is this for real 350 bass?

[jingle_jangle]

So there shouldnt be a problem right ? It would seem to me that unless its a dead nuts copy . No harm no foul . Besides we all know what a real rick looks and feels like .

It is disproportionate to my eye--the lower bout is too bulbous top-to-bottom, and the neck too long for the body mass. The neck and strings appear to be shifted too far over to the treble side, although they are not, geometrically speaking; it's a visual perception thing that would need to be corrected

Glad you agree with me about the disproportionate thing, but those are not my words in the top paragraph.

Regarding that and the issue of "dead nuts copy"...oh, hell, let's not. Send me a PM if you want to talk about it.

[1965]

So, in other words, it looks like a 350V63

[jaymi]

It looks like a 350V63

That would be kinda fun for those guys who play lots of beatles

[s4001]

FWIW, that's the only hollow/ semi hollow bass I've seen that I like the looks of.

[thinneckrick]

No, A 35001V63

[s4001]

No V68. Any foo knows that 68 is THE year.

[jaymi]

No V68. Any foo knows that 68 is THE year.

prob need checkerboard to be V68

[admin]

Certainly a nice looking bass. I wonder about its tone.

[jaymi]

Certainly a nice looking bass. I wonder about its tone.

i will bet it sounds sort of 4005 ish....

[admin]

I was thinking along the same lines, Jaymi. The smaller body gave me reason for pause, however.

[shamustwin]

It's way ugly, IMO. Pointy, out of proportion.
Now, a 660 based bass would look cool.

[rickenbrother]

Now, a 660 based bass would look cool.

That would, but I'd prefer a 381 based bass if RIC ever chose to use one of their guitar designs for a bass guitar.

[ivan]

Now, a 660 based bass would look cool.

That would, but I'd prefer a 381 based bass if RIC ever chose to use one of their guitar designs for a bass guitar.

+1000