Why did the Vintage Forum disappear?

[Grey]

Relative worth and wether or not it was made in the "golden era" of manufacturing involves too much opinion and hyberbole. A change in onwership of the company, the way that it was run, and the clear and progressive modernization into how the instruments are made today is a simple fact. Nor would I call a 30+ year old instrument "modern".

[collin]

Nope.

I wouldn't call them modern either....but I sure wouldn't call them vintage. That's why I said they were more of a long transitional period for Rickenbacker.

You can consider any event in Rickenbacker's history you want, and they're all valid points, but the general guitar buying public (to whom prices and desirability are certainly factors....) determine that the classic (i.e "vintage") Rickenbacker period ended in 1973. They don't have to explain that in futile, subjective conversations like ours either....they say by paying a considerably higher premium.

Again, I'm not taking away from "transitional" era Rics like your 480, they're great guitars and wonderful part of Rickenbacker history....but if you think yet can be openly grouped together the same as a mid 60s Rick, you're kidding yourself. I'm sure George Gruhn, Norm Harris, Tony Bacon and countless other credible experts would agree as well..

p.s....when Rickenbacker produces a "vintage" reissue, do they pattern it a 1964 instrumet or a 1982? Course it's the 64, it actually looks different than a modern Ric, which looks like.....yep, the 1982 model!

[collin]

More to the point of this topic, I would visit the vintage forum to discuss the features of these classic vintage Rickenbackers, not go into depth about when John Hall took the company over, or when small changes were made to production as it went into the "modern" era.

It's about the guitars..always has been & always should be!

[admin]

There are some very good points here and the discussion has allowed us to reflect on the essence of an era and how it is defined. Is it based on management, qualitative features of an instrument, or a time period. In the case of RIC it may turn out to be all three. Vintage instruments by virtue of their rarity in one way or another are often more valuable.

As many of my cohorts have said, when I was young all I could afford was an old instrument and now all I can afford is a new one.

So our two factor model of RIC eras seems to have developed into a three factor model and we have skipped the rigorous factor analysis that is often our litmus test.

Vintage, Francis Hall, CPI, 21 frets, and so forth, before 1973
Transitional Modern, Francis & John Hall, B series, 1974 - 1980/84
Modern Contemporary, John Hall, V & C Series etc., after 1980/84

There is certainly some fine tuning to do here but it is helpful to at least consider these timelines.

[Grey]

Vintage means different things to different people, I personally think the system we already had worked perfectly. As I understand it was a decision on the admin side of things to help moderators better manage the forum.

[ken_j]

Maybe I'm alone here but I like the changes with everything in one area. Why not give this format a bit of time and see how it works out.

[libratune]

I am late to the discussion here but basically agree with Collin. For me the cutoff for what I consider to be vintage Ricks is late 1973.

I believe Peter has proposed an elegant three-category solution (with a "Transitional" category in the middle, 1974-84) that may serve to give the various parties to this discussion what they want without necessarily defining "vintage." I note that there were changes going on in that "transition" era that remained specific to that era (i.e., certain models were both introduced and discontinued in that era) such as the 480 (technically intro'd in late 1972) and 481 and 430 guitar models and the 3000 and 3001 basses (1976). So perhaps that era deserves a category unto itself. Also on the bass front, the 4001 was phased out and the 4003 introduced, another major "transition." I note that of the 364 Rickenbacker instruments currently listed on the Register as made in 1974, over 70% (263) are model 4001 basses.

I don't pretend to know what went on behind the scenes at RIC during the mid-1980s other than John Hall suceeded his father as the guiding force behind Rickenbacker. But I do know that 1984/85 marked the beginning of several important reissue models, such as the 360/12V64, 4001V63 and 325V59 and V63 reissues, followed within a few years by the artist "signature" limited editions, JL, RM, PT, SH, CS, JK, TP etc. I believe the effect of this was to revive interest in Rickenbacker guitars (as opposed to basses, which didn't need quite the same boost).

I suppport the three categories as outlined by Peter. It will be interesting, if that proposal is adopted, to see the degree of activity in each.

[manta]

I would support Collin's Pre-'73 as Vintage and after '73 as the modern era. I just don't see how something from the '80s can be "vintage". And there is so much more study and knowledge that has to go into the background of the '50s and '60s era guitars. They are the foundation of the rock era. They have counterparts from other companies in tat era, etc. Stick with true vintage and modern. Ten years from now we can tack on a few years to the vintage category.

[admin]

For the time being and while we think more about how to categorize Rickenbacker guitars, I have provided three subforums here which will allow us to sort archived posts. It will also provide a provisional framework for us as we move forward. This arrangement does not preclude further changes, of course, and your continued discussion is welcomed.

I still wonder about a 12 string forum while we are in the process of sorting through the data.

[Grey]

Calling everything after 1973 "modern" is too much of a generalization, if it has to be changed and not just reverted to how it was, I support the 3 period idea. It's about keeping things organized, having a vintage forum that amounts to 23 years worth of instruments, versus a modern forum that has 39 years worth of instruments would leave the modern section overflowing. And again, "modern" to me, is a short peroid of time within the last decade. You can't call something made 30+ years ago using standards that Rickenbacker instruments are no longer produced with today a representation of modern instruments.

(Yes, I started in 1950 for that 23 years worth of guitars number, I don't think there's a huge amount of discussion for 30s-40s lapsteels)

[Sir Ricardo]

I would consider 1973 the cutoff point, when CPI, 21-frets, toasters and many other vintage appointments disappeared.

I would vote to simply lump all the guitars into two separate forums - Vintage (1954-1973) and Modern (1973-present)

Just my $.02 here...

Agreed. It is simple and easy to administer.

Adding my $.02 to this makes $.04.

[Ontario_RIC_fan]

p.s....when Rickenbacker produces a "vintage" reissue, do they pattern it a 1964 instrumet or a 1982? Course it's the 64, it actually looks different than a modern Ric, which looks like.....yep, the 1982 model!

Good points Collin...

I myself would very much like a v82 reissue though!

[37012player]

There were a number of significant changes in 1973 for various reasons. Some features, such as the highly prized sparkle MOP inlay material source became unavailable to Electro. For bass’s the bridge plate had been a sand casting to date, that was prone to a few problems during manufacture, such as bending or cracking as it ‘seasoned’. The bridges were not ideal on the bass’s as the saddles would readily move about due to these sand casting tolerance issues.

The local supplier to Electro of the checker board binding went out of business, and Electro was without a supplier for this purfling material, as they seemingly, at the time did not know who the original manufacturer was.

The revised 'Big Dome Top' High Gain was by Electro decision, soon to be ‘standardised’ on everything Electro made. The belovedToaster PU faded out of manufactured instruments rapidly, until it resurfaced decades latter on reissues.

These relatively significant changes also coincided with a drop in popularity for the guitar lines. Fortunately the bass lines began to soar during this era.
1973 was, for numerous reasons, chance, by design, cost cutting, or what-ever a landmark year of change for the brand.

I can understand however, why 1974 transition instrument owners would struggle to accept such a brutal cut off date. Im sure however that people will understand that Peter and Co needed to draw a line in the sand somewhere.

Si..............

[admin]

Si, thanks for your interesting review. In passing, we have tried to introduce some flexibility in our classification by adding the transition years (1973-1983).