Allparts vs. Vintage Ric Bridge

[weemac]

The AllParts tailpiece definitely looks different. Every time I see one on a real RIC bass I do a double take because I wonder if it's a Rickenfaker. I think they cheapen real RIC basses. Every one of these I've ever seen that was old LOOKED old, with blistering chrome.

I've seen a couple that have lasted ok but I think that Dane has hit the nail on the head!

Eden.

[bobbolux]

Has there been a recent design change in the stock rick bridge?

Pics of '60s/'70s/ current type of tailpieces.

Tailpieces_Bottom_3981_800.jpg

Show us a photo of the underside of an Allparts tailpiece for comparison, please.

holding an AllParts bridge in my hand now, looks essentially identical to the middle one shown in your picture. I like the look of the newer one on the right, seems like the higher mass (filled in areas) is a step in the right direction.

[johnhall]

It ought to; our part was used as the casting pattern and you can even see some of the original mold marks and flaws of the particular part they used.

[bobbolux]

This brings up a question, and I'm sure most here know the answer so forgive my ignorance - Are the Allparts bridge assemblies "ok" or blessed as far as Rickenbacker is concerned? or is it an unwelcome knockoff that is beyond the reach of Rickenbacker's control/copy/patent protection?

...and if so, what about the Hipshot bridges and tuners?

just curious, don't mean to bring up any sore subjects if they happen to be.

[johnhall]

We consider both to be "knock-offs", although Hipshot's at least shows some creativity. The Allparts bridge is a definitive example of the term.

For the moment both are beyond our cost-effective control, however, that will likely change dramatically in light of a wide range of filings- and investments- we've been making around the world over the last year.