"Modding" a Rick signature guitar Q;opinions?

rick12dr · Post by **rick12dr** » Wed Dec 15, 2004 7:11 am

I don't think this has been addressed here AFAIK,but here you go; hypothetically, say you have a 370-12RM. These were mfd before Rick introduced the "scatterwound" toasters, which, by most accounts, are a superior PU tonally, to we "vintage tone purists".MY Q is this; if one were to replace the original PUs on an RM model, would this affect the resale price? Opinions, please.Also, if one did this, would you advise keeping the original non-scatterwounds, or just sell them, since the scatterwounds actually give
a Rick[especially a Byrd guitar !!] a more "correct" tone?

brian · Post by **brian** » Wed Dec 15, 2004 8:17 am

My opinion, probably marginally if the original pickups were removed in a fashion that they could be reinstalled to look original. (ie. wires unsoldered and not cut). AND they were kept and sold with the instrument. More so if they were not or the removal was not clean.
Having said that the condition and completeness (certificate, registration card intact, etc.) of the instrument would be part of the equation. As we are all aware mint originals with all items as of initial sale go for the highest. If the instruments are played then pickps, or other components may fail in some cases and have to be replaced anyway. As you slide down the scale the pickup replacement would probably have less effect.

adam_swapp · Post by **adam_swapp** » Wed Dec 15, 2004 8:39 am

If you like the sound better, change the pickups. Guitars are made to be played.

The OCD element of the collector world might ding you a couple of bucks at resale, but I don't think the average player would. When you amortize the possible decrease in value over the time you own the instrument, it's a small price to pay for having the guitar that you want. Anyway, I would think the hit from a broken solder joint would pale in comparison to the effect of buckle rash, worn frets, finish dings, etc. There's also a chance that you would actually get more for a guitar with scatterwounds, as the players might well prefer the sound and pay accordingly.

I would keep the original pickups, though. If I sold the guitar, I'd probably reinstall them just to make it complete and correct. Then sell the now used scatterwounds to me at a deep discount.

doctorwho · Post by **doctorwho** » Wed Dec 15, 2004 9:03 am

If the scatterwound sound is what you want on your guitar, then by all means, swap out the pickups, but keep the originals, and document everything you do to it (label the original pickups neck, middle, bridge, make a diagram of the wiring before and after, etc., and include the date that the changes are made). That way, if/when you sell it some time in the future, it will still be "complete" and the future owner can decide for himself/herself whether to return the guitar to "stock" condition.

rick12dr · Post by **rick12dr** » Wed Dec 15, 2004 10:29 am

OK, hypothetical again, but suppose we find out that McGuinn has swapped out his original PUs with scatterwounds.In the never ending quest to "keep up with our heroes' and their tastes and changes, any complaint about the PUs is likely to be a so what deal.Also, and more applicable to original buyers of the guitars when still being offered, who likley paid not much over $1000 new with discount from a dealer, even if swapping out PUs on the guitar Does affect the price, and given that recent prices on used RMs has been over 5K in some cases, so what if you lose a few bucks off it? You Still have an instrument that increased in value quite a bit.As to the issue of solder joints, unless yer talking old 60s and 50s axes that are worth Huge $$$,I say, POOOH! to that.From what I've seen of the insides of newer guitars and their electronics, unless you live near salt water, you are not going to see much oxidation on solder joints that you would ever know that a competent resolder job had been done.

jeff_ulmer · Post by **jeff_ulmer** » Wed Dec 15, 2004 10:59 am

I would pay a lot less for a collectable that wasn't as built from the factory, even if it had been modded and put back.

adam_swapp · Post by **adam_swapp** » Wed Dec 15, 2004 12:02 pm

Jeff,

You and I might illustrate the difference between the collector and the player elements. I don't care if it's been modded (non-destructively, of course). I'm buying a guitar to play it. If I'm buying as a collector, then it is, almost by definition, an investment - so I would approach the whole transaction from a different perspective. But really, how much is an unbroken solder joint worth? I've rebuilt lots of parts on my classic cars, but they're still "original" - and nobody is dropping the appraisal because I once pulled the steering box.

I sometimes think the vintage guitar market has an undercurrent of unhealthy, competitive obsession. The guitars were built and sold to be used - people shouldn't be disappointed because they were and show the signs.

Of course, Lennon's 325 is the counterpoint to the mantra of originality, isn't it?

tony_carey · Post by **tony_carey** » Wed Dec 15, 2004 12:21 pm

I'm sure that we all saw the vintage Ric on ebay recently that had had a third p/up added. Everybody though that it was so sad to see a gtr like this 'ruined'. I think that alterations are perceived differantly according to their age. Everybody likes vintage gtrs to be 100% original, if your a player or a collector, but not too many people would worry if a recent guitar was modified. The only fly in the ointment is that even a guitar built today will at some time become a vintage instrument.

jeff_ulmer · Post by **jeff_ulmer** » Wed Dec 15, 2004 3:05 pm

I most certainly play all my instruments, but if I'm buying a limited edition model, I want it in its original form, and will make every effort to keep it pristine - otherwise why not save a lot of money and just buy a regular model and mod it? I wouldn't buy a limited $5000 guitar and go bar hopping with it, that's just insane IMO, and I certianly wouldn't go changing stuff on it either.

While I agree that modern instruments will some day be vintage, my criteria ofr a guitar open to mods is its rarity. As I've said elsewhere, I routinely mod MIM Strats - that's why I buy them - but there are millions of these guitars in circulation. Would anyone be upset if I bought a Lightshow, routed another pickup in and added a Floyd Rose? It would certainly make it more useful to me, but why buy it in the first place if you need to do that to it to make it suit you?

scoobster28 · Post by **scoobster28** » Wed Dec 15, 2004 4:02 pm

NO...not to a lightshow!

brian · Post by **brian** » Wed Dec 15, 2004 6:59 pm

Ultimately it is up to you as the owner to decide what you want to do. Its your instrument, your money and probably more importantly your enjoyment of the above you are talking about.
I guess whether you bought the instrument as a collectible or to play would probably have a big impact on whether you would consider such a mod or not.
If you do not have the instrument then if I were considering such a mod I would probably buy one not in mint condition. Or if I had one in mint condition and if there is no sentimental attachment to the particular instrument I would maybe consider swapping it for one in a lesser, but still good condition plus some $$$$$.

rick12dr · Post by **rick12dr** » Wed Dec 15, 2004 9:12 pm

One point I forgot to make about all this; while an RM may be"collectible", it is NOT a "vintage" instrument.

doctorwho · Post by **doctorwho** » Thu Dec 16, 2004 12:44 am

In a different perspective, are mods in practicality any different from "abuse", like excessive finish wear, belt buckle scarring, etc.? Both make a nice guitar less desirable for collectors,but not necessarily to players ...

The reason this came to mind is the history of my 1970 331 LS BG. It had sat in the back of a closet, not in a case, for years and had lost its bridge, bridge plate, nut, R tailpiece, and DC power transformer. Additionally, it had been a player's guitar, and had some belt marks on the back and a 1" section of neck binding missing on the treble side. Nevertheless, I saw an intrinsic value (first year of production, the lights worked, and all the other parts were there, including the Type 1 High-Gains), so I bought it (the original buyer backed out), and restored the missing parts to make it operational. So even with playing wear and replacement parts, is it collectable? Possibly. Playable? Definitely! It's for each of us to decide!

adam_swapp · Post by **adam_swapp** » Thu Dec 16, 2004 1:41 am

Gary - It's collectable to me. Whaddya want for it?

BTW, how do you "lose" a nut?

brian · Post by **brian** » Thu Dec 16, 2004 4:45 am

While there is no doubt the 370RM has a "collectible" value I wonder how much the electronics of it and of the 381JK add to their desirability for players and therefore price ? While I'm aware that there is some thought that in the instance of the 370RM some of the effect can be achieved with effect boxes, I'm sure that the onboard effects add to the value. I guess this would show in any difference in price between models with the electronics and the few without. (I haven't seen enough sales to know whether such a difference exists or if it is very much as not many seem to have been made without the compression electronics). For me the electronics definitely add to the desirability, others I know do not like active electronics in guitars and basses.