Page 9 of 9
Posted: Thu May 18, 2006 4:56 pm
by jwilli
Paul wrote "I would describe these as very rudimentary guitars, compared with the Gibsons and Fenders of the era..."
Yes, but thats the charm of these Combo 400s. You'll want one after its put back together and set up.
Posted: Fri May 19, 2006 2:55 am
by studiotwosession
Sorry for the double post.
It seems to me the Gibson Melody Makers and Les Paul Jrs. are about as basic a guitar as it gets.
Posted: Fri May 19, 2006 6:08 am
by jingle_jangle
The assembly and finish of the Gibsons (and Fenders) was of a better standard than Ricks back in '57. A year later, Rickenbacker really began to get their act together.
Posted: Fri May 19, 2006 7:08 am
by studiotwosession
I see.
Posted: Wed Aug 02, 2006 7:30 am
by studiotwosession
Posted: Wed Aug 02, 2006 7:39 am
by sowhat
Nice!
Posted: Wed Aug 02, 2006 9:15 am
by squid
Wow. I actually like that more than a 660/12. That simple strip of binding really sets the colour off.
Posted: Wed Aug 02, 2006 10:47 am
by randyz
John: I agree completely. I think the checkerboard binding is too much sometimes. I definitely prefer the look of Glenn's guitar to the 660/12 or the TP signature model. Paul did a fantastic job on that finish!
Posted: Wed Aug 02, 2006 11:23 am
by jingle_jangle
So, Randy, then you're not a fan of 381s?
Posted: Wed Aug 02, 2006 11:28 am
by randyz
Paul: As a matter of fact, I'm not. I don't have anything against them, but I prefer the more common 1960's models (i.e. 325, 330, 360, 450, 610). The 381's are beautifully constructed but they are too fancy for my tastes.
Posted: Thu Aug 03, 2006 3:01 am
by studiotwosession
I'm in the minority, being a fan of the thinner neck widths.
But I think it's kind of funny how the Petty model and 660s have wider necks, which Petty is said to favor (after all, he chose it for his model) yet on his recent tours he's also out there playing 425s.
