New! "Model of the Week"!

General Rickenbacker discussion

Moderators: rickenbrother, ajish4

kcole4001
Senior Member
Posts: 3368
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2005 7:07 pm

Post by kcole4001 »

Cool basses, Jeff!
JG still always looks good even when scuffed up some.

And if it was a faker, the chrome would most likely be pitted by now, it seems a common fault of the copies to have low quality chroming, particularly on the tailpiece.
Plus five minus five!
User avatar
ram
Senior Member
Posts: 3743
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 2:55 pm

Post by ram »

Jeff, great pics. I like the MG in the first with the halo around the bridge pup/
The only thing we can perceive are our perceptions - George Berkeley
User avatar
lars
RRF Consultant
Posts: 809
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2004 5:00 am
Contact:

Post by lars »

Image
kcole4001
Senior Member
Posts: 3368
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2005 7:07 pm

Post by kcole4001 »

That must be a 1973, Lars?
Must have been a good year for FG, judging by yours & JPS'.
Beautiful!
Plus five minus five!
User avatar
bassduke49
Senior Member
Posts: 6580
Joined: Wed May 14, 2003 5:00 am

Post by bassduke49 »

Here's the famous "Mink" - that is, the original one. This used to be a kinda beat MG that I partially abused back in the '70s when I first got it. Through the magic of Ted Staberow and Paul Wilczynski, it looks like this today:

Image Image

And here is what it used to look like:

Image
Author: "The Rickenbacker Electric Bass - 50 Years As Rock's Bottom"
User avatar
badeggs
Intermediate Member
Posts: 865
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 5:04 am

Post by badeggs »

Thanks, Tom, unintended effect there! I don't know how it gets so smudged - I only play up at the neck pickup.

Paul, that Mink is something else. What I wouldn't do for a '70-'72...
User avatar
lars
RRF Consultant
Posts: 809
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2004 5:00 am
Contact:

Post by lars »

May '73, Kevin.
gray

Post by gray »

Still can't upload pictures for some reason!!!!!
User avatar
jps
RRF Consultant
Posts: 37497
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2003 6:00 am

Post by jps »

How large in pixels x pixels and in Kbytes are your pics?
gray

Post by gray »

I forget; too big. All my pictures are too big, but that's not the issue. I resized them and tried to post one, but all that came up was this stupid icon that told me the file name, as opposed to the picture itself coming up. It was there on my post, but I deleted it, otherwise you'd see what I mean.
I'm sure it's just the stupid program that came with the computer.
User avatar
jps
RRF Consultant
Posts: 37497
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2003 6:00 am

Post by jps »

Assuming your pics are no larger than 500 x500 pixels and the file size is smaller than 35K you should just have to click on the "Upload Attachment.." button where it says 'Action:' below where you type your post, then browse for your image and add it.

Like this:

Image

See how easy it was? Image
User avatar
charlyg
Senior Member
Posts: 3755
Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2005 2:01 am

Post by charlyg »

When Electricity came to Arkansas Cleveland!

HT to BOA
gray

Post by gray »

That's what I did, only a picture didn't appear on the page, I got an icon comprised of the file name of the picture, there in my post on the page, where the picture should have been. It's hard to describe. I swear it's the program.
gray

Post by gray »

Here it is, a terrible photograph from a terrible camera, but a picture nevertheless. My 77 4001.
Image

You can see a couple of the dings in it, in addition to the hole drilled in the pickgaurd by a previous owner. Fortunately, it's a replacement PG, so no biggie there.
Regardless of its "patina" I have no current plans for a refin, as I like the orange tint the FG gets from age.

AND, I was right, it WAS the program. But I'm tricksy, so I fixed it.
User avatar
charlyg
Senior Member
Posts: 3755
Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2005 2:01 am

Post by charlyg »

Sweet bass! and nice job on the pix. Any port in a storm..........
Post Reply

Return to “Rickenbacker General: by Howard Bishop”