Announcing the new Ric Acoustic/Electrics

brammy · Post by **brammy** » Sat Dec 03, 2005 9:19 pm

How come Ric doesn't make an AC/EL?

jingle_jangle · Post by **jingle_jangle** » Sun Dec 04, 2005 5:55 am

Probably because they are far too busy with keeping orders filled to embark on new projects which would drain company resources and compromise focus.

Having said that, I was very, very impressed by the new T5 I played last week.

Too bad Taylor is affiliated with the "Church of Scientology", 'cuz I'd've gotten one of those instead of my 6122-59 Gretsch...

longhouse · Post by **longhouse** » Sun Dec 04, 2005 6:03 am

The T5s are nice to look at, Paul -but the split F-hole ruins it.

I didn't know Bob Taylor was a scientologist!

britye · Post by **britye** » Sun Dec 04, 2005 6:44 am

News to me too, fill us in

jingle_jangle · Post by **jingle_jangle** » Sun Dec 04, 2005 6:57 am

Can't completely fill you in yet, but Taylor is listed in the World Institute of Scientology Enterprises directory, as a business which operates under the principles of Scientology. And, presumably, donates a portion of its profits to this sham "church".

I've been told by one who has looked into this that it is a sort of training ground for Scientology "students". The "students" work in the Taylor factory as a way to pay for their training.

I know nothing about Bob's personal involvement with Scientology.

Do you mean that the split F-hole ruins the top visually or structurally or sonically? I suspect you mean "visually" and I disagree on this. Were it not "split", it would look static. The bar in the center is a minor stroke of genius, design-wise, because it livens up the whole top area at zero cost.

It helps to look at design with your eyes instead of your brain, at least at first.

That may sound like a sarcastic statement, but it is not meant that way. Here's why:

It's necessary to at first turn "off" your critical faculties and just observe your gut reaction to a design or design element. Then you can bring your critical faculties into the scene and use them to analyze, not the design itself, but your own reaction to the design.

I learned that in my Scientology training.

(JOKE)

admin · Post by **admin** » Sun Dec 04, 2005 7:06 am

I tried the Taylor T5 a couple of months ago and found the look to exceed the tonality. It is very light and an easy player though.

Scastles · Post by **Scastles** » Sun Dec 04, 2005 7:15 am

Can't say I'm real impressed with the looks of the T5. I haven't played one but I get the sense they would sound something like an Ovie.

sloop_john_b · Post by **sloop_john_b** » Sun Dec 04, 2005 7:24 am

I was not impressed with the T5. I don't know, I never liked Taylors and I could never really figure out why. I guess now I at least have a reason when people ask. I am most definitley a Martin guy, through and through.

For acoustic electrics, I play an Alvarez Yairi DY-88 that's a few years old and beat to hell, and I guess I kind of have a soft spot for it.

jingle_jangle · Post by **jingle_jangle** » Sun Dec 04, 2005 8:17 am

Looks like an Ovie does not equate to sounds like one.

The build methods of the T5 are similar in some ways to RIC's way of building a guitar.

The attraction of the T5 is the capability of mixing the sounds from the different pickups. Everything from acoustic amplified to (semi) thrash.

Looks are a personal thing, Stan, and I suspect you've not held or played one yet. When you get one into your hands, flip it over and look at the back construction. It's amazing.

I think it's sort of the distillation of the old Chet Atkins Gibbies, Ovation, and other influences. And a darned good distillation it is, too. It's just too bad for the WISE connection.

longhouse · Post by **longhouse** » Sun Dec 04, 2005 11:27 am

I was referring to the aesthetics of it, Paul. We'll always agree on Rics however (so long as they're not purple!!!).

The split F-holes would look more at home on a Cort or Ibanez. I like the T5 silhouette. Just that garish F-hole ruins it... Makes me think of awful fringed jackets or alligator-skinned barfly women with their smokes in leather pouches on their belts.

IF they'd put the knobs down on the lower bout like an F-series Ric and offer a Bigsby, now that would be cool.

rick12dr · Post by **rick12dr** » Sun Dec 04, 2005 11:50 am

Paul;
Lament Not. The 6122-59 is far and away a better, hipper, cooler,dare I use a 70s term,"righteous" guitar anyway.I'm loving mine more all the time,
and I haven't used it plugged in as much as unplugged, I could go on, but I'm preachin' to the choir on this...

brammy · Post by **brammy** » Sun Dec 04, 2005 6:54 pm

>>>>>they are far too busy with keeping orders filled to embark on new projects which would drain company resources and compromise focus.

You might be right about being too busy keeping orders, but as far as compromising focus, I dunno.... I'd sure like to hear John Hall's comments on this.

Ric makes electric guitars and they make acoustic guitars. Seems to me that an AC/EL would be right up their alley.

jingle_jangle · Post by **jingle_jangle** » Sun Dec 04, 2005 7:27 pm

Amen, Don. Righteous, brother...

Kent, anytime I give my opinion on RIC and their products, it's just that--an opinion. JH, or BH, or KH, anyone else, for that matter, who has anything to add or any corrections to make, is going to say what they wish. It's a public Forum.

Porsche makes cars, and they make bicycles. Seems like a motorcycle would be right up their alley, too, by your reasoning...

jwargowski · Post by **jwargowski** » Mon Dec 05, 2005 7:51 am

I've been eying a Taylor 12 string as of late. Having done quite a bit of comparison shopping (Ric accoustics not represented sadly) The Taylors ring out and project so much more than anything else I've tried. The tops seem really alive.

I tried the T5 as well - it seems like a good guitar to cover a lot of bases, but I actually prefer having a lot of guitars to cover a lot of bases.

Oh, and Porshe actually did quite a bit of design R&D with H-D on the V-Rod engine, so they do kinda build motorcycles as well, but now we're getting way off topic!

jingle_jangle · Post by **jingle_jangle** » Mon Dec 05, 2005 8:02 am

Design and development ain't building production.