Thunderbird online sound comparison

[Annoying Twit]

I'm not likely to be buying anything soon, but my interest has been piqued by the very nice sound of Norris's Thunderbird as in the bass bash yesterday. I thought I'd have a listen to some thunderbirds online. Thomann have sound samples of a wide variety of Thunderbirds.

However, I've been very surprised by what I've heard. The only one that I've heard that seems to have the warm, solid, bass that Norris's Gibson has is the Epiphone Pro IV. All of the others sound, to my ears, considerably worse sounding, including Thomann's sample of the Gibson itself!

Epiphone Pro IV - the winner? Really round powerful bass sound? [url="http://www.thomann.de/gb/epiphone_thunderbird_proiv_na.htm"]http://www.thomann.d...rd_proiv_na.htm[/url]

Jackson Kelly David E. Thunderbird. [url="http://www.thomann.de/gb/jackson_david_ellefson_kelly_bird_bass.htm"]http://www.thomann.d...y_bird_bass.htm[/url] Nowhere near as much rich bass.

Harley Benton T'bird. [url="http://www.thomann.de/gb/harley_benton_tb_70vs.htm"]http://www.thomann.d...ton_tb_70vs.htm[/url] Not odd sounding, just not a very bassy sound.

Jackson JS2. [url="http://www.thomann.de/gb/jackson_js2_kelly_bird_iv_bcsb.htm"]http://www.thomann.d...ird_iv_bcsb.htm[/url] Lacks bass.

Epiphone Thunderbird IV (bolt on). [url="http://www.thomann.de/gb/epiphone_thunderbird_iv_ebass.htm"]http://www.thomann.d...rd_iv_ebass.htm[/url] A bit more bass than some others, but not as much as the Pro IV and a bit of an odd sound in the midrange.

Gibson. Not a bad sound here, but not as warm and bassy as the Epiphone Pro IV. But, this is the Gibson? [url="http://www.thomann.de/gb/gibson_thunderbird_2014_hc.htm"]http://www.thomann.d...ird_2014_hc.htm[/url]

Just curious here. I'm aware of how much online samples can be misleading, as a long time ago I decided against ever having a Yamaha BEX4 as the online samples didn't sound nice to me. Being able to try a real one (Len Derby's) in real life yesterday shows me that I was mistaken in that. Also, it could be that the recording for the Epiphone has had the bass boosted or some compression along the line at some point.

If anyone has the time & interest, I'd be very interested to hear what people say about the sounds of these t'birds. In particular the comparison between the sounds of the Epiphone Pro IV versus the actual Gibson. Does the Epiphone sounds better to others, as it does to me? I even tried cranking the volume of the Gibson when comparing, as people tend to prefer louder sounds. But even then the Epiphone sounds better to me.

After yesterday, I was thinking that if the sound was somewhere in the ballpark, that I might try a Harley Benton deko t'bird. But, the sound IMHO isn't in the same league as the Epi, unless these samples are misleading. Which they could easily be. I don't want something that looks the part, but doesn't have the sound. Particularly since I'm very happy with the active double humbucker sounds I get from my Ibanez SR760.

EDIT: For name confusion!

Edited May 10, 2015 by Annoying Twit

[Norris]

(It was my bass - tauzero had the lovely Warwick Buzzard )

[Annoying Twit]

[quote name='Norris' timestamp='1431282861' post='2769601']
(It was my bass - tauzero had the lovely Warwick Buzzard )
[/quote]

When I saw you had followed up, I immediately realised my mistake. Where is the highly embarrassed smiley?

[Guest MoJo]

I experienced a similar situation with a TC Electronics BG250-115. I was looking for a lightweight combo for pub gigs and had ordered a Peavey MAX115 II from PMT Online. When it arrived, there was evidence that it had been knocked. Plugging in my bass, I discovered that the electronics had suffered too. Following a call to PMT, I took the Peavey back to the Birmingham branch. They hadn't got another in stock so they asked me if I wanted to have a look around and see if anything else took my fancy. I noticed that they had a couple of BG250-115's and asked if I could try one of them. Previously, my opinion of the TC had been coloured by what I'd heard in YouTube clips, including those posted by TC themselves. In every clip, the combo came across as clinical and hollow sounding. In reality, the BG250-115 produces a huge, warm sound and is certainly enough for any pub gig without PA support.
This is why bass bashes are so vital. They let you experience things first hand.
I listened as you played that Thunderbird and I got serious GAS too

[Happy Jack]

The best of the lot is the Mike Lull.

[Happy Jack]

IMHO of course.

[Annoying Twit]

I've found reviews of the Epiphone Pro that claims that it sounds better than the Gibson. But Norris's Gibson is I presume not too old as it has the current three point bridge, if I remember that correctly. I did plug my PJ, as a known not wonderful sounding bass, into his amp to see what the contribution of the amp was, and the Gibson was clearly much better sounding through the same amp and settings. To my ears, the Epiphone Pro in the samples has that kind of sound, but the Gibson itself doesn't. It could be that something has changed between Norris's model and the current Gibson. Has it? In which case the sound samples might show the true sounds of those instruments. Or it could be that the sounds are misleading. The Harley Benton one is a cheapie, but I find it unlikely that with Wilkinson pickups and active EQ that it will really sound quite as thin as it does. This youtube video of the current Gibson sounds closer to what I remember of what I heard yesterday.

[url="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QBtwbzsO7Fw"]https://www.youtube....h?v=QBtwbzsO7Fw[/url]

I wanted to look into this further. So, I captured the sample audio from Thoman's site so that I could look into it further. I think that their Epiphone Pro IV sample has had much more compression, and some post-bass EQ applied. When I got both into Logic Pro X, let alone hearing the difference, I could see it! (See attached image). Visually, a much more compressed sound. BTW: Yes, I was lazy and didn't un-stereoise the sounds I captured from Thomann.

I added some EQ and compression to the Harley Benton sound (I chose that one as IMHO being the worst of the Gibson/Epiphone/HB t'bird samples). While it doesn't now sound identical to the Epiphone (chosen as the best of the Gibson/Epiphone/HB t'bird samples), IMHO much of the difference has disappeared. If I fiddled around more, I think I could get them even closer sounding.

(I'm not saying that I think that the Epi sounds better than the Gibson, just that the Thomann Epi samples IMHO sound better, and my fiddling is to try to work out why this might be).

Here's the Epi T'bird sound from Thomann: [url="https://soundcloud.com/annoyingtwit/epi-t-pro"]https://soundcloud.c...gtwit/epi-t-pro[/url]

Here's the Harley Benton T'bird sound from Thomann: [url="https://soundcloud.com/annoyingtwit/hb-t70"]https://soundcloud.c...yingtwit/hb-t70[/url]

Here's my modified version of the HB T'bird with more compression and some EQ changes: [url="https://soundcloud.com/annoyingtwit/hb-tb70-vs-changed-1"]https://soundcloud.c...70-vs-changed-1[/url]

I think more fiddling with the multi-band compression and EQ on the HB T'bird could probably bridge the sound quality gap between the HB and the Epi even further. The fundamental sound of the HB pickups doesn't seem bad, even if the signal is unimpressive dry.

It raises the question of whether I actually need better sounding basses, or whether the only thing I really need to do is learn how to coax better sounds out of what I have.

Edited May 10, 2015 by Annoying Twit

[DaBassMonsta]

I've got a 2013 Gibson and an Epiphone Pro IV and I find it's a much punchier sound from my Epi. The biggest thing for me though is the change in volume. I've found my Epi is remarkably louder. The pickups are in a slightly different spot on the Epi; a little closer to the bridge so that probably helps with the brightness.

[Annoying Twit]

@TheBassMonsta - do you think you could process the Gibson to be as punchy as the Epi? Would you say that the Gibson has its' own sonic advantages over the Gibson?

@HappyJack On this youtube video, the Mike Lull bass [s]definitely[/s] IMHO has that solid 'bassy' sound. It also seems to have a bridge similar to the original T'bird bridge.

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SyHTxlW2FLQ[/media]

Edited May 10, 2015 by Annoying Twit

[DaBassMonsta]

I'd love to even them up. There is definitely a nicer feel when playing the Gibson but the sound isn't quite as good... which really annoys me given their costs!

[PlungerModerno]

After some quick searching it seems this isn't a fair comparison - the Thunderbird Pro is an active bass : [url="http://www.epiphone.com/Products/Bass/Thunderbird-Pro-IV.aspx"]http://www.epiphone.com/Products/Bass/Thunderbird-Pro-IV.aspx[/url]

while many of the others, including the Gibson, are passive instruments. As has been mentioned however, the devil is in the details - the recordings aren't consistent enough in EQ and compression to make a fair comparison by my understanding anyway.

[Annoying Twit]

The Harley Benton and one of the Jacksons are also active.

Given what I saw in the waveforms pictured above, I find it very difficult to believe that the highly compressed sound of the Epiphone isn't due to outboard compression of some sort. Which the other basses appear to have less of, if they are compressed at all. Hence I agree with you the Thomann sound samples lead to a very unfair comparison.

Personally I believe that the only way to create sound samples for comparison is to upload completely dry samples digitised direct from the bass. Potential buyers can then put those samples through their amps/recording/live setups, and see what they will sound like in real life. But, I'd expect that most online punters wouldn't do this, and what they would hear would be basses that don't sound particularly good.

What I really want right now is a pedal compressor so that I can experiment using it with my graphic eq pedal. I know that I have various types of compression on my Zoom B1xon and also built into Logic/ProTools/etc., but I'd like a standalone compressor for instantaneous experimentation. The cheap HB and Joyo (etc.) compression pedals seem to have mixed reviews, so I don't know what would be a good option.

Edited May 11, 2015 by Annoying Twit

[PlungerModerno]

[i]"Personally I believe that the only way to create sound samples for comparison is to upload completely dry samples digitised direct from the bass[/i]"

+1 It's a pet peeve of mine when people demo instruments with amps & cabs and even with effects - leaving the listener with little clue as to the raw sound of the bass.

Using a limiter will give you the clean, un-clipped recording you need without resorting to heavy compression.

P.S. I picked up one of these a while back - [url="http://www.thomann.de/ie/carl_martin_classic_opto_compressor.htm"]http://www.thomann.de/ie/carl_martin_classic_opto_compressor.htm[/url]
Works just fine - but, [url="http://www.ovnilab.com/reviews/cmclassic.shtml"]as this review tells[/url], it's not as flexible as some other compressors. I'd recommend it.

Edited May 11, 2015 by PlungerModerno

[Annoying Twit]

PS: I bounced my compressed version of the HB-TB70 track so that I could see what it looked like. It still wasn't anywhere near as compressed as the Epi Pro, even though I thought I'd added loads.

[MarkG3]

I've got the HB Tbird and I think it's great. Never had a Tbird before, so initially getting used to the position of the neck was different and reaching passed fret 16/17 is tricky, but I like the sound I'm getting from it. For the price I think it's great!

[Annoying Twit]

Mark_88MPH, how would you describe the accuracy of the HB [size=4]TB70-VS sound sample on Thomann's product page?[/size]

[MarkG3]

I would say mine definitely has more low end than those examples and not as much highs

[synthaside]

What an interesting thread I must have been busy at work to have missed this yesterday ;-). I have a completely stock 90's Korean Epi bolt on t-bird from before the Pro was a thing and I can say the sound I get out of it is , Is much less wooly but more wooden and more punchy, like the jazz tone on the pro recording ( I have very old round's on it which if one broke I would have to find second hand or settle for flats)

I will actually be doing some scratch recording on Thursday with it using a DI box straight into a very old digital multi tracker , nothing complex just a couple of bits for my covers band , to onboard a new guitarist so I'll upload and share with what I consider totally flat eq.

I think what defines a t-bird is the shape and style its essentially a twin humbuckered bass which there are thousands of variations of in every flavour, so pickups and tonality of wood will give differnt sounds and as there isnt a "Trademark sound / tone attributed to a tbird like a P or Rick the builder / designer can be a bit more flexible" .

I'll say one thing about tbirds is that they do not encourage static hand placement , weird to explain but on my P orJ basses my hand is glued to the front P or rear J pickup. On my tbird I move my hand and play all over the neck pickup with the same level of comfort to get a tone I feel more suitable for the song.

The sculpted ridge where the wings join the necked body can be as comfortable to me as floating on the E or resting on one of the pickups

Just an idea

Edited May 12, 2015 by synthaside

[NancyJohnson]

Synth
[quote name='synthaside' timestamp='1431427488' post='2771131']
I think what defines a t-bird is the shape and style its essentially a twin humbuckered bass which there are thousands of variations of in every flavour, so pickups and tonality of wood will give differnt sounds and as there isnt a "Trademark sound / tone attributed to a tbird like a P or Rick the builder / designer can be a bit more flexible" .
[/quote]

This is spot on. It's just a shape. Likewise all these people with Rick copies expecting to hear a close approximation of a 4000 series' tone. I've owned a handful of Thunderbirds, all documented on this forum and now I'm down to two Gibsons and a Hamer FBIV. Conversely, and by way of comparison, I also own a 1978 Aria Primary Bass that owes me maybe £30.00. Through my chosen set up, there's really not much difference between what these basses sound like.
P

[tauzero]

[quote name='Norris' timestamp='1431282861' post='2769601']
(It was my bass - tauzero had the lovely Warwick Buzzard )
[/quote]

Yep, Thunderbirds only have 80% of my required complement of strings. I suspect that a 5-string T-bird with a 5-0 headstock might be a little on the neck-divey side.