Why has'nt RIC made a Harrison Signature 360/12?

mojo_jojo · Post by **mojo_jojo** » Mon Dec 12, 2005 12:25 pm

I know the 360/12c63 is a copy of George's original, however I'm surprised they didn't pay tribute to him, like the JL series.

jingle_jangle · Post by **jingle_jangle** » Mon Dec 12, 2005 1:20 pm

That's called "licensing", it doesn't come cheap, especially from the Harrison Estate, and RIC doesn't need it to boost sales because they sell all they can build as it is.

janglebox · Post by **janglebox** » Mon Dec 12, 2005 1:25 pm

With the JL model, RIC received permission from Yoko Ono. The company can't just slap on a performer's signature, or use a performer's name for commercial gain without receiving permission from the performer or the estate.

Besides, I think it's pretty clear to fans of Harrison that the C63 is indeed a tribute to George.

Scastles · Post by **Scastles** » Mon Dec 12, 2005 1:39 pm

Maybe RIC did and possibly the Harrison estate balked at the idea or requested a substantial return, in return, or RIC for a number of reasons, didn't wish to pursue the idea. Or possibly it's none of the above.
I bet JH would have an answer.

johnhall · Post by **johnhall** » Mon Dec 12, 2005 5:16 pm

I've never spoken to George or representatives of his estate about doing such an edition. I'd love to do it, of course, but it certainly requires proper permission and cooperation to do such a thing and the opportunity has not yet presented itself.

rickinroma · Post by **rickinroma** » Mon Dec 12, 2005 9:10 pm

even the 4001C64 and the C64S is a Paul's bass copy but it has no Paul's signature just because
RIC would need a permission, I guess

fenderslash · Post by **fenderslash** » Mon Dec 12, 2005 9:11 pm

Here's a question, just to satisfy my curiosity about a thought that came to mind as I was reading this thread. As a generalization, with various manufacturers what I've noticed is that signature models are replicas of the unique modifications that a performer has made to his guiter. Did George personalize his Rics in any way? Or did he just use off-the-shelf models with no mods? What I'm getting at is that it would be a bit weird to sell a 360/12c63 George Harrison model when the only difference would be the signature on the pick guard (and George himself wouldn't have even had that!).

jojo99 · Post by **jojo99** » Mon Dec 12, 2005 9:22 pm

At the risk of having another post deleted, my opinion is that in an ideal world, a signature model would have the final approval of the guitarist who inspired it, not a gaggle of lawyers. (no offense intended, bowing graciously, exiting...)

johnhall · Post by **johnhall** » Tue Dec 13, 2005 6:31 am

The only limited edition we've done that did involve lawyers was the John Lennon model. The rest were done with handshakes, so I guess the world is about 7/8th ideal.

kennyhowes · Post by **kennyhowes** » Tue Dec 13, 2005 8:41 am

The "Rocky" Stratocaster notwithstanding, I never thought of George as being a customize-your-guitar kind of dude. Electronically, anyway.

A guitar fan, yes. An avid player, in search of new sounds? You bet. Someone who could use a solder iron, I don't know...

jingle_jangle · Post by **jingle_jangle** » Tue Dec 13, 2005 8:53 am

Wow. Compared to other threads I've read lately, which seem to go on and on and on and on and on in pursuit of pointlessness, this one has been concise and quite informative.

Kudos to all.

rick12dr · Post by **rick12dr** » Tue Dec 13, 2005 9:45 am

So, hypothetical Q here; I'm guessing some guys might Only buy a C 63 12 If it was "Harrison approved, i.e. "Sig. model".But if the guitar was otherwise identical to existing C 63s, What's the point? The factory is already doing all it can to fulfill orders now.The reason people want the '63 was Harrisons' unofficial "endorsements,meaning, We saw him play it in The Beatles, it's so cool, we gotta have one like it, dadada".Where does the anal retentiveness stop?? BTW, I'll likely have a C 63 at some point; I grew up with the Beatles in the day, and I feel no need to have a sig. model.

jingle_jangle · Post by **jingle_jangle** » Tue Dec 13, 2005 10:15 am

Regardless, highest marks to RIC for giving value for money.

Those atrocious Judas Priest thingies are a good example of cynical market think...make forty sets of SG/Vs in boring colors with odd pickguards, and sell them for far more than they are intrisically worth. Create a licensed product and price it to match the false demand created by very limited (manfacturer-controlled) numbers.

RIC's best example of a signature model is probably the Lemmy; high price, limited numbers, but look at the exquisite workmanship and the point of difference between it and virtually any other bass on the market! Worth every penny.

I'm not crazy in general about "Artist" models of products; they smack of the cult of celebrity rather than intrinsic value. But at least RIC doesn't set out to rob its customer base!

janglebox · Post by **janglebox** » Tue Dec 13, 2005 10:18 am

I agree as far as sigs plastered on a non-upgraded production instrument. The appeal of the Ric LE series is the added appointments and artist/period details—that's what makes the guitars so special. IMO, the pick guard signature isn't even particularly appealing from an aesthetic standpoint.
I'm guessing that for serious Harrison admirers (and serious Ric afficianados), George's sig would be no greater inducement to purchasing a C63/12.

oreca · Post by **oreca** » Tue Dec 13, 2005 4:46 pm

Steve nailed it for my case. The fact that Harrison's signature is on the pickguard doesn't change, or wouldn't change anything. I still want one.

Actually... If it was signed, I would probably buy an unsigned pickguard and replace it.