Two fretboard questions

Vintage, Modern, V & C Series, Signature & Special Editions

Moderators: rickenbrother, ajish4

Two fretboard questions

Postby (parker_knoll) » Mon Oct 22, 2018 3:27 pm

Hello after a long absence,

I sadly lost my beloved early 90s 330/6MG in unfortunate circumstances and am now looking at a replacement.

However, I see some things may have changed and I'd be grateful if folks know the answers to these two questions?

1. when did they switch from bubinga to rosewood for the fingerboards?

2. did they change the fretwire? the stuff on the new guitars looks wide, as is currently popular. My guitar had skinny frets, which I actually liked.

Thanks all
(parker_knoll)
Junior Member
 
Posts: 196
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2010 7:09 pm

Re: Two fretboard questions

Postby (jps) » Mon Oct 22, 2018 3:54 pm

Not sure about the change (?) in fretwire; RIC switched from bubinga to chechen in late 2011. I, personally, love the look of the chechen, I believe the switch to it was, primarily, due to upcoming changes in CITES restrictions that were soon to be implemented.
User avatar
(jps)
RRF Consultant
 
Posts: 36378
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2003 6:00 am
Location: Not of this Earth

Re: Two fretboard questions

Postby (parker_knoll) » Mon Oct 22, 2018 6:03 pm

The bubinga had a lovely reddish tint and round grain patterns. Isn't the chechen more linear in its grain?
(parker_knoll)
Junior Member
 
Posts: 196
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2010 7:09 pm

Re: Two fretboard questions

Postby (collin) » Mon Oct 22, 2018 6:33 pm

parker_knoll wrote:The bubinga had a lovely reddish tint and round grain patterns. Isn't the chechen more linear in its grain?


Chechen has a nice look, and the fact that it's not CITES-restricted makes it all the more appealing. Not worth the headache just for Bubinga, IMO.

Chechen (aka "Caribbean Rosewood") often has a much more dramatic wood grain than Bubinga, with big swooping grain patterns and light color variations. By and large, it's more brown than Bubinga.

The real "red" fretboards prior to Bubinga were Paduak.
User avatar
(collin)
Senior Member
 
Posts: 6644
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2007 6:28 pm
Location: Corona, CA, USA

Re: Two fretboard questions

Postby (parker_knoll) » Mon Oct 22, 2018 7:14 pm

oh, could mine have been Paduak? it was a plain jane 330 from 1993 or so.
(parker_knoll)
Junior Member
 
Posts: 196
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2010 7:09 pm

Re: Two fretboard questions

Postby (collin) » Mon Oct 22, 2018 8:21 pm

parker_knoll wrote:oh, could mine have been Paduak? it was a plain jane 330 from 1993 or so.


Nope, that would be Bubinga ("African Rosewood"). It does have a reddish tint as well, but not as pronounced. Paduak is almost orange, especially when it's freshly cut and unfinished.

AFAIK, Paduak was only used on late 1950s instruments (and reissues of the same, such as the 325c58).
User avatar
(collin)
Senior Member
 
Posts: 6644
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2007 6:28 pm
Location: Corona, CA, USA

Re: Two fretboard questions

Postby (jdogric12) » Tue Oct 23, 2018 10:03 am

How early 90's? No one's mentioned the neck size or shape yet. Mid 90's they got fatter. Mid 00's they seemed to have slimmed back down to a reasonable girth.
(jdogric12)
Rick-a-holic
 
Posts: 10340
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2005 6:00 am

Re: Two fretboard questions

Postby (collin) » Tue Oct 23, 2018 1:06 pm

jdogric12 wrote:How early 90's? No one's mentioned the neck size or shape yet. Mid 90's they got fatter. Mid 00's they seemed to have slimmed back down to a reasonable girth.


I've always heard that size doesn't matter, JDog. :!:
User avatar
(collin)
Senior Member
 
Posts: 6644
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2007 6:28 pm
Location: Corona, CA, USA

Re: Two fretboard questions

Postby (jdogric12) » Tue Oct 23, 2018 1:47 pm

collin wrote:
jdogric12 wrote:How early 90's? No one's mentioned the neck size or shape yet. Mid 90's they got fatter. Mid 00's they seemed to have slimmed back down to a reasonable girth.


I've always heard that size doesn't matter, JDog. :!:


It's what you do with it! :lol:
(jdogric12)
Rick-a-holic
 
Posts: 10340
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2005 6:00 am

Re: Two fretboard questions

Postby (tcsmit29) » Wed Oct 24, 2018 6:46 am

collin wrote:
jdogric12 wrote:How early 90's? No one's mentioned the neck size or shape yet. Mid 90's they got fatter. Mid 00's they seemed to have slimmed back down to a reasonable girth.


I've always heard that size doesn't matter, JDog. :!:


Oh, it matters. :o I prefer the Ricks that are less well endowed. Too much girth can be a bad thing, imo.
(tcsmit29)
New member
 
Posts: 56
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2011 12:01 pm

Re: Two fretboard questions

Postby (parker_knoll) » Tue Oct 30, 2018 7:13 pm

tcsmit29 wrote:
collin wrote:
jdogric12 wrote:How early 90's? No one's mentioned the neck size or shape yet. Mid 90's they got fatter. Mid 00's they seemed to have slimmed back down to a reasonable girth.


I've always heard that size doesn't matter, JDog. :!:


Oh, it matters. :o I prefer the Ricks that are less well endowed. Too much girth can be a bad thing, imo.


Not a fan of the 381?
(parker_knoll)
Junior Member
 
Posts: 196
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2010 7:09 pm

Re: Two fretboard questions

Postby (tcsmit29) » Wed Oct 31, 2018 10:46 am

parker_knoll wrote:Not a fan of the 381?


Not really. To be honest though I've never even seen one in the wild much less held and played one. My disdain for the instruments with the thicker neck girth comes from a late 90's 370/12 that I bought. It was awful. It felt like fretting a Louisville slugger. My previous Rick was a 1990 330/12 which was from that range of instruments that had slimmer necks mentioned by JDog. So basically it boils down to the fact that the slim necks were what I was used to. I got a chance to pick up a 370/12RM soon after. It played like a dream. Sold that Rickenballbat as fast as I could.
(tcsmit29)
New member
 
Posts: 56
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2011 12:01 pm

Re: Two fretboard questions

Postby (collin) » Wed Oct 31, 2018 2:16 pm

tcsmit29 wrote:
parker_knoll wrote:Not a fan of the 381?


Not really. To be honest though I've never even seen one in the wild much less held and played one. My disdain for the instruments with the thicker neck girth comes from a late 90's 370/12 that I bought. It was awful. It felt like fretting a Louisville slugger. My previous Rick was a 1990 330/12 which was from that range of instruments that had slimmer necks mentioned by JDog. So basically it boils down to the fact that the slim necks were what I was used to. I got a chance to pick up a 370/12RM soon after. It played like a dream. Sold that Rickenballbat as fast as I could.


The '69 381 I owned a few years ago had one of the slimmest necks I've seen on a Rickenbacker. That, coupled with the extra thick body, made the neck seem tiny.

And the larger 381 made for a very resonant guitar, it sounded wonderful like a jazz guitar (the new ones are great too).

Also, we could go down the neck profile rabbit hole in another thread, but there's a few "eras" where the necks got super thick. Late 90s is certainly the most significant, in my opinion. Some people like that, some don't... horses for courses.
User avatar
(collin)
Senior Member
 
Posts: 6644
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2007 6:28 pm
Location: Corona, CA, USA

Re: Two fretboard questions

Postby (tcsmit29) » Fri Nov 02, 2018 1:58 pm

collin wrote:
tcsmit29 wrote:
parker_knoll wrote:Not a fan of the 381?


Not really. To be honest though I've never even seen one in the wild much less held and played one. My disdain for the instruments with the thicker neck girth comes from a late 90's 370/12 that I bought. It was awful. It felt like fretting a Louisville slugger. My previous Rick was a 1990 330/12 which was from that range of instruments that had slimmer necks mentioned by JDog. So basically it boils down to the fact that the slim necks were what I was used to. I got a chance to pick up a 370/12RM soon after. It played like a dream. Sold that Rickenballbat as fast as I could.


The '69 381 I owned a few years ago had one of the slimmest necks I've seen on a Rickenbacker. That, coupled with the extra thick body, made the neck seem tiny.

And the larger 381 made for a very resonant guitar, it sounded wonderful like a jazz guitar (the new ones are great too).

Also, we could go down the neck profile rabbit hole in another thread, but there's a few "eras" where the necks got super thick. Late 90s is certainly the most significant, in my opinion. Some people like that, some don't... horses for courses.


No disrespect to 381s intended. In fact I am not even sure why I was asked if I was a fan of them. Unless my girth comment was mistaken to be about body size.
(tcsmit29)
New member
 
Posts: 56
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2011 12:01 pm

Re: Two fretboard questions

Postby (parker_knoll) » Wed Nov 07, 2018 3:44 pm

tcsmit29 wrote:No disrespect to 381s intended. In fact I am not even sure why I was asked if I was a fan of them. Unless my girth comment was mistaken to be about body size.


Yep, I thought you were talking about body size. I'm a fan of the slimmer necks myself.
(parker_knoll)
Junior Member
 
Posts: 196
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2010 7:09 pm


Return to Rickenbacker Guitars: by John Simmons

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests