660/12 nut on a 360/12

rickfan60 · Post by **rickfan60** » Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:25 am

Bob: Since no two players are alike, RIC cannot do a single setup that pleases everyone. They leave the nut slots fairly shallow because it is easier to cut them deeper than it is to fill them in. Paul's comment about the setup being just a starting point is correct. They start with a neutral setup (not too low or too high) that the owner can build from. Also consider that climate will change the necks to some degree. Ricks are born in sunny SoCal but most will live out their lives in other places.

jingle_jangle · Post by **jingle_jangle** » Tue Feb 27, 2007 12:30 pm

"Wider string spacing with narrow pairs is better, PERIOD."

Er, true, but within narrow limitations. The first limitation is the neck width, actually the fretboard width. The second is a sort of ideal minimum space that must be allowed for between string pairs in order to provide enough space for both strings to simultaneously vibrate at maximum amplitude without crashing into each other. Both of these are pretty much accounted for with the 330/12 nut. This turns the binding on a bound Rick neck into, effectively, part of the fretboard surface.

shackleton · Post by **shackleton** » Wed Feb 28, 2007 3:01 pm

Man you must have a really narrow neck. I have put these nuts on two 360s and they don't get the strings out to the binding.

jingle_jangle · Post by **jingle_jangle** » Wed Feb 28, 2007 5:38 pm

I hope not. The strings won't go to the binding at the nut, but most people, when they fret a string, don't hit it dead center and push straight down. There needs to be space on either side of a string to allow for the inevitable slight bending force that is exerted on a string when a note or chord is fretted, even in first position.

kog · Post by **kog** » Wed Feb 28, 2007 5:52 pm

I've been reading the posts for a couple years now with people complaining about the width of a Rick 12 neck, specifically the 300 series. And I've always wondered what the fuss was about. I've only owned one 12 string guitar, my 1980 360-12, and I've gotten completely used to the string spacing.

So this week I got my second 12-string guitar, an Epiphone acoustic 12, and this thing is like trying to fret the deck of an aircraft carrier. I've got big hands and fingers -- and I can't get used to this big old Epi fretboard. I guess I have the opposite problem from most of you, and have to learn to adjust (after 27 years).

Anybody else ever run into this?

jingle_jangle · Post by **jingle_jangle** » Wed Feb 28, 2007 7:11 pm

Jerry, I have, sort of. My first ever Rick was a new 2003 660/12.

The only time I'd played a Rick 12 with a typical neck was a friend's, briefly (5-10 minutes) way back in '65.

I enjoyed the 660 neck and kind of got used to it, but when I got my second Rick 12, a '66 450/12 from Glenn Wall, it was a whole new--and more comfortable--ball game. I took to it like a duck to water. My third Rick 12 was my 730L/12, and it had slightly wider spacing, but even this one felt more natural than the 660/12, which I still play.

I have a Washburn Cumberland 12 acoustic. Fantastic guitar, especially considering its cost--$499.00. It has a neck that's 1/16 wider than the 730, and I swear that I can feel that small difference. My favorite 12s to play switch between my 325/12--which still is begging for a proper setup--and my 360/12WB, which is now my favorite full-sized Rick 12 to play, narrow nut and all.

teb · Post by **teb** » Wed Feb 28, 2007 7:59 pm

I think it's more a matter of what shape your fingertips happen to be than it is just hand size. I have big hands and long fingers, but the big problem is that they're pretty blunt-ended, so damping strings was always a problem on my Ric twelves. You learn to get around some of this by fingering chords differently (two-fingers to fret an A chord, one finger for Em, position your second finger on the D strings when playing a C chord so that it's off-center and damps the A pair beyond where it's already being fretted, rather than damping the open G pair, etc.) Even so, just basic fingering was a constant impediment. I drastically cut down the amount of time I was playing round-wounds on my basses, because it tended to build up bigger calouses, but it still wasn't the full answer. It's extremely annoying to be a Byrds fan who owns a Ric twelve and to not be able to get a clean D chord out of the thing. "Oh what will you give me... Say the slightly buzzy and muffled bells of Rhymney"....just doesn't cut the mustard.

My first 360/12 had an Arnquist nut, which helped, compared to the stock nut but things were still tight. When I got my 660/12 it's string spacing and I just couldn't get along at all. I like tighter pairs and it had the widest pairs of any twelve I've ever owned. With my fat fingertips, it just felt like a continuous band of strings and I had to look at my fingers to see where they were.

When I finally found the 360/12WB FG that I've wanted for ages, finding a way to get it to work for me was the last chance before switching to a different brand or twelve (oh the humanity!). Arnquist teased me with pictures and string spacing measurements from a full width re-fret and after kicking the idea around for a few days, I decided to try it. It allows me to have maximum nut spacing, but even when bending strings or adding vibrato, the strings don't fall off the ends of the frets. I've been playing it daily since July and it's become the guitar that I pick up first any time I play. I mentioned to M.A. in a e-mail the other day that it was as if there had been a "creativity barrier" on the guitar which had always been there and which had suddenly been lifted. My Takamine acoustic twelves, which have pretty fast necks for acoustics, feel pretty broad and slow by comparison. The full-width refret wasn't cheap, considering that the old frets were in good shape, but if you really have problems with string spacing and string damping, the difference that a few millimeters can make is amazing.

shackleton · Post by **shackleton** » Thu Mar 01, 2007 7:57 am

I agree 100%. The only thing I would add is on most rics there is room to spread out the strings with modifing a blank nut but thats a minimum of $60 if you can find a good luke. If all ricks came like the picture they couldnt keep up with demand. I guess he took all the lacquer off too?

jingle_jangle · Post by **jingle_jangle** » Thu Mar 01, 2007 8:13 am

"If all ricks came like the picture they couldnt keep up with demand."

Don't make the mistake, Eric, of thinking that everyone thinks like this. I like my unmodified Ricks just fine, thank you. And I prefer my fretboards shiny, too. I guess you could call me a Curmudgeon, eh?

squirebass · Post by **squirebass** » Thu Mar 01, 2007 9:29 am

Paul,
Isn't that 325/12 you refer to a short scale instrument?? The only 12 I've ever owned is my 660/12 Burgundy COY, which I got in 2002 or 03, can't remember exactly. I love that guitar...and so do my bandmates! For my sausage fingers it works fine, although I have played a 330/12 and I liked it too. But I can't imagine playing a 12 string version of Lennon's short-arm guitar, are you saying that it is easy to play?

jingle_jangle · Post by **jingle_jangle** » Thu Mar 01, 2007 10:01 am

Gene, my 325/12 is indeed a short scale (20.75", shorter than a Squier Mini Strat!) It was one of the "Test Body" 325s that were entirely handbuilt by RIC to check dimensions, fits, and toolings before beginning the C58 series. These were later completed into working instruments--there were ten made, I believe, of which a minority were 12s, and all ten are different. Nick Thiel was the sparkplug on this project; John Williams was also involved (I believe he owned mine for a brief time before consigning it to Mike Parks to sell).

Mine is in Blue Boy, and is the current (March) object of lust on the RRF calendar that I produced for us.

I am blessed with long, skinny phalanges, but playing the 325/12 is still a heck of a challenge, which is why it is currently one of my faves. I'm gonna master it, or else...

johnhall · Post by **johnhall** » Thu Mar 01, 2007 11:01 am

If all ricks came like the picture they couldnt keep up with demand.

Oh, that's funny! You're such a card.

kcole4001 · Post by **kcole4001** » Thu Mar 01, 2007 11:19 am

teb · Post by **teb** » Thu Mar 01, 2007 11:37 am

I too would rather play my Rics unmodified, but the key word is "play". I'd take a stock, off-the-shelf Rickenbacker to just about any custom-made guitar of the same type, but I've ended up selling-off some lovely Rics and replacing them with other brands because no matter how badly I wanted my fingers to fit, or what I tried to do differently to accommodate the neck width and string spacing, they just weren't right for me. My lovely MG 360/6 was replaced with a hollow-bodied Epi and my 250 hot-rod was replaced with a rosewood Tele. I was not about to let that happen to my twelve-string if there was any other option available. Had I known back then about the possibilities of having the new nut and full-width re-fret done, the others would likely have been shipped out to Mark and the situation fixed, rather than traded off for other guitars. I don't expect Rickenbacker to change their production for me, but it's certainly nice to know that if needed, I can probably get just about anything to work well for me. If I ever get the chance to drag the twelve over to a confluence, she's gonna' be the most popular girl at the dance for a lot of the 12-string players.

I wondered about the unvarnished fingerboard and didn't know whether I'd like it. Especially when it's freshly cleaned and oiled, it strikes me as looking maybe a bit neater than my varnished boards looked. Feel-wise, I don't think I can tell the difference. I think the claims that some folks make that stripping the fingerboard makes the action faster or drastically different are pretty much nonsense.

sloop_john_b · Post by **sloop_john_b** » Thu Mar 01, 2007 11:50 am

Todd, you should come out to MARF and bring her with you! The way you always talk her up, i'd love to see what the fuss is all about. If you can't make it, you can just ship the guitar to us, that'll be fine.

I too think that the laquered vs. un-laquered stuff is rubbish. Unless you're pressing REALLY hard, you're feeling the frets, not the fretboard.