660/12

General Rickenbacker discussion

Moderators: rickenbrother, ajish4

Re: 660/12

Postby (andyenobs) » Tue Aug 27, 2019 4:58 pm

As previously stated as much as the R tailpiece looks good it is a real pain to change the strings. The Trapeze tailpiece is a much better job. I know as I have a 330/6 and a 660/6
(andyenobs)
New member
 
Posts: 87
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2019 10:00 am

Re: 660/12

Postby (Hussar303) » Thu Aug 29, 2019 11:18 am

Would you guys know a reliable shop that sells 660/12s in the EU? I've seen them on Thomann.de, but I often find stuff cheaper than on that site, so I'd like to avoid overpaying.
Anywhere in the Schengen space would be fine, and if there's nothing else, then I'll settle for Thomann. I live in Belgium and plan to move to a house in Hungary in the near-ish future as I get a remote job, so if it's possible to find it in a physical shop in any of these countries, it'd be awesome.
(Hussar303)
New member
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Fri Aug 23, 2019 10:41 am

Re: 660/12

Postby (andyenobs) » Thu Aug 29, 2019 7:43 pm

Hi Hussar 303

In the UK try www.soundaffectspremier.com or www.reidys.co.uk both are Rickenbacker stockists and you should be able to negotiate a discount.
I bought a 660/12 in Mapleglo in May this year in San Francisco USA and had it delivered to my son's in Texas. I found out they weren't making anymore this year and probably next as well. I am visiting my son next month and I was looking to bring it back with me to the UK. But we are flying from Boston with Norwegian Airlines back to London Gatwick and they will not let me take it in the cabin unless I buy another seat!!! So it looks like uPs plus insurance. I dont think the guitar in its case would withstand the rigours of the hold or the freezing temperature. Let this be a lesson to you all and I haven't told the Missus yet.
Any suggestions would be gratefully received.
(andyenobs)
New member
 
Posts: 87
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2019 10:00 am

Re: 660/12

Postby (andyenobs) » Mon Sep 09, 2019 6:39 pm

The guys at Haight Ashbury Music in San Francisco where I bought it from reckon to just pad the cardboard box out with T shirts or similar and put it in the hold but I am concerned what damage the low temperatures could do to the guitar. Also I have got no chance gliding through customs at London Gatwick carrying a new Rickenbacker box. Come on guys lets have some suggestions or advice I fly Sunday to Boston for two nights then on to DFW to see my son and family.
(andyenobs)
New member
 
Posts: 87
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2019 10:00 am

Re: 660/12

Postby (jps) » Mon Sep 09, 2019 8:06 pm

andyenobs wrote:The guys at Haight Ashbury Music in San Francisco where I bought it from reckon to just pad the cardboard box out with T shirts or similar and put it in the hold..

Why am I not surprised by this? Let me guess. They'll be tie-dyed, right? :lol:
User avatar
(jps)
RRF Consultant
 
Posts: 36284
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2003 6:00 am
Location: Not of this Earth

Re: 660/12

Postby (admin) » Tue Sep 10, 2019 7:31 am

Andy: You are at the crossroads and need to thread the needle. You have a landmark birthday on the horizon perhaps and this may be thought of as special gift to you from your son and family. Why not leave the instrument in the US until your son comes to the UK to visit with the guitar to celebrate your birthday? Good things come to those who wait.
Life, as with music, often requires one to let go of the melody and listen to the rhythm

Please join the Official RickResource Forum Facebook Page https://www.facebook.com/groups/379271585440277
User avatar
(admin)
Site Admin
 
Posts: 14871
Joined: Wed Jul 05, 2000 5:00 am
Location: Fredericton, NB Canada

Re: 660/12

Postby (andyenobs) » Thu Sep 12, 2019 5:49 pm

Unfortunately Peter the UK will charge me 8% import tax and a further 20% VAT on the value plus the tax plus the cost of the carriage to the UK whether it is a gift for a special birthday or not. Their financial limits for gifts to be free of tax and vat are very verv low. I will just bite the bullet.
(andyenobs)
New member
 
Posts: 87
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2019 10:00 am

Re: 660/12

Postby (andyenobs) » Thu Sep 12, 2019 5:59 pm

Unfortunately Peter the UK will charge me 8% import tax and a further 20% VAT on the value plus the tax plus the cost of the carriage to the UK whether it is a gift for a special birthday or not. Their financial limits for gifts to be free of tax and vat are very verv low. I will just bite the bullet.
(andyenobs)
New member
 
Posts: 87
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2019 10:00 am

Re: 660/12

Postby (J_B_Sessoms) » Sun Jan 05, 2020 1:51 pm

andyenobs wrote:As previously stated as much as the R tailpiece looks good it is a real pain to change the strings. The Trapeze tailpiece is a much better job. I know as I have a 330/6 and a 660/6


Been a while since I've been here, so I apologize for the delay following up. "Real Life", as they say, has intruded.

I already own 4 Rickenbacker 12-strings with the 'R' tailpiece, so I'm not much fussed about the difficulty changing the strings. Been doing it for 50+ years. Never had any real problems (other than the first time out when I learned not to take all of the strings off at once). I like the aesthetics of the 'R' tailpiece. I'm not really worried about the hurting the "value" of the instrument if the tailpiece is replaced. I don't buy a guitar as an investment. If I get one I'm going to keep it until I die, so the "value" is someone else's problem.

I like the 660/12 for the checkerboard binding and triangle inlays, otherwise I'd go with the 620/12. I'd be reluctant to change the tailpiece myself. Not for "value", but because I'm clumsy & I'd be afraid of effing it up. But, I think I know a couple of good luthier/repair techs who could handle the job.

The only thing holding me back is I've already got too many guitars, so I wouldn't get to play it as much as it deserves and I don't have room to keep it when I was not playing it.
John Sessoms
'66 Rickenbacker 330/12
'81 Rickenbacker 360/12 WB
'01 Rickenbacker 360/12 Carl Wilson #476
'12 Rickenbacker 370/12
(J_B_Sessoms)
New member
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2017 6:30 pm
Location: Raleigh, NC

Re: 660/12

Postby (andyenobs) » Mon Jan 06, 2020 11:19 am

I am amazed that's if I understood you right that you would prefer a 620/12 to a 660/12. I have had a 620/6 and it was fine but the 660/12 is so comfy to play with the wider neck. I sold the 620/6 to get a 660/6 which I also really like. so both guitars have the same width neck together with my Taylor Grand Concert. It makes it so much easier without having to make major adjustments when playing.
(andyenobs)
New member
 
Posts: 87
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2019 10:00 am

Re: 660/12

Postby (admin) » Sat Feb 15, 2020 5:20 pm

Andy you now have Model 660 bookends. It is surprising how much of a difference the slightly wider fret boards make in our playing. It was a great improvement in the Rickenbacker guitar line and I was glad to see it come onboard. It took me a while to get used to both my 350 and Rickenbacker 12 string.
Life, as with music, often requires one to let go of the melody and listen to the rhythm

Please join the Official RickResource Forum Facebook Page https://www.facebook.com/groups/379271585440277
User avatar
(admin)
Site Admin
 
Posts: 14871
Joined: Wed Jul 05, 2000 5:00 am
Location: Fredericton, NB Canada

Re: 660/12

Postby (Tubwompus) » Wed Feb 19, 2020 1:24 pm

My first Rick 12 was/is a 350/12v63 as a sister to my 350v63 and it was also my first experience with 12 strings above that skinny neck.
Tough to play cleanly but I attributed that to my Iimited skills.

Three years ago, I bought a 660/6 as my first Rick in the modern era. I had a ‘61 450 MG back in the late 80’s that I foolishly let go and decided to finally replace it so I ordered a 660/6 JG, partially because it looked similar to my old 450 with the bonus of the gold-on-black color scheme that I’m so fond of. To my surprise, the neck was wider than I remembered my 450 and it was delightful to play. So a 660/12 HAD to join the family. Between that one and my 1993+, the 350/12 only comes out just if I think about not having communed with it for awhile.
(Tubwompus)
New member
 
Posts: 44
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2017 10:07 am

Re: 660/12

Postby (admin) » Fri Feb 21, 2020 10:50 am

Tubwompus wrote:My first Rick 12 was/is a 350/12v63 as a sister to my 350v63 and it was also my first experience with 12 strings above that skinny neck.
Tough to play cleanly but I attributed that to my Iimited skills.

Three years ago, I bought a 660/6 as my first Rick in the modern era. I had a ‘61 450 MG back in the late 80’s that I foolishly let go and decided to finally replace it so I ordered a 660/6 JG, partially because it looked similar to my old 450 with the bonus of the gold-on-black color scheme that I’m so fond of. To my surprise, the neck was wider than I remembered my 450 and it was delightful to play. So a 660/12 HAD to join the family. Between that one and my 1993+, the 350/12 only comes out just if I think about not having communed with it for awhile.


Sam, thanks for your comments. Do you find the tone of the 350/12v63 to be close to that of the 1993+ or the 660/12? If they are noticeably different please give me your impressions how each differs from the 350/12v63. Also, I have wondered over the years whether the 350/12v63 would be as balanced to hold and play with the relatively heavier headstock compared to the 6 string model.
Life, as with music, often requires one to let go of the melody and listen to the rhythm

Please join the Official RickResource Forum Facebook Page https://www.facebook.com/groups/379271585440277
User avatar
(admin)
Site Admin
 
Posts: 14871
Joined: Wed Jul 05, 2000 5:00 am
Location: Fredericton, NB Canada

Re: 660/12

Postby (Tubwompus) » Sun Feb 23, 2020 6:04 am

Well bud, I finally got the chance to get them all out at once.

My 350/12v63 has a reversible mod of a push/pull fifth knob. Pulled out, it behaves normally and pushed in, it behaves as if it just has neck and bridge pickups. I haven’t done it yet on the 1993+ but with the 350’s fifth knob pulled out to be the same setup as my box-stock 1993+, the 1993+ seems to breathe a bit more, tonally, but that could be somewhat psychological because of its increased body size. The 1993+ is decidedly louder acoustically.

The 660/12, in comparison, is a bit more upfront sounding with more pronounced high-mids than my semihollows. For lack of a better term, the 660 sounds a little less “3D” than my other two. Still a glorious tone that one would expect from a Rick 12, however, and definitely interchangeable with the semihollows in the heat of battle. In fact, the 660’s extra bit of “cut” might even make it the handiest of the 3 onstage if one’s not playing Byrds or Beatles.

In the next couple days or so, I’m going to record them all under identical circumstances and conduct a blindfold test with a bud’s help.

And just like my 660/12 is a little bit neck heavier than my 660/6 because of the extra hardware, the 350’s are the in same boat BUT in spite of the 350’s bodies both being a little bit lighter-weight than the 660’s because of being semihollow, when I let go of the 350/12, it just levels itself to the neck being parallel to the floor and no further. (I should mention that if one were to use one of those straps made from seatbelt material, the results may be a bit more extreme because those straps are so slippy and slidey.)

Incidentally, the amps I tested them all through were an AC-30cch head through a Vox 2x12 cab loaded with greenbacks, along with an all original early-‘65 Vox Pacemaker-V2.
(Tubwompus)
New member
 
Posts: 44
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2017 10:07 am

Re: 660/12

Postby (admin) » Sun Feb 23, 2020 10:14 am

Tubwompus wrote:Well bud, I finally got the chance to get them all out at once.

My 350/12v63 has a reversible mod of a push/pull fifth knob. Pulled out, it behaves normally and pushed in, it behaves as if it just has neck and bridge pickups. I haven’t done it yet on the 1993+ but with the 350’s fifth knob pulled out to be the same setup as my box-stock 1993+, the 1993+ seems to breathe a bit more, tonally, but that could be somewhat psychological because of its increased body size. The 1993+ is decidedly louder acoustically.

The 660/12, in comparison, is a bit more upfront sounding with more pronounced high-mids than my semihollows. For lack of a better term, the 660 sounds a little less “3D” than my other two. Still a glorious tone that one would expect from a Rick 12, however, and definitely interchangeable with the semihollows in the heat of battle. In fact, the 660’s extra bit of “cut” might even make it the handiest of the 3 onstage if one’s not playing Byrds or Beatles.

In the next couple days or so, I’m going to record them all under identical circumstances and conduct a blindfold test with a bud’s help.

And just like my 660/12 is a little bit neck heavier than my 660/6 because of the extra hardware, the 350’s are the in same boat BUT in spite of the 350’s bodies both being a little bit lighter-weight than the 660’s because of being semihollow, when I let go of the 350/12, it just levels itself to the neck being parallel to the floor and no further. (I should mention that if one were to use one of those straps made from seatbelt material, the results may be a bit more extreme because those straps are so slippy and slidey.)

Incidentally, the amps I tested them all through were an AC-30cch head through a Vox 2x12 cab loaded with greenbacks, along with an all original early-‘65 Vox Pacemaker-V2.


Sam, I very much appreciate your detailed reply. I am waiting, with much interest, to hear the sounds of each. Thanks again.
Life, as with music, often requires one to let go of the melody and listen to the rhythm

Please join the Official RickResource Forum Facebook Page https://www.facebook.com/groups/379271585440277
User avatar
(admin)
Site Admin
 
Posts: 14871
Joined: Wed Jul 05, 2000 5:00 am
Location: Fredericton, NB Canada

PreviousNext

Return to Rickenbacker General: by Howard Bishop

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests