Just asking... about RIC

1rr3l3v4n7 · Post by **1rr3l3v4n7** » Tue Jan 17, 2006 6:37 pm

hmmm ok here it goes...

I'm just asking what is now happening to Rickenbacker ...

In the last years, we had a couple of colors of the year, some of vintage re-issues, less artist series and less "new" models (like the 3000 series were new comprared to the previous bass series).

RICKENBACKER was the 1st electric guitar maker, they invented the pickup, they re-invented the sound of bass and had very special, innovative and unique features (the bass mute, the ROS, the 12 strings guitars headstock, the wireing of the 4002, the comb 12/6 converter and so many others)... F.C. Hall saved the company in the 50's and re-invented it to the RIC International we now know. WOW! Just WOW! That's one big reason why I'm so proud of the white nameplate on my instrument that says Rickenbacker.

Also, please consider the fact (wich must be a top priority in the musical instrument manufacturing buisness of today) that rickenbacker's instruments are handmade in USA. So RIC is not employing kids in a far point of the world where our national work conditions doesn't apply or exploiting lives and a such cheap salary that it has to be considered inhuman, but is well humanly handmade in US.

So, I'm asking how a company such as RIC can still be alive and selling good products without giving up and having their products made in China, India, Hongkong, Taiwan, or anywhere the buck is easy and the human rights or fair living conditions are optionnal.

I hope the answer to that question doesn't turn around "selling what we know we will sell": vintage stuff, Vintage colors, vintage sound, Beatles re-issues, Squire's sound, and others.

Sure I love that sound, and that's why I chose RIC, but where is the innovation nowadays in that company? In re-issuing or inventing ways to bring up the past? I love Squire's sound (lots and lots), but can Rickenbacker surprise it's fans and give them something new, something we haven't heard of, something as exciting as it was when F.C. Hall innovated or when Beauchamp invented?

I'm just asking, why RIC focuses on the past and the vintage stuff, or in other words, why RIC seems to refuse to take risks like it used to.

Any opinions?

(I remind you that I love, really, what RIC does and did, and that I'm just asking a question.)

longhouse · Post by **longhouse** » Tue Jan 17, 2006 7:31 pm

The vintage style/sound is their bread and butter but I feel you're overlooking the 650 Rics. Solidbody, cobalt-samarium humbuckers (which they had before Fender starting touting their own version), roller bridge saddles, etc. They beat the pants off PRS and Gibson without looking as Star Wars as Parker.

What do you want from RIC? Graphite?

jingle_jangle · Post by **jingle_jangle** » Tue Jan 17, 2006 7:47 pm

This is more like nine questions, Karl, but if you're only allowed one, I think what you are asking is: where's the innovation these days?

This is a complex and interwoven issue. I think it could be answered with another: Is innovation the only form of progress (progress=moving ahead)?

Rickenbackers (and all classic instrument designs) are about appearance and sound. That's their tradition, their past and their present, and the two are united in peoples' minds and nearly inseparable.

Should RIC spend lots of money inventing a new "look" that still says "Rickenbacker" somehow, without developing a new sound to accompany that look? Or should they continue on the path of tradition and keep the innovations as baby steps?

RIC's recent history of innovations has more singles than home runs. This is nothing new in any small company--what's great is that nothing lately has been an abject failure, and the bread and butter of making updated classics continues on.

Change for change's sake may often be the American business model, but if RIC followed that plan, they would not be the company we know and admire. They'd either be gone, period, or swallowed up by a conglomerate as Gibson and Fender once were, and how Gretsch now is. (Although, to be fair, Fender's doing a hell of a job resurrecting Gretsch.)

1rr3l3v4n7 · Post by **1rr3l3v4n7** » Tue Jan 17, 2006 8:25 pm

Very interesting.

Nice.

I truly appreciate your participation here guys.

An yeah...
I over looked the 600 series... sorry

doctorwho · Post by **doctorwho** » Tue Jan 17, 2006 10:08 pm

Based on what John Hall told us during the factory tour prior to the SoCalCon, there are plenty of ideas in the wings (no pun intended).

brammy · Post by **brammy** » Tue Jan 17, 2006 10:22 pm

... maybe even a Rickenbacker 12-string AC/EL

(yea, in my dreams)

ol_reb · Post by **ol_reb** » Wed Jan 18, 2006 2:11 am

Innovation? Oh hell yeah, there's always room for that.

How about a solid body 350 with the same kind of humbuckers and bridge that the 650 has?? It's small enough not to be too heavy and still maintains the classic Rickenbacker look.

Also, Noel was dead on in his statement about Ric's humbuckers.

ken_j · Post by **ken_j** » Wed Jan 18, 2006 4:30 am

So, I'm asking how a company such as RIC can still be alive and selling good products without giving up and having their products made in China, India, Hongkong, Taiwan, or anywhere the buck is easy and the human rights or fair living conditions are optional.

I believe it has alot to do with supporting the community, state, and country where the Hall family lives. Also to control quality.

jwr2 · Post by **jwr2** » Wed Jan 18, 2006 4:49 am

they have a nice little niche market selling retro instruments to middle aged Beatle wannabes and they have an 18 month waiting list for new orders ...

wmthor · Post by **wmthor** » Wed Jan 18, 2006 4:57 am

I'm asking how a company such as RIC can still be alive and selling good products without giving up...

Being a family owned business probably helps a lot in this area. I would suspect that they probably don't spend much time worrying about how to increase the wealth of an outside shareholder or investor.

jwr2 · Post by **jwr2** » Wed Jan 18, 2006 5:32 am

ya because there are no outside investors or shareholders ... they don't have to innovate if they don't want to ... they sell their current product line faster than they are made ...

wayang · Post by **wayang** » Wed Jan 18, 2006 6:04 am

"...middle aged Beatle wannabes..."

Ouch! A little bit mean there, Jeff...but not inaccurate...Maybe the onus should be placed on Ric owners to be more 'innovative'...ahh, I don't really want to go there, discussion-wise...

On the subject of production/innovation...should Converse keep changing the way they make Chuck Taylors? They're great shoes, and remain reasonably priced...in an era when 'athletic' shoes are approaching the price I paid for my first Ric. Why should they be changed if they're working well? 'If it ain't broke, don't break it...'

Remember when Coca Cola felt they had to change the taste of their product? What a backlash! (Of course, I can't help wondering what it tasted like back in the 1920's...when it really was "The Real Thing"...)

randyz · Post by **randyz** » Wed Jan 18, 2006 6:17 am

"...middle aged Beatle wannabes..."

Hey, I resemble that remark! Honestly, I don't care if RIC ever creates another new design, so long as they never compromise quality and keep building the finest vintage reissues in the market. I prefer their reissues to the originals I've owned. And I always stick with traditional finishes (FG, MG, JG, and BG). Just keep making the guitars played by my musical heroes...

dswp · Post by **dswp** » Wed Jan 18, 2006 6:26 am

"innovation nowadays"

What about the kick a$$ new 700 and 4004 line?
Modern art, I say....

ol_reb · Post by **ol_reb** » Wed Jan 18, 2006 7:04 am

"....but don't cha.....step on my blue suede Chuck Taylors..."