A Gibson ES-335 12-String review that features some classic Rickenbacker riffs and demonstrates the difference in tonality/overall sound: http://www.totallyguitars.com/vintagesn ... tring.html BTW, I disagree with the reviewers summation that Rick 12's are harder to play. I'd say different rather than harder.
I've also finally found one these: http://www.allparts.com/GB-2580-010-ABM ... _1643.html Hint: They are a lot cheaper on Ebay.
Rickenbacker 12 vs Gibson ES-335 12
Moderators: rickenbrother, ajish4
-
Chrome Aardvark
- Junior Member
- Posts: 142
- Joined: Mon Dec 20, 2010 8:33 am
-
Chrome Aardvark
- Junior Member
- Posts: 142
- Joined: Mon Dec 20, 2010 8:33 am
Re: Rickenbacker 12 vs Gibson ES-335 12
Anyone checked these out? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gccKHXfpHaU
Re: Rickenbacker 12 vs Gibson ES-335 12
Hi From Australia.
Among my guitar collection I have a Rickenbacker 370/12 in Mapleglo and a Gibson ES335/12 in vintage cherry. I bought the Ricky second hand about a year ago (from memory it was built in 2002) but it is in immaculate condition. It is fitted with toaster style pickups. The only faults it had were a couple of small areas on the fretboard where the lacquer had chipped off which I've since had repaired. The Gibson has a wider neck than the Rickenbacker which makes it easier to play chords (in particular) without inadvertently muting nearby strings although it also means that muscle fatigue and potential cramping of the left hand is a bit more likely (maybe I just don't play it enough to build up those muscles though).
I bought my ES335/12 new from a local music store a couple of years ago. I think my 335/12 was manufactured in 2013 or 2014 but curiously I can't find any reference to the model on Gibson's website (apart from a single line in an article about their 12 string electrics. It also came with curious gauges of strings and I emailed Gibson to find out what they had installed on it in the factory. I got a reply but never did try and match them. When I first changed the strings, the only 12 string electric set I could get locally was a set of Ernie Balls which were substantially lighter than what Gibson had fitted the guitar with. Needless to say the intonation was made less accurate with the change of strings (maybe that's why Gibson used such an odd collection of string gauges in the first place). Not to be put off (and wanting to keep my options more open with respect to possible string supplies) I found a company in Germany (via the web) and bought one of their 12 saddle bridges. I had it installed by a local luthier. Now I have Elixir strings on the guitar and the intonation is absolutely perfect. The luthier said, "That is the most in-tune 12 string I've ever heard." After such success with the Gibson, I purchased a genuine Rickenbacker 12 saddle bridge and had that fitted on my 370/12 by the same installer. I also sourced some Rickenbacker strings so have them on the 370. Now both guitars play wonderfully in tune (although the Gibson (for some reason) plays slightly better in tune.
By pulling up on the volume knobs for each pickup on the Gibson, you get a single coil option which drops the output somewhat but gives a more open tone (a bit closer to the Rickenbacker's tone. But the different construction materials and methods and design mean they don't quite sound the same. Is one better than the other? Well, that's a very subjective thing, I guess, but both of them sound amazing. They also both look amazing.
I love the stereo option on my three Rickenbackers (I also have a 360 six string and a 4003 both in Fireglo) and often use the stereo outputs in recordings. That's one of the big things in favour of the Rickenbackers. I wish the 335 had a stereo output option.
I'm not entirely convinced about the practicality of the arrangement of the machine heads on my 370/12. While it looks very neat, it does make changing strings more problematic (especially on my 370/12 as the slots for the octave strings' machine heads is not routed all the way through the headstock). There's also only just enough room to turn the machine heads without bruising your fingers on the adjacent machine and I find a number of the octave strings touch the truss rod cover on their way from the nut to the machine head's spindle. This makes tuning a bit tricky at times as the strings get stuck against the plastic. But those negatives are a small price to pay for such an amazing sound.
The Gibson has mini-Grover machine heads that are somewhat closer together than you would find on a 6 string Gibson. That means the headstock isn't quite as oversized as it otherwise might be. I find it holds its tuning very well.
Acoustically I prefer the sound of the Rickenbacker over the Gibson. That's not to say that the Gibson sounds bad acoustically. No, it sounds great but the Ricky sounds even better. Well, I guess that ought to be expected, given that the Gibson's body is made of laminated wood while the Rickenbacker is carved out of maple. Everyone knows a solid top acoustic sounds better than a laminated top one. Curiously my 360 six string sounds rather "boxy" acoustically (certain resonant frequencies in the lower mids give it an odd tone) but this is not true of the 370/12. Perhaps the design works better with the extra strings or maybe it's just the variation in the timber.
Which is my favourite? The Rickenbacker 370/12 with the toaster pickups or the Gibson ES335/12 with its wider neck and humbuckers that you can coil tap? I still haven't decided. They are both absolutely awesome guitars but I do love my Rickenbackers! (and my Gibsons... and my Fender Strat... and my ...)
Among my guitar collection I have a Rickenbacker 370/12 in Mapleglo and a Gibson ES335/12 in vintage cherry. I bought the Ricky second hand about a year ago (from memory it was built in 2002) but it is in immaculate condition. It is fitted with toaster style pickups. The only faults it had were a couple of small areas on the fretboard where the lacquer had chipped off which I've since had repaired. The Gibson has a wider neck than the Rickenbacker which makes it easier to play chords (in particular) without inadvertently muting nearby strings although it also means that muscle fatigue and potential cramping of the left hand is a bit more likely (maybe I just don't play it enough to build up those muscles though).
I bought my ES335/12 new from a local music store a couple of years ago. I think my 335/12 was manufactured in 2013 or 2014 but curiously I can't find any reference to the model on Gibson's website (apart from a single line in an article about their 12 string electrics. It also came with curious gauges of strings and I emailed Gibson to find out what they had installed on it in the factory. I got a reply but never did try and match them. When I first changed the strings, the only 12 string electric set I could get locally was a set of Ernie Balls which were substantially lighter than what Gibson had fitted the guitar with. Needless to say the intonation was made less accurate with the change of strings (maybe that's why Gibson used such an odd collection of string gauges in the first place). Not to be put off (and wanting to keep my options more open with respect to possible string supplies) I found a company in Germany (via the web) and bought one of their 12 saddle bridges. I had it installed by a local luthier. Now I have Elixir strings on the guitar and the intonation is absolutely perfect. The luthier said, "That is the most in-tune 12 string I've ever heard." After such success with the Gibson, I purchased a genuine Rickenbacker 12 saddle bridge and had that fitted on my 370/12 by the same installer. I also sourced some Rickenbacker strings so have them on the 370. Now both guitars play wonderfully in tune (although the Gibson (for some reason) plays slightly better in tune.
By pulling up on the volume knobs for each pickup on the Gibson, you get a single coil option which drops the output somewhat but gives a more open tone (a bit closer to the Rickenbacker's tone. But the different construction materials and methods and design mean they don't quite sound the same. Is one better than the other? Well, that's a very subjective thing, I guess, but both of them sound amazing. They also both look amazing.
I love the stereo option on my three Rickenbackers (I also have a 360 six string and a 4003 both in Fireglo) and often use the stereo outputs in recordings. That's one of the big things in favour of the Rickenbackers. I wish the 335 had a stereo output option.
I'm not entirely convinced about the practicality of the arrangement of the machine heads on my 370/12. While it looks very neat, it does make changing strings more problematic (especially on my 370/12 as the slots for the octave strings' machine heads is not routed all the way through the headstock). There's also only just enough room to turn the machine heads without bruising your fingers on the adjacent machine and I find a number of the octave strings touch the truss rod cover on their way from the nut to the machine head's spindle. This makes tuning a bit tricky at times as the strings get stuck against the plastic. But those negatives are a small price to pay for such an amazing sound.
The Gibson has mini-Grover machine heads that are somewhat closer together than you would find on a 6 string Gibson. That means the headstock isn't quite as oversized as it otherwise might be. I find it holds its tuning very well.
Acoustically I prefer the sound of the Rickenbacker over the Gibson. That's not to say that the Gibson sounds bad acoustically. No, it sounds great but the Ricky sounds even better. Well, I guess that ought to be expected, given that the Gibson's body is made of laminated wood while the Rickenbacker is carved out of maple. Everyone knows a solid top acoustic sounds better than a laminated top one. Curiously my 360 six string sounds rather "boxy" acoustically (certain resonant frequencies in the lower mids give it an odd tone) but this is not true of the 370/12. Perhaps the design works better with the extra strings or maybe it's just the variation in the timber.
Which is my favourite? The Rickenbacker 370/12 with the toaster pickups or the Gibson ES335/12 with its wider neck and humbuckers that you can coil tap? I still haven't decided. They are both absolutely awesome guitars but I do love my Rickenbackers! (and my Gibsons... and my Fender Strat... and my ...)
- My two 12 string semi-acoustics
Re: Rickenbacker 12 vs Gibson ES-335 12
Welcome Bernard! Great first post. Are the push/pulls original to the 335/12?
-
Chrome Aardvark
- Junior Member
- Posts: 142
- Joined: Mon Dec 20, 2010 8:33 am
Re: Rickenbacker 12 vs Gibson ES-335 12
All the new 335 12-strings have the push/pull component. The originals from the late 60s and early 70s don't.
Re: Rickenbacker 12 vs Gibson ES-335 12
Now there is the Rickenbacker 1993+ 12 with the wider neck, it just comes down to preferred tone, look and the Rick 12 better neck balance.
The Rickenbacker tone is Surreal, unlike anything else it reaches beyond being just a guitar tone.
End of story for me.
The Rickenbacker tone is Surreal, unlike anything else it reaches beyond being just a guitar tone.
End of story for me.
-
squirebass
- Veteran RRF member
- Posts: 1562
- Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2000 11:05 pm
Re: Rickenbacker 12 vs Gibson ES-335 12
I honestly don't think I have ever played a 12 string version of the ES-335. But I love my Rick 660/12 AFG and the jangle of its scatterwound toasters. They have such a rich, hi-fi sound to them, unlike like Fenders yet very cool in their own right
I got it because I thought the wider neck would make it more playable for me than either the 330 or 360 12 stringers, and it IS very playable, although I have had to use some of the alternate fingerings that McGuinn uses for playing chords.
I got it because I thought the wider neck would make it more playable for me than either the 330 or 360 12 stringers, and it IS very playable, although I have had to use some of the alternate fingerings that McGuinn uses for playing chords.