Why did the Beatles stop using Rickenbackers?

David_Lopes · Post by **David_Lopes** » Wed Aug 23, 2000 10:09 am

I've read Bjorn's great article on the beatles ric's which talk us their use of them to about 1966. After, it seems that the guitars at least were put away in favor of fenders (strat/tele/jag), gibsons (SG/LP), and the Epiphone Casino.

Does anybody have any input on this change ?

Thanks,
Dave in Paris

admin · Post by **admin** » Wed Aug 23, 2000 6:14 pm

David: If you include the 4001S used by Paul McCartney it should be remembered that he used this Rickenbacker from about 1965 until the end of the Beatles recordings. The Beatles were always experimenting with sounds and consequently were destined to use a wide range of instruments during their career. I believe that it was their growing need to experiment with all types of sound that led them to use instruments that moved away from the Rickenbacker sound as time went on. My two cents. It must also be acknowledged, of course, that they also moved away from Gretsch and Hofner from the early days as well. It is so nice that the Rickenbacker sound was such a central part of their initial work.

Mark · Post by **Mark** » Thu Aug 31, 2000 11:03 am

If you look at who else was making music/records in that time frame you can't help but see that Clapton,Jeff Beck (not the guy from LA called Beck...this is the real Beck)Jimmy Page,Dave Davies and Jimi Hendrix were influences on the Beatles.I don't think that George was out to get the tone of Petula Clarks guitarist.He was on the cutting edge and was looking for the new thing all the time.
Revolution the single,was made without an amp.They over drove the tube recording console to get that sound .
Both John and George never gave up on their Ricks ...but they merely expanded (more than their minds) their arsenal of tools and the Gibson/Epiphone ,Fender,and other guitars they acquired after 1965 gave them a larger palette to "paint" with.
If Hendrix and Jeff Beck had gotten those sounds from a Rickenbacker ,then you would see a very different musical landscape today.

admin · Post by **admin** » Thu Aug 31, 2000 11:44 am

The key to The Beatles success was innovation, experimentation and the defiance of convention. These philosophies allowed them to push the envelopes of composition and musical performance in the 1960s and were, in my view, also responsible for their choice of instruments and techniques used in the studio. Nonetheless, McCartney knew the 4001S to be a good thing and their recordings from Rubber Soul onward would have been very different without the Rickenbacker bass.

anon · Post by **anon** » Tue Nov 07, 2000 3:25 pm

Perhaps the 325 was feeling small to John(it's 3/4 size). Also, by 1965/66 many groups had co-opted the Beatles sounds and signature chord progressions, thus the twelve string(until McGinn)
was saturating music. Plus, a Casino through a good tube amp(especially an AC-30) produces that
great Revolver overdrive sound(think Taxman).
I think Jeff Beck's work in the Yardbirds was a definite influence(the sound of Heart Full of Soul and Taxman are remarkably similar, if you discount the Yardbirds' ****** production) although Beck used a Fender and a Maestro Fuzz.

simer4001 · Post by **simer4001** » Sun Nov 12, 2000 12:21 pm

Something that should be mentioned is that each of them always returned to their Rickenbacker's. John was rumored to have played his 1958 325 Capri during the Double Fantasy sessions, and the follow ing sessions for what became Milk and Honey. Some even say this is the last guitar Lennon played.

It was reported that George used his 360/12 for Cloud Nine. As for Paul, it isn't documented anywhere whether Paul has recorded with his 4001S, but in the collage inside the Off the Ground sleeve, you can see Paul playing his 4001S with headphones on.

Tim_Fletcher · Post by **Tim_Fletcher** » Sun Jan 14, 2001 5:43 pm

A guy named Andy Babuik is in the process of publishing a Beatles Gear book which will allegedly give lots of detail about these things. Apparently it's due out some time this year.

oslpchris · Post by **oslpchris** » Tue Jun 26, 2001 10:20 am

Any new news on this book Tim was talking about... I haven't heard anything about it... is it still happening or not?

chris
new to the Ric list... not a Ric owner
but i have a Gretsch Tennessean, Can I still play w/ you guys?

Tim_Fletcher · Post by **Tim_Fletcher** » Wed Jun 27, 2001 12:19 pm

Apparently he now has a publishing deal with Tony Bacon and it's due out on 1 October.

scouser · Post by **scouser** » Fri Jun 29, 2001 8:19 am

Andy Babuik interviewed me on several occasions for his new book. He seems to be a stickler for detail and also for collaberation of the facts. I really enjoyed speaking with him and look forward to reading the book myself.

Rick_Harper · Post by **Rick_Harper** » Wed Jul 04, 2001 2:23 pm

I have a boot tape of The Fabs in Philly (or Cleveland - I'm working from memory)'65 and McCartney breaks a string. Lennon says "Whaterwegonnadew" Paul says "Hang On" and obviously switches basses... you can hardly hear it. Anyone have a photo? Would love to see him w/ the Rickenbacker (he was using it as a spare by this time i think)...

Rick Harper

Nick_Thiel · Post by **Nick_Thiel** » Wed Jul 04, 2001 2:32 pm

He didn't have the Ric until the Hollywood Bowl show in August of '65, he used the Ric as a back-up on the '66 tour. The back-up in '65 was the refin'd Hofner.

Dr._Winston_O_Boogie · Thu Jul 05, 2001 10:21 am

Welcome aboard Oslchris! Yes you can play! ha ha To answer the original question, I believe as someone has already mentioned that The Beatles were looking for new and different sounds for there recordings. It had nothing to do with there lack of interest in the original instruments. My 2 cents!

The Doctor...