481 - interesting since rare, or a fine player as well?

Transition years of Rickenbacker Guitars from 1973-1983 inclusive

Moderators: rickenbrother, ajish4

Post Reply
4000
New member
Posts: 86
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2010 7:48 pm

481 - interesting since rare, or a fine player as well?

Post by 4000 »

Hello,


Just curious if the 481 is not just interesting since it's rare, or that's a nice fine playing & sounding guitar as well ?

I'm fond of the feel, sound & vibe of the 360, so am wondering if that will be present in a 481 as well (same neck feel/dimensions?)

In other words, if 481 prices are mainly because of collectibility, and not since it's a mighty fine guitar then I'd better skip.

Curious to your opinions.

Thanks!
User avatar
wim
Intermediate Member
Posts: 1486
Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2003 1:37 am

Re: 481 - interesting since rare, or a fine player as well?

Post by wim »

I've tested both 480 and 481 guitars many years ago, because they look good in a way.
To be honest, I didn't buy any of them, and neither did a lot of other people it seems.
The slanted fret thing is just weird.
Play one before you invest a lot of money in one.
They are nothing like the 300 series
User avatar
jdogric12
Rick-a-holic
Posts: 10853
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2005 6:00 am

Re: 481 - interesting since rare, or a fine player as well?

Post by jdogric12 »

There's a non-SF 481 that's been on the market for a while that looks interesting. I remember a few people playing 480's and 481's at MARFs and no one ever hating them.
User avatar
jps
RRF Consultant
Posts: 37132
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2003 6:00 am

Re: 481 - interesting since rare, or a fine player as well?

Post by jps »

From RIO!!!
Copyright © Jeffrey P. Scott 2008 All rights reserved.
Copyright © Jeffrey P. Scott 2008 All rights reserved.
User avatar
wim
Intermediate Member
Posts: 1486
Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2003 1:37 am

Re: 481 - interesting since rare, or a fine player as well?

Post by wim »

jdogric12 wrote:There's a non-SF 481 that's been on the market for a while that looks interesting. I remember a few people playing 480's and 481's at MARFs and no one ever hating them.
The latter seems obvious if they brought them along to play them :wink:
User avatar
wim
Intermediate Member
Posts: 1486
Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2003 1:37 am

Re: 481 - interesting since rare, or a fine player as well?

Post by wim »

jps wrote:From RIO!!!
Chip_1200_5473.jpg

Almost looking as cool as a bass player
4000
New member
Posts: 86
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2010 7:48 pm

Re: 481 - interesting since rare, or a fine player as well?

Post by 4000 »

wim wrote:I've tested both 480 and 481 guitars many years ago, because they look good in a way.
To be honest, I didn't buy any of them, and neither did a lot of other people it seems.
The slanted fret thing is just weird.
Play one before you invest a lot of money in one.
They are nothing like the 300 series
Hi Wim,

Thanks for the response & warnings.
Yes, the weird thing is that I in fact hope that a more expensive guitar (481, 480) plays as nice as one that could be bought cheaper (360, 330) :-)

Other thing: I like the bigger body of the 360,
and the 400- & 4000- range of instruments are actually pretty small bodies, its just that upper horn that makes them look a bit bigger.
They are nothing like the 300 series
W.r.t. sound, or playability ?

I was surprised I could handle the 360-neck, and in fact like the feel. The 481 seems to have the same vibe (apart from the slanted frets...)

OK, I figure there's just one way to find out: I must try them.

Bye! (Groeten!)
4000
New member
Posts: 86
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2010 7:48 pm

Re: 481 - interesting since rare, or a fine player as well?

Post by 4000 »

jps wrote:From RIO!!!
RIObacker ! ;-)

Thanks for the pic
User avatar
wim
Intermediate Member
Posts: 1486
Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2003 1:37 am

Re: 481 - interesting since rare, or a fine player as well?

Post by wim »

4000 wrote:
wim wrote:I've tested both 480 and 481 guitars many years ago, because they look good in a way.
To be honest, I didn't buy any of them, and neither did a lot of other people it seems.
The slanted fret thing is just weird.
Play one before you invest a lot of money in one.
They are nothing like the 300 series
Hi Wim,

Thanks for the response & warnings.
Yes, the weird thing is that I in fact hope that a more expensive guitar (481, 480) plays as nice as one that could be bought cheaper (360, 330) :-)

Other thing: I like the bigger body of the 360,
and the 400- & 4000- range of instruments are actually pretty small bodies, its just that upper horn that makes them look a bit bigger.
They are nothing like the 300 series
W.r.t. sound, or playability ?

I was surprised I could handle the 360-neck, and in fact like the feel. The 481 seems to have the same vibe (apart from the slanted frets...)

OK, I figure there's just one way to find out: I must try them.

Bye! (Groeten!)
Neither sound nor feel is like a 300 series.
You're talking about the one on marktplaats?
If it's not too far, go test it, you might like it.
There's nothing more personal than preferences of course.
User avatar
8mileshigher
Senior Member
Posts: 4871
Joined: Tue May 23, 2006 12:34 pm

481 - interesting since rare, or a fine player as well?

Post by 8mileshigher »

The Original Poster's question of "fine player" classification aspect of 480 or 481 models is very subjective.

The 480 and 481 models have absolutely flat necks with zero radius. The necks are also very thin (across the width) and likewise "thin" in the overall breadth or circumfrence. Hence a very different feel and playability from 300 series Rickenbackers. With it's whippy thin neck, low action and bolt on feature, this brings the 480's strings very close to the pole pieces on the Transitional High Gains. So close that I couldn't use a traditional Ric sponge for the mounting screws, but merely used a piece of wax paper between the metal pickup housing and the finish.

With its flat neck, low action and the pole pieces closeness to the strings, my 480 is the loudest of my ten Rickenbackers. I find it great for rhythm guitar parts but the flat neck and flat frets are not very conducive to string bending, although every player's vibrato technique will vary. The 480 is a great sounding guitar and a very cool design, but I find the 300 series necks are better for me personally.

I can't comment on the 481 Slant Fret models as only tried one a few times.
Attachments
Full length view of my refinished Daphne Blue 480 from 1973 with Transitional High Gains
Full length view of my refinished Daphne Blue 480 from 1973 with Transitional High Gains
Perspective view of the thin, flat 480 neck
Perspective view of the thin, flat 480 neck
Low action and flat neck radius brings the strings real close to the pole pieces on the Transitional High Gains giving the 480 a real "biting" hot, gainy tone
Low action and flat neck radius brings the strings real close to the pole pieces on the Transitional High Gains giving the 480 a real "biting" hot, gainy tone
"What we've got is Blind Faith in each other" Steve Winwood, Newsweek July 28 1969

10 4003 FG
06 WB BRG
04 660-12 JG
03 360-12 FG
99 V64 six FG
96 650-A TQ
94 V64-12 JG
81 370-WB JG
73 480 DaphBlue
61 Cons Steel MG
4000
New member
Posts: 86
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2010 7:48 pm

Re: 481 - interesting since rare, or a fine player as well?

Post by 4000 »

Thanks for the info & pics, much appreciated!

OK, so the 480 has an even skinnier neck than the 300-series guitars, good to realize.

I agree with what makes a "fine player" being highly subjective. Simply trying is best, but good to keep the info learned here in this thread in mind.


What you say about great for rhythm guitar parts on one hand, and not very conducive to string bending on the other
made me think of an article I read that stated a related thing about chords vs single notes

( It's here, but in Dutch: http://www.gitaarnet.nl/content.php?325-rickenbacker480 )

... here's the relevant part, machine-translated:

"It should be clear that this is not a guitar for the heavy boys. The red 480 from the previous paragraph was first in possession of a hard rock guitarist pur sang. I can not imagine that he was happy with it, but he will not have sold it for nothing either. Distorted the guitar can be used, but really only for rhythm-parts on the bridge element, solos come out a bit thin. Clean it is an excellent guitar for chord work and sounds nice and clear, for single string the sound is not powerful and convincing enough. Something that, in my opinion, all Rickenbacker guitars 'suffer', they are all mainly used for accompanying parties. Only the style of Pete Townshend is still a bit close to soloing but then you have also had it. I have never seen a real hard rock guitarist on a Rickenbacker, but it can be me."

... let me add that I'm just quoting here; we'll all know that 300-series aren't too shabby for rock stuff as well, so I don't fully agree with everything of the stuff in blue.

But I DO recognize the single line statement
(based on a 360 with 'normal' strings, but I should add that my references are Jazzmasters with thicker strings).


> this brings the 480's strings very close to the pole pieces on the Transitional High Gains.

No noticable string pull ? If not, I'll still pay attention to this, the humbuckers of the 481 might differ here.


Thanks/best regards
User avatar
collin
Senior Member
Posts: 6949
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2007 6:28 pm

Re: 481 - interesting since rare, or a fine player as well?

Post by collin »

They're definitely interesting guitars, but I have to admit they're one of my least favorite Rickenbacker models. Some folks are into the 4001-shaped body for a guitar, but I find it awkward, and the flat fingerboard radius is uncomfortable to play IMO.

All of this is subjective, of course and experience may be different. But to me the 480/481 are not a "hidden gem" in the back catalog and are still surprisingly affordable for a reason.
4000
New member
Posts: 86
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2010 7:48 pm

Re: 481 - interesting since rare, or a fine player as well?

Post by 4000 »

collin wrote:They're definitely interesting guitars, but I have to admit they're one of my least favorite Rickenbacker models. Some folks are into the 4001-shaped body for a guitar, but I find it awkward, and the flat fingerboard radius is uncomfortable to play IMO.
Thanks for sharing experiences!

The 4000-ish shape for guitar indeed an acquired taste, not fully sure about it either, but such things sure trigger my interest.
All of this is subjective, of course and experience may be different. But to me the 480/481 are not a "hidden gem" in the back catalog and are still surprisingly affordable for a reason.
A 360 is a thing of beauty, and do like the non-amped tones as well. The 481 being solid obviously won't give that bonus. I'm aware of some other semi's that give me that bonus, and are 60% in price of the 481, but hey, these are new ones... so not the vibe of an older instrument.

OK, enough rambling ;-) , a testdrive will tell more.
Post Reply

Return to “Rickenbacker Guitars: Transition Years - 1973 to 1983”