Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

Hands up! Sir, put down the chisel and screwdriver and step away slowly from the historic Rickenbacker guitar...

stsang wrote:Hands up! Sir, put down the chisel and screwdriver and step away slowly from the historic Rickenbacker guitar...

Grey wrote:

greg_feo wrote:Almost anyone here would give their left nut for a chance to own S.Arden's old guitar and some other pieces~ imho.

That is essentially the basis of every post in this thread, we all wish we owned it and kept it in its original condition. We've seen what happened to the guitar in his "capable" hands.

stsang, look up the word inevasive.

Grey , All due respect it sounds/reads looks like jealousy has raised its ugly head.

FYI~It is OK (?) for SUZI herself to change TP from original trapeze, to keep up with the new 'R" "modern" look .

She OWNED it. We don't . Personally, I fancy gold plastic on Rickenbacker's, and Oven Knobs vibe is good enough.

Horses for courses. Stay positive.

Peace out ~

greg_feo wrote:stsang, look up the word inevasive.

Er, I did and there's no such word...

greg_feo wrote: Grey , All due respect it sounds/reads looks like jealousy has raised its ugly head.

FYI~It is OK (?) for SUZI herself to change TP from original trapeze, to keep up with the new 'R" "modern" look .

She OWNED it. We don't . Personally, I fancy gold plastic on Rickenbacker's, and Oven Knobs vibe is good enough.

I play guitars, I don't put them on a hanger to look at, so the first Rickenbacker 12 string ever built is not an instrument I have any personal desire to own because I wouldn't want to damage its historic signifigance by playing it as roughly as I do my other guitars. I already own my dream Rickenbacker.

The trapeze was changed by the factory, Arden did not modify it.

Grey wrote:

greg_feo wrote: Grey , All due respect it sounds/reads looks like jealousy has raised its ugly head.

FYI~It is OK (?) for SUZI herself to change TP from original trapeze, to keep up with the new 'R" "modern" look .

She OWNED it. We don't . Personally, I fancy gold plastic on Rickenbacker's, and Oven Knobs vibe is good enough.

I play guitars, I don't put them on a hanger to look at, so the first Rickenbacker 12 string ever built is not an instrument I have any personal desire to own because I wouldn't want to damage its historic signifigance by playing it as roughly as I do my other guitars. I already own my dream Rickenbacker.

The trapeze was changed by the factory, Arden did not modify it.

"I wouldn't want to damage its historic signifigance.." (?) is that a word?

At her request. . Time to whip out Occams razor ?

New owner gets to make the new rules . My two cents.

Why didnt John Hall buy this one? John...I heard you were trying. True?

stsang,
meant Non-invasive.

Peace~

greg_feo wrote:stsang,
meant Non-invasive.

Thanks for clarifying. No - they took the original nut off the guitar and replaced it with another (this was confirmed and discussed earlier in this thread). If you don't regard that as an invasive change I will respect your opinion. But the new owners didn't just change the plastic pickguard and TRC...

greg_feo wrote:New owner gets to make the new rules . My two cents.

Obviously we know that and it has been said a million times on this thread already. It just sucks.

Slow day on BGC?

Non-invasive or otherwise, the point is wether the guitar will ever be returned to its original state or left as it currently is. "We still have all the original parts" isn't much consolation to the fact it's being displayed under 10lbs of "makeup".

The website does not even recognize the provenance of the guitar.

Updates Made To Website and Facebook Page.

beatleboy wrote:Updates Made To Website and Facebook Page.

I'd just PM Ivan and Greg regarding future updates.

Grey wrote:Non-invasive or otherwise, the point is wether the guitar will ever be returned to its original state or left as it currently is. "We still have all the original parts" isn't much consolation to the fact it's being displayed under 10lbs of "makeup".

So , "leave it in its original state", by your assessment , means when this vintage guitar (or any player) needs to be re-fretted...
you say > don't touch it ? It is Historic? Gawd, if Jimmy Page thought that about his Les Pauls .

You can't drive a car on flat tires, or a guitar with a nut on its last legs.

greg_feo wrote:
So , "leave it in its original state".

By your assessment , when this vintage guitar (or any player) needs to be re-fretted, don't touch it ?

Let's hope all the Suzi fans don't have a heart attack when there comes a time.

Are you being deliberately obtuse? I will summarize my opinion on this issue for the last time.

A refret is hardly the same thing as removing the tailpiece, pickguard, knobs, and nut, then dressing it up and restringing it to look and play like something it isn't. As I said, the website does not even acknowledge the history or provenance of this instrument. I can come up with a laundry list of reasons why this modification was not necessary, but the current owner can't come up with a single reason as to why it had to be this guitar and not any other vintage Rickenbacker 12-string that more closely matched the Harrison guitar in its stock form, other than "I bought it and I can do whatever I want with it". Yeah, well, like someone else said, congratulations on that.

It is, quite simply, a case of more money than sense. Its signifigance to every Rickenbacker 12 string guitar that came after is outweighed by its relative association to one musician. Note, relative. This is not an instrument George Harrison ever played. Most musicians would have the common sense to step back and say "this guitar has more historical worth than just being associated by a thread bare connection with The Beatles". I am a Rickenbacker fan, not a Beatles fan, the two are not mutually exclusive so my opinion on this issue is not clouded by fandom twords a certain influential musical group.

And really, Jimmy Page? You're going to compare a musician who modified his guitars to suit his musical preferences, to a guy who modified a guitar cosmetically to look like something that it isn't, so he can hang it on a wall and look at it?

greg_feo wrote:This is a guitar that is meant to be played. Now it will be. Way better than rotting in Japan where it was.

If it is a guitar that is meant to be played, why does it need to be dressed up to look like something it isn't?

Huh? Irreverence, it's the spice of life.

All arguments aside, can we hear how it sounds? I'd be interested to see what it sounds like, maybe you guys could do 'THE CHORD' with all of the vintage gear, and make that play when you first enter the website. That would be a nice touch.