Page 2 of 6
Re: Rickenbacker Boomers v. The Rest
Posted: Fri Mar 21, 2008 2:16 am
by antipodean
I don't consider myself a boomer - born '63...but I am by definition. I would have thought the post-war baby boom was actually well and truly done by 1960!
Re: Rickenbacker Boomers v. The Rest
Posted: Fri Mar 21, 2008 5:07 am
by chuck_king
Depending on who you talk to, the Boomer/post-Boomer dividing line falls in different places. I've always thought
this book did a great job of explaining the differences between generations---the authors set the end of the Boomer generation around 1960, although people born within a year or so either way may cleave to either group. But it's funny, my wife was born right on the cusp (1961) and I was born a few years later (1966)---she definitely has more in common with people 15 years older than her than with people just a few years younger, and I'm in just the opposite boat. She has lots of friends older than her but not many younger; I have lots of friends younger than me but not many older by more than a few years. It's almost uncanny.
Vis-a-vis Rickenbacker, I suppose it goes to whether the iconic Rick player to you is George Harrison (or Roger McGuinn), or Tom Petty (or Peter Buck). I am unashamedly a Pete Buck guy.
Re: Rickenbacker Boomers v. The Rest
Posted: Fri Mar 21, 2008 5:10 am
by epitreture
I voted, but I'm not sure if there shouldn't be a third choice. Perhaps the second choice should be 1964-1984 and then after 1984. That would give a better indication of how many younger Rick players are here. BTW, I'm a 1961.
Re: Rickenbacker Boomers v. The Rest
Posted: Fri Mar 21, 2008 6:27 am
by gregga41
1960 here! Seems like i'm on the boomer "cusp"!
Almost that long since my Melbourne Demons(Aussie Football) have won the premiership!
Re: Rickenbacker Boomers v. The Rest
Posted: Fri Mar 21, 2008 6:41 am
by cheyenne
1960 here.
Re: Rickenbacker Boomers v. The Rest
Posted: Fri Mar 21, 2008 7:07 am
by Razor
incubus2432 wrote:'68......I'm stunned every day that I'm actually an adult age.
Hey Brian that puts you the same age as my Lambretta!!
As for me, I was born in 1965 - making me a mere youth!!
Re: Rickenbacker Boomers v. The Rest
Posted: Fri Mar 21, 2008 8:33 am
by sowhat
1978 here. And sometimes feeling i'm getting old.
Re: Rickenbacker Boomers v. The Rest
Posted: Fri Mar 21, 2008 8:59 am
by wj350
Bravo Oscar Oscar Mike...er
'56 Vintage here. Too bad I'm not a LP, but then I'm not goldtop either.
Bill
Re: Rickenbacker Boomers v. The Rest
Posted: Fri Mar 21, 2008 9:06 am
by hjarnett
1977 here
Re: Rickenbacker Boomers v. The Rest
Posted: Fri Mar 21, 2008 10:27 am
by ken_j
I will only go as far as to say that I was a Truman era baby.
Re: Rickenbacker Boomers v. The Rest
Posted: Fri Mar 21, 2008 11:21 am
by leesh
'82! But I have a Rick that's pre-64...does that count? It was made the year my mom was born.....aww.....
Re: Rickenbacker Boomers v. The Rest
Posted: Fri Mar 21, 2008 11:53 am
by fatcat
Old enough to know better, but still chasing rainbows.
Re: Rickenbacker Boomers v. The Rest
Posted: Fri Mar 21, 2008 12:17 pm
by jch
1970 here
i lived the 60's through my late dad's stories,i was born to late, as they say.
Re: Rickenbacker Boomers v. The Rest
Posted: Fri Mar 21, 2008 12:38 pm
by lennon211
1982 here. Everyday I feel older and older though from teaching high school.
Re: Rickenbacker Boomers v. The Rest
Posted: Fri Mar 21, 2008 12:43 pm
by brianeharmonjr
'85 here. I know I'm not the youngest here, though.