Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

Before you throw down more lackluster comments,
Think about this:
It's the 70's, Your in a great experimental progressive rock trio. You love the sound / play of the Les Paul Equally as much as the Rick bass. Your live performances require instant switching between the two. Yet the ideals of the band do not allow for an additional player.
Why Not put em together ?

I happen to know that the work done on this was high quality with seamless woodworking and electronics.
Sure it was heavy But if you would all take the time to listen to their tracks you'll hear why it works .
It is unfortunate that most of you will never see SFF live Then you might've understood the premise of this Custom Doubleneck.

Sometimes one must let go of purists attitudes to forge ahead.

Although I wouldn't have done something like that he did pick two pretty good instruments! Hurts my back and shoulder just looking at it.

sturoc wrote:Before you throw down more lackluster comments,
Think about this:
It's the 70's, Your in a great experimental progressive rock trio. You love the sound / play of the Les Paul Equally as much as the Rick bass. Your live performances require instant switching between the two. Yet the ideals of the band do not allow for an additional player.
Why Not put em together ?

I happen to know that the work done on this was high quality with seamless woodworking and electronics.
Sure it was heavy But if you would all take the time to listen to their tracks you'll hear why it works .
It is unfortunate that most of you will never see SFF live Then you might've understood the premise of this Custom Doubleneck.

Sometimes one must let go of purists attitudes to forge ahead.

I'm pretty sure you misunderstand the intentions of those here. While I can't speak for everyone, I can speak for myself--the one who started this thread.

I saw it while browsing google for something--I'm not even sure what.

I had hoped someone might could have shed some light on this thing. It's an interesting experiment at the very least.

I had really hoped someone might have some higher resolution images and a story about it.

What you fail to understand here is that unlike a lot of web forums, a high percentage of these guys have met at least one or two other forum members. When this happens, you see a lot of banter and inside jokes about things which likely don't even relate to the topic.

I don't think it's "purist attitudes" you see here so much as banter amongst friends who know each other.

I know personally that I have mistaken some of this but when you haven't met a lot/most of these people it's very difficult to break through that.

So, I'm not sure how you stumbled upon this site... likely a mention of SFF and a google hit brought it up, but you definitely are welcome here and you won't find a much more knowledgable group of Rickenbacker fans online... which is why I brought this particular "monstrosity" up here.

And yes, I used the term "monstrosity" earlier because it fits this instrument. It is a bit of a big thing to handle and is sewn together like certain well-known monsters.

So, if you have any information on this instrument, please share.

I'm 100% certain that no one here will bite.

That is, unless you want us to bite.

sturoc wrote:Before you throw down more lackluster comments,
Think about this:
It's the 70's, Your in a great experimental progressive rock trio. You love the sound / play of the Les Paul Equally as much as the Rick bass. Your live performances require instant switching between the two. Yet the ideals of the band do not allow for an additional player.
Why Not put em together ?

I happen to know that the work done on this was high quality with seamless woodworking and electronics.
Sure it was heavy But if you would all take the time to listen to their tracks you'll hear why it works .
It is unfortunate that most of you will never see SFF live Then you might've understood the premise of this Custom Doubleneck.

Sometimes one must let go of purists attitudes to forge ahead.

I think that "lackluster" is the wrong word. It means, "lacking liveliness or spirit", and passion about the instruments that we admire and play is one hallmark of this group that shows in this, and most, threads.

My passion extends to playing and collecting, and I admire all sorts of guitars for their eye appeal.

No doubt you've analyzed what you think is the reason that this one mongrel was brought into existence. There's another, less practical and unfortunate reason: the player and the builder both looked at it and said, "That's cool!!!"

If their own definition of "cool" meant "attractive", they were sadly misguided, regardless of the quality of the work done. It's butt-ugly, and my observation has nothing to do with "purism", unless, of course, "pure" means "attractive", too.

There are two catch-all words which Americans use when they fail to define exactly what it is about an object or idea it is that appeals to them. I call them, "Wal-Mart" words, because they're cheap, cheerful, and all too common. One is a masculine word: "cool". One's feminine: "cute". Both are overused to the point that they have every meaning, and no meaning at all.

This "cool" guitar/bass pastiche has nothing save freak appeal. I look at it in horror as I would a train wreck.

I think it's cool...in a cute sort of way.

It might fall into the catagory - just because can doesn't mean you should....?

Yup.

Thanks for providing some luster, Dr. JJ...