Author Topic: The september custom-alembird (Read 475 times)

pmoran · « **on:** September 08, 2005, 05:04:41 PM »

i'm amazed. i clicked on this month's featured custom, and i find an alembic version of my '87 gibson rd artist. same finish----well, way nicer wood----and same body erroneously described as a thunderbird body. right now, i'm looking at my '94 thunderbird and my '87 rd artist and the alembird very much more looks like my rd than my tbird. that headstock (is that a rogue?) is beautiful, but i love my rd artist fleur mop inlay. i love that curve, though. so elegant. it is a beauty, but i think it's way closer to my rd than a tbird. sorry, just my opinion, and i'm looking at both of them right now. should have been called an alemartist.

ajdover · « **Reply #1 on:** September 08, 2005, 05:41:41 PM »

Pat,

I too have a Thunderbird (an '87) and an RD Artist (a '77 - BTW, they stopped making them in '81, so yours can't possibly be an '87, maybe a '77?). The Alembird looks much more like a Thunderbird than an RD to me - less points, more rounded. I too love the fleur (called by some to the the shrimp inlay) inlay on my RD, and it sounds awesome. The one thing I don't get about Steve's Alembird is that most of the higher frets (beyond the 17th Fret) are inaccessible (or so it seems from the pix). Maybe this is OK with him, and that's cool.
One of the complaints I have with the Thunderbird (other than neck dive) is the difficulty reaching the upper frets. Maybe the Alembic Elfs did something to make them more reachable? Steve, any insights?

In any event, it's a beautiful bass. Steve got what he wanted, and that's all that counts ... now, where's my checkbook?

Alan

lbpesq · « **Reply #2 on:** September 08, 2005, 05:42:33 PM »

Pat:

Check out Steve's Alembird Project in the factory to customer section. The history of this bass, along with the modification from the T'bird and reasons therefore, AND peghead info is all there.

Bill, tgo

pmoran · « **Reply #3 on:** September 09, 2005, 03:31:20 PM »

once again, i screwed up and didn't catch the error in my typing. it is a '77 and i bought it new off the showroom floor from the gibson/fender dealer in odessa, texas. it was the first new bass i ever owned. i sold my (+/-) '69 gibson ebo to afford the rd artist. boy, do i wish i still had my ebo. i'm glad there's someone else here who not only loves and owns alembics as do i, but also someone who loves gibson basses. my rd, and yours, is so maligned on websites on the internet and you and i know that there aren't alot of basses w/the sustain of an rd artist. the moog electronics aren't any more difficult, in fact i'd suggest much easier, to master than the electronics on my mark king. of course, as you know ajdover, rd's weigh slightly less than the planet jupiter, excluding the moons of course. but that weight gives it that sustain. that and the mahogany neckthru construction. i guess the reason the alembird looks more like an rd than a thunderbird to me is the alembird finish is identical to my rd artist.

pmoran · « **Reply #4 on:** September 09, 2005, 04:51:39 PM »

how can i post pics of my rd and my tbird side by side so you can see what i'm talking about? btw, the mark king on ebay didn't sell w/a starting bid of $2500 so the seller has reposted it w/a starting bid of $2800! huh? i messaged him and asked him if i was misreading his ad and he replied that he meant to do that and the bass was worth it. i won't argue that it's worth it having paid considerably more for my coco bolo mark king, but i still think my coco bolo is way prettier. so, how can i post pics of my rd and tbird and i'm ready to post pics of my mark king.

ajdover · « **Reply #5 on:** September 10, 2005, 04:13:24 AM »

Pat,

The RDs, as I recall, were not neck through but set neck designs. I know mine is. Maybe you got a one off? And as far as I know they were all maple, not mahogany like the T-Birds. Works for me - I like the bright tone the Maple imparts. You might want to check out http://www.gibsonbass.com/RDartist.php for more info.

Alan

pmoran · « **Reply #6 on:** September 10, 2005, 04:34:34 PM »

maybe you're right, and that appears to be important to you ajdover, but i have a link on another computer at work which gave a history of rd's and said they were neckthru and mahogany. i looked at the back of my bass and it does look like a set neck. never thought about it. didn't figure into my buying since dave recently suggested that it was obvious to him the reason i didn't like my epic was that my other alembics were all neckthru's and i think he's right about that. i like the sustain and depth of neckthru's. i have laid my tbird and rd down on my bed and looked at them and i'm telling you the tbird side closest to my belly, what i would call the top edge of the bass is almost straight coming out of the curve by the neck pickup. the rd is more rounded. i look at the alembird, and i see the curving, rounded shape of the rd. not the literally straight line of the tbird. but if it's that important to you to be right, then you win.

ajdover · « **Reply #7 on:** September 10, 2005, 11:10:12 PM »

Pat,

Being right isn't that important to me - just trying to understand what you're saying here, that's all. I was just curious that maybe you were lucky enough to buy a one off, unique RD with a neck through design. I'd be jealous if that is the case ...

Perhaps we have different ideas of what rounded means - no worries. I just think that the Alembird looks more like my Thunderbird than RD. If you think differently, that's cool, no biggie.

Alan

bassicinstincts · « **Reply #8 on:** September 27, 2005, 05:11:00 PM »

Had a look at the link given above to the RD Artist website - strange no mention is made of the fact these were originally going to be called Entwistle signature bass, or something similar. Gibson designed them for John, he didn't get on well with them, but Gibson decided to try and sell them anyway!!

Ben

s_wood · « **Reply #9 on:** September 29, 2005, 06:23:16 PM »

FYI, the Alembird's body is an exact copy of my '64 Gibson Thunderbird IV. I just placed the Alembird and the T-Bird against each other and re-confirmed this - the bodies are identical. AJ, I wish the Alembird provided better access to the upper frets, but there was just no way to do that and retain the T-Bird body shape. T-Birds look cool, IMHO, but ergonomically they are a disaster!

ajdover · « **Reply #10 on:** September 29, 2005, 07:32:05 PM »

Steve,

Yeah, I wish it did (upper fret access) too! Same as on my '87 Thunderbird .. lots of access to everything except the upper frets. And you're right, ergonomically, they suck, but man, they just look so cool! I love mine, and I'll never sell it.

You have a beautiful bass, and I'm jealous. I hope you enjoy many years of playing her.

Best wishes,

Alan