MAD...VERY VERY MAD...YES. FURIOUS...PLS READ

[admin]

Yes, another RRF corker thread.

[DriftSpace]

Many Australian vintners are using screw-on tops now. Not sure what to do. Maybe pour a thimble full in the top and have a swig?

People who sniff the cork don't know why they are sniffing. It's pretentious, but people still sniff because they think it makes them look smart. Usually a cork just smells like cork, and it doesn't tell you anything more about the wine than you could learn by just tasting it; that's why the waiter pours the person who ordered the wine a little bit before serving the entire table. The waiter hands you the cork so that you can inspect it, and to see if the cork is in optimal condition. Checking a cork to see if a wine is "corked" is better done by feel and visual inspection than by smell. If you want to know if the wine is corked and can't see evidence on the cork: just taste the wine. A screw-top prevents the air from reaching the wine altogether, so don't bother pouring it in the plastic-lined top; just pour it in a glass and enjoy!

Anyhow (I think) this was the point of Ben's joke; sniffing the cork = pretentious; vintage guitar fetishism = pretentious. You can like what you like (plenty of vintage guitars are great, just like plenty of vintage wines) but don't try and pretend that it's because of some kind of "objective" qualities that you perceive and understand which other people don't ... especially if you can't even support or explain your perspective. Don't sit there smelling the cork and pretending like you're some kind of expert, telling everyone else they just don't get it. Plenty of "new" wines are exceptional, as are plenty of new guitars; some get better with age, and some don't.

... the guitars recorded those days were all BRAND NEW instruments of course - as vintage guitars was non-existant. So the rule is: If you really wan't to sound like it used to and getting it real original and genuine - record it with a brand new guitar thru a tube driven desk.

George's Rickenbacker 360/12 was a year old when he recorded A Hard Days Night, Clapton's "Fool" SG was maybe three years old when he recorded Disraëli Gears Jimi's Strats were all bought brand new - many bought at Mannys in N.Y. in bunches... and well... I think you get it it

Watch out Troels; making too much sense and presenting a concise argument is likely to result in mockery!
Better to just say something vapid, as in: "I like it because it's cool, and if you don't think it's cool it's because you lack understanding."

(Seriously though: thanks for the great post. )

What can also be really good these days? Wine in a box, and wine with screw caps. True story.
(Just wait until you see someone sniffing a plastic-lined tin screw cap . . .)

I think a guitar "seasons" (whatever that really means) a lot in the first 15 years of it's life regardless if you play it or not, it has nothing to do with "They made them better in the old days" Leo Fender had a sign in the old Fender factory that said "We don't make them like we used to, but then again we never did"

Anybody who has tried to drill/nail/screw into a wall stud of an old house knows that the properties of wood change with age, but this can vary wildly depending on environmental factors. Yes, the properties of wood definitely change with age, but it's not always for better or for worse. I didn't know that about the sign, but that's a nice little way of encapsulating Leo's love of change and innovation; he was definitely not one for nostalgia. Well said, Eden.

Yes, another RRF corker thread.

Yeah, go ahead and pour this one in the toilet, Peter.

[admin]

Troels, the very good news is that your quality modern guitar will last several lifetimes if cared for properly and in large measure it will play just as nicely a few generations from now. I am inclined to put more stock in quality and the hands of the player than new or modern. When you make guitars as well as RIC, however, both vintage and modern enthusiasts are likely to be equally happy.

Sean, interesting comments. Perhaps vintage is not what it used to be.

[Oskar]

The parting out of a perfectly good guitar has been an ethical issue for a long time. And while I too feel a pang of illness when I hear of someone doing this, I also feel that it's also the market speaking... whether we like it or not.

I also feel the same way when a collector with deep pockets pays an exorbitant amount for an instrument and then squirrels it away for years, never to see the light of day until he's ready to sell it at a 150% profit. To me that guitar may as well be parted out.

I guess I'm different. All my guitars, even the ones that are worth something, are used and gigged with. Probably because I was never in a financial position to consider an instrument as an investment, and always saw it as a tool to make music with. Just my 2 cents worth.

[gareth]

Every time I see the vintage v. modern guitar debate retreaded, this is the only image I see in my head!

I ride a 1945 Harley Knucklehead, and it's not because HD aren't making new bikes Ben

I have a couple of "new" RICs (4004LK and 4001CS), but if I want a 4008, a 4000, or a nice early 70's 4001, I kind of got to go to the vintage market.

Not to say that there isn't a fair share of pretension in the vintage/collector market, but if you ain't making them any more, there's nowhere else to go when you want to get one, and every time one gets chopped up for parts, a baby gets dragon kicked by a hipster douchebag or something.

I think that's how Paul W explained it to me.

[analogpackrat]

If you play a vintage guitar or bass and it feels and sounds different (better) than a comparable new model is that cork sniffing? Isn't the sound and playability of the instrument the core purpose of the thing? I have a couple of oldies and a few newer ones. I know which are my favorites and the vintage ones are at the top of the list. As other have pointed out, wood changes when it ages. Also, the quality of the wood 40, 50, 60 years ago was different (there was more tight grained older growth wood available). The construction methods have also changed. These are not minor differences. Sure there are bum instruments of any age, but a guitar or bass that has survived 40+ years intact is by definition not a bum.

Parting out an intact guitar that was not produced in significant numbers and never will be produced again is pretty indefensible in my book. The only way to prevent this guy from doing his thing is to bid faster and/or higher on those undervalued listings.

[jingle_jangle]

The parting out of a perfectly good guitar has been an ethical issue for a long time. And while I too feel a pang of illness when I hear of someone doing this, I also feel that it's also the market speaking... whether we like it or not.

Having worked in both design and marketing in my career, I have to say that, although the money is in marketing, it's antithetical to my own experience and beliefs, which is why I chose to leave the "profession".

A lot of real twisted thinking is used to manufacture justification to unload more and more "product" on an ever-increasingly-confused and apathetic buying public. The aim of marketing is to convert resources into cash to line somebody's pockets, without regard for formerly proudly-promoted positive attributes such as quality of design or manufacture.

One of the simplest, most basic tenets, which finds greater and greater acceptance among otherwise smart people is the notion that the market "speaks", therefore it must be accommodated without ethical consideration. In other words, "If it sells, it's good."

This is insidious, as it removes critical thinking from the act of buying, while denying even the existence of ethics in the decision to sell or to buy. It's one of marketing's greatest triumphs and nastiest black eyes.

The breaking up of an otherwise complete, original, and rare instrument for junkyard profit is ethically indefensible.

[Badanovski]

The thought of vintage & Rickenbacker brings up my first bass. In 74' I bought a new 4001. There were about 10 bass players in my town that had Rics. Urban Myth was that the neck on Squire's Ric had gone rubberband where it joined the body. We thought we'd get 10 or 15 years out of them & then have to get a new one. We were hesitant to buy an older one. I never thought there'd be a market for vintage 4000 series. Now to my surprise my 4003 is an 89' & still going strong.

[jingle_jangle]

The missing link in this legend is the fact that Squire's 4001 has had the neck shaved to a bare minimum, and this, coupled with the old truss rod system and his use of round wound strings, have caused the action to go south. I inspected, held, and played Chris' 4001 a few years back at RIC, and can testify that it had been modded beyond the practical limits--action at the 15th fret was about 9-10 mm! I think it was in for neck work--Ben could probably clarify.

[RIC_FACTORY]

Thinking that Ricks overall were built superior prior to an arbitrary date for no other reason than your own subjective reasons (like sound and appearance) is corksniffing. That being said, I would love to hear somebody tell me how a guy using a manually operated router that would routinely torpedo guitar necks into the wall is doing a better job shaping a neck crafted the same way every time by a CNC machine that scraps a guitar neck maybe a few times per year.

Understanding that Ricks built according only to the tolerances and repeatabillity barely imagined 20 years (nevermind 40 years ago) and finish applications (UV) only very recently perfected by a minority of the most renowned guitarmakers on Earth is acknowledgement that the march towards higher quality continues every day at RIC.

[admin]

Nicely put Ben. I have always found it interesting how often we characterize the older days as being the gold standard.

We have, of course, learned a few new things since then.

I still laugh when I recall my children commenting during episodes of boredom, "let's get dad to tell us about the olden days."

[leftybass]

Just so everyone will be clear:

The original point of this thread was to voice my own disgust at seeing a perfectly good (albeit vintage, unaltered and rare) Rickenbacker Guitar that hasn't been made in over 40 years. Why not keep it whole??? It is the right thing to do and I cannot be convinced otherwise.

Ya can't order a new one.

I have owned dozens of new, used and vintage Rickenbackers, many of them one-of-a kind. Love 'em all, that should be obvious to all who know me.....my point was not to start another debate about new vs. vintage instruments.....everyone has their interests in their appreciation of Ricks.

Why destroy the few in numbers for the sake of profit..? It may be a person's right to do with his property as he/she wishes, but a terrible decision all the same.

[leesh]

Well said.

[leftybass]

Well said.

Thanks Leesh. Give that baby boy a hug from all of us.

[Oskar]

One of the simplest, most basic tenets, which finds greater and greater acceptance among otherwise smart people is the notion that the market "speaks", therefore it must be accommodated without ethical consideration. In other words, "If it sells, it's good."

I never said that this is a "good" thing (and I'm on your side with this issue). I merely pointed out that in spite of our best efforts there is not a whole lot one can do to reverse the trend. The market dictates many aspects of our lives, some way, way more important than parceling out a guitar, health care and gasoline prices come to mind. It's part of the price (no pun intended ) we pay for a supposed "free" market. In other words, I can't tell you what to sell or how to sell it if you own it and put it out there, whether it's whole or in parts.

I think what we can all do is stick to our own set of ethics when wheeling and dealing. Unfortunately there is not much one can do when selling to someone you don't know, e.g. via e-Bay. But with a bit of digging you can get a pretty good idea of a person's intentions. This is one reason I try to sell and buy most of my stuff locally, and in many cases from people I know.