To keep or not 2005 330/12

[dlbeaty]

The only Rick I ever played was a 1996 330/12 at GC a while back that fit my hand perfectly. After missing that one I found a 2005 model at GC online and had it shipped to my home for a very reasonable price. It was in excellent condition and all, but the neck is thicker and not as comfortable to play.

My delimma is that the ability to actually handle a 12 string Rick before buying again will be unlikely for some time. Our local GC only carries the current thick neck 330/12 and 360/12's and used ones are uncommon here in Columbus, Ohio. I have less than a week to return this one, which I hate to let go. OTOH, I feel I will never be fully satisfied.

I have been searching the forums on neck profiles and it is confusing. Any advice?

[jdogric12]

They're super thin on 60's and 70's, a hair thicker but still very thin in the 80's. They chunked up mid to late 90's, and imho continue to be pretty thick today. They slimmed a hair around 2008, but not as thin as the 80's.

[dlbeaty]

They're super thin on 60's and 70's, a hair thicker but still very thin in the 80's. They chunked up mid to late 90's, and imho continue to be pretty thick today. They slimmed a hair around 2008, but not as thin as the 80's.

Thanks for the basic run down. 60 and 70's models will be tough to find. Maybe I could be happy with an 80's or early 90's model in good condition. The used one that I liked was said to be a 1996 330/12. The new one at GC measured and felt the same as mine. About 7/8" from the fret board to the thickest part of the neck near the first fret. Do you think the 2008 thickness is the same as the current model?

There is a 1991 model on GC web site. It may be okay, but I hate to be let down again. I will check out the marketplace on this site and see if I can get some help there.

[jps]

...60 and 70's models will be tough to find.

Not as hard as you think; there are plenty out there, really.

[dlbeaty]

...60 and 70's models will be tough to find.

Not as hard as you think; there are plenty out there, really.

Maybe hard to find in my price range and with good fret condition? Under 2kUS?

[jdogric12]

try this. i used to own the same year/model/finish. might even be my old one! amazing player. the BIN isn't completely unreasonable either. offer 1750 and see wha happens.

http://pages.ebay.com/link/?nav=item.vi ... ID=EBAY-US

[dlbeaty]

try this. i used to own the same year/model/finish. might even be my old one! amazing player. the BIN isn't completely unreasonable either. offer 1750 and see wha happens.

http://pages.ebay.com/link/?nav=item.vi ... ID=EBAY-US

Thanks Jason. I did see that one last night, but also saw some c63's and v64's for a little more. Am I correct in assuming that these are supposed to have the thinner necks of the earlier models? Also, I like the sharper edges on the horns of these and the 330's.

[dlbeaty]

From the experience I had with the 1996 330/12, I am thinking that the necks from the eighties to mid/late nineties might be better for me than the extra thin ones of the sixties and seventies. If I could find when exactly they began to be the current thickness somewhere in the nineties, it would help.

This one has caught my eye:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Vintage-1995-Ri ... 7171&rt=nc

[xcoyle]

The good news is, early to mid 90's instruments sell on the low end of the price spectrum. Looking at completed listings, you could get one for $1200 delivered if you are patient and have 4-6 weeks to wait for a few that are let loose for bidding.

I would return the guitar you have if you don't enjoy playing it.

[dlbeaty]

The good news is, early to mid 90's instruments sell on the low end of the price spectrum. Looking at completed listings, you could get one for $1200 delivered if you are patient and have 4-6 weeks to wait for a few that are let loose for bidding.

I would return the guitar you have if you don't enjoy playing it.

It has been hard to let this one go because of what I thought was a good price with the option to return for a full refund. But if deals come up like you described, it should not be as hard as I thought to replace it for basically the same money.

Only can I be sure that a 1990-1996 330/12 will have the narrower neck like the used one I saw in the store?

[jps]

Only can I be sure that a 1990-1996 330/12 will have the narrower neck like the used one I saw in the store?

Are you looking for narrower (fingerboard width) or do you mean thinner (front to back of neck)?

[dlbeaty]

To clarify, the standard 1.63" width at the nut is fine for me. I am looking for necks that are thinner from the top of the fret board to the back of the neck. As best as I can tell, the 2005 I have is 7/8" at the highest part of the arch near the first fret. But the shape is likely a factor too. The standard Gibson LP and SG necks are around 3/4" which you would not think is much of a difference but is.

I am thinking about this 1995 model if I can get confirmation on the neck diameter. http://www.ebay.com/itm/Vintage-1995-Ri ... 7171&rt=nc Without a caliper it is hard to be precise. I am hoping that some of you guys and gals on this more active forum can confirm the best years in the 90's for thinner neck profiles.

[jdogric12]

IIRC, it had to do with the beginning of CNC machine use, which I think could be as early as '92. I'd still recommend the '79, or a mid to late 80's if you can find one and just have to have the sharp horn shape of a 330.

[dlbeaty]

IIRC, it had to do with the beginning of CNC machine use, which I think could be as early as '92. I'd still recommend the '79, or a mid to late 80's if you can find one and just have to have the sharp horn shape of a 330.

Jason, are you saying that the horns are sharper on the 80's vs the 90's and later model 330's?

Also, since the use of the CNC machine, should not the nineties be more consistent? The neck size that I felt was a perfect fit for me was a 1996.

[dlbeaty]

what about the solid body 12 strings? I personally think most of them look cool. However I have not had one in my hands or heard the sound other than on recordings.