Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

The upper and lower horns are clearly infringing Rics copright.
The upper rear of the body obviously suggests the Ric shape too.
Don't these people have ANY ideas of their own?

Saw one with my son at Larchmont NY GC. His first comment was it looked like an imitation Ric

I think Ibanez might want a word:

http://www.ibanez.ru/info/catalog/1983-84b/06.jpg

J.

Good eye. I forgot about those Ibbies.

12stringbassist wrote:The upper and lower horns are clearly infringing Rics copright.
The upper rear of the body obviously suggests the Ric shape too.
Don't these people have ANY ideas of their own?

Don't these people have ANY ideas of their own?

no

no one does.

Ric, Fender and Gibson designed the only basses that matter. everything else is a copy of those three

I say YES.

the first thing I thought was how the hell could a company like Schecter get away with such brazenly obvious "inspired by" model. I mean Schecter is no fly by night company trying to pass off the looks on suckers who want something better and think they can apease it with a knock off...

Obviously the headstock and some other things are different but theres no doubt to my eyes its trying to be a Ric.

thant being said

I played one and I like the feel. the sound was awful though.

It was the Diamond series 004 model that I actually had my hands on. the one posted by the OP is not as apealing visually as this one...IMO

ricnbacker wrote:Ric, Fender and Gibson designed the only basses that matter. everything else is a copy of those three

Sarcasm I hope. There is quite a bit out there that is innovative and worthwhile. The reason you don't see it as much as the overflowing sea of lawsuit basses is because the philosophy behind the instrument is totally different.

ricnbacker wrote: Ric, Fender and Gibson designed the only basses that matter. everything else is a copy of those three

Warwick? Ken Smith?

Methinks thou dost too narrow-minded be.

Conklin, man. Those basses look like very little else. And they are killer.

ricnbacker wrote:
Ric, Fender and Gibson designed the only basses that matter. everything else is a copy of those three

There was a fellow called Paul Tutmarc who might take issue with that, if he were still alive, having designed & marketed the first 4-string fretted bass guitar in 1933.

And then there's that utter plagiarist Ned Steinberger - J'accuse!

J.

If you took that Schecter & got a rasp & filed the sharp edges off the horn ends, it wouldn't share a single common contour or design detail with a Rickenbacker:



Still quite like it but it looks sort of - bland.

J.

You've got that right, Jon. This entire silhouette is out there walkin' the line between every basic bass shape anyone's ever dreamed up (except the Gibson EB-0).

Personally, I think it's ugly, and for all the right reasons, too.

cassius987 wrote:

ricnbacker wrote:Ric, Fender and Gibson designed the only basses that matter. everything else is a copy of those three

Sarcasm I hope. There is quite a bit out there that is innovative and worthwhile.

Not in my opinion

FretlessOnly wrote:

ricnbacker wrote: Ric, Fender and Gibson designed the only basses that matter. everything else is a copy of those three

Warwick? Ken Smith?

Methinks thou dost too narrow-minded be.

I dont

bassassin wrote:

ricnbacker wrote:
Ric, Fender and Gibson designed the only basses that matter. everything else is a copy of those three

There was a fellow called Paul Tutmarc who might take issue with that, if he were still alive, having designed & marketed the first 4-string fretted bass guitar in 1933.



J.

Who?