325C58 JG

General Rickenbacker discussion

Moderators: rickenbrother, ajish4

Post Reply
ricnbacker
Veteran RRF member
Posts: 532
Joined: Wed Aug 07, 2002 5:00 am

325C58 JG

Post by ricnbacker »

i saw one of these today in a guitar center. i cannot belive how light in weight it is.i am no guitar player but i have handled a few, mostly les pauls and strats. they have some weight to them, this was like balsa wood compared to the others.

i am not putting it down, its a beautiful guitar, just an observation.
User avatar
jps
RRF Consultant
Posts: 37503
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2003 6:00 am

Post by jps »

It's a hollowbody guitar.
User avatar
jwilli
RRF Consultant
Posts: 4327
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2000 8:45 pm

Post by jwilli »

It being made of Alder explains the light weight too.
ricnbacker
Veteran RRF member
Posts: 532
Joined: Wed Aug 07, 2002 5:00 am

Post by ricnbacker »

it also seemed very small, like a short scale.

maybe because my bass is ssoooo big.

what do i know , i am just a bass player in a rock and roll band!

lol
User avatar
admin
Site Admin
Posts: 15135
Joined: Wed Jul 05, 2000 5:00 am
Contact:

Post by admin »

"It also seemed very small, like a short scale."
Chris it is a short scale. 20.75 inches.
Life, as with music, often requires one to let go of the melody and listen to the rhythm

Please join the Official RickResource Forum Facebook Page https://www.facebook.com/groups/379271585440277
ricnbacker
Veteran RRF member
Posts: 532
Joined: Wed Aug 07, 2002 5:00 am

Post by ricnbacker »

thanks pete,

what can i say, lol
spencer

Post by spencer »

LOL?
Are you laughing at a 325?
Please don't laugh, there's nothing funny about it. They're nothing but very, very, very Cool.
spencer

Post by spencer »

Hey, just kidding.
Actually, I've played a C58 several times and noticed that it's way lighter than my 325V63, even though it's thicker. Is it structurally "more hollow"?
User avatar
johnhall
RIC
Posts: 3926
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2000 11:17 am
Contact:

Post by johnhall »

The back is certainly much thinner but the main difference is the Alder being so much lighter than Maple.

I had a 381/12V69 built with Alder as a test and it's really light as well. I was very much afraid the Alder neck might be a problem but it's just fine even after at least 8 or 9 months now.
ricnbacker
Veteran RRF member
Posts: 532
Joined: Wed Aug 07, 2002 5:00 am

Post by ricnbacker »

spencer,

i was laughing at my ignorance!
rick12dr
Veteran RRF member
Posts: 1209
Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2000 7:51 pm

Post by rick12dr »

John;
So how does a 12 string sound using alder vs maple?I've wondered how a 360 would work, using an alder body, but retaining the maple neck.
jeff
Veteran RRF member
Posts: 239
Joined: Tue May 22, 2001 7:48 am

Post by jeff »

I actually just purchased a 325C58 JG on Sunday (7th)! I love it!!! I'm not impressed with the vibrato, but I do appreciate the authenticity that went into it. I already have the Burns replica knobs on it. I own a bowtie bridge and will purchase a Bigsby B5 in the next couple of months. It's a great pity that the British version of the B5 is no longer being manufactured. Or does somebody out there know something that I don't?
hamiltone
New member
Posts: 42
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2003 3:07 pm

Post by hamiltone »

I think Selmer had the licencing rights back in the 60s and as far as I am aware the British version is no longer manufactured and hasn't been for a long time. The only licenced version that I've seen is the Bigsby B50, a somewhat remodelled version of the B5. I've just fitted a B5 to my 1981 320 and it definitely looks the part. Check out www.bigsbyguitars.com for more details.
jeff
Veteran RRF member
Posts: 239
Joined: Tue May 22, 2001 7:48 am

Post by jeff »

Thanks for the info Karl. I'm researching the differences right now between the B5 and the B50. The B50 looks more similar to the pictures I've seen of Lennon's except for the newer etched logo. The B5 other than being slightly larger is probably the way to go however.
Post Reply

Return to “Rickenbacker General: by Howard Bishop”