the specs on these, but I would assume the nut is 1.5" like the regular Thunderbird IV, is that correct?

Even though I would probably go with the blue one since I can just swap all of the chrome over from my Epi Blue bird, I think the black hardware looks great on the burst model and I wouldn't change it.

[Dave W]

Don't like it but that's not a surprise since I don't like the modern reverse-birds either. They make Firebird with all the right parts but can't do the same with their basses?

They could do the same if they wanted. They obviously don't want to. They deliberately underserve bassists because they know they can get away with it.

[uwe]

You guys are a bickering bunch!!! Your inability to be pleased with something shows how at ease you are with your more feminine side.  

For nearly a decade you drool in this forum about the Non Rev being reissued. Now it has happened and we have a nit picking contest! "Don't like this, don't like that, wasn't that different back then, couldn't they, shouldn't they have done it that way ...". Can't imagine you would have been quite as choosy with your nose flattened against a window of a music shop offering these exactly in today's shape and form in 1968! "No, sir, I really don't want that black hardware, it's too futuristic for me, we still have the age of Chromagnon men you know? What would Lyndon B. Johnson think of it ..."  



Reissuing a no hope minority model (even in its heyday) for the converted few at an absolutely affordable price is nowadays called "underserving bassists". You live and learn. And while we're at it: Name me one other guitar firm that reissued (many for the first time) as many legendary past sixties, seventies and eighties models as Gibson has in the last two to three years? Grabber, Ripper, G-3, RD, Explorer, Flying V, EB-0 Junior, Non Rev, Midnight ...

Anything but the most slavish copy (which still doesn't make it an original, duh!) is not good enough for you. Ungrateful sods!



The 1987 reissue TBird has now been in production consecutively for 25 years, the original lasted three years (five if you count in the Non Revs who did to Ray Dietrich's design and concept what we did to Poland in 1939!), the Bicentennials two. What on earth makes you guys so sure that they are more worthy Birds than what has been produced now for a quarter of a century??? The Bicentennial didn't even bother with a body contour (not original, cost-saving, how could they ignore the wishes of the bass players, tsk, tsk, tsk), its pups are farther removed from the sixties ones than the TB Plus are ...  

I'm obviously undiscerning, but I do not feel "underserved" by Gibson's more recent bass reissue policy, overwhelmed more likely!!!