are actual 330 ok?

[egosheep]

While some people might prefer elements found only in '70s and '80s models, a lot of other people are very happy with more recently-made Ricks. Maybe we're just not sophisticated enough to know any better

I certainly wouldn't put it that harshly, but in essence that's true. Most people who "loooooove" brand new Ricks have never played a vintage one. I know firsthand - I used to rave about recents until I got spoiled!

Definately... the differences aren't cosmetic, it's a totally different experience in feel and tone. That doesn't mean that newer Ric's are bad guitars, it just means that there are very real differences between eras. If you happen to have a preference for certain features in a Ric, vintage is the way to go. What is intriguing about the late 70's-early 80's period is that it has a lot of cool vintage features but can be found reasonably cheap on the used market, for those of us who don't have the scratch for a Rose Morris.

[jdawe]

I certainly wouldn't put it that harshly, but in essence that's true. Most people who "loooooove" brand new Ricks have never played a vintage one. I know firsthand - I used to rave about recents until I got spoiled!

I agree with you up to a point. There is no question that connoisseurs often develop a refined ability to notice subtle details that most people would overlook. However, with guitars there is also a huge element of subjectivity -- to a large extent what feels "right" to us is whatever it is we're familiar with.

I think there are some and basic and more or less objective playability features that distinguish a well-crafted quality instrument from a crummy el cheapo: things like whether it stays in tune, intonates properly, can be set up with decent action, and so forth. I also think that most of us would agree that Rickenbackers -- old, new or in between -- are generally on the "quality" side of this spectrum.

Beyond that, however, I think that a lot of preferences -- like skinny necks vs. thicker necks, hi-gains vs. toasters, etc. -- are fundamentally subjective or depend on individually variable things like playing style, hand and finger size, etc. While it's true that I (unfortunately) haven't had an opportunity to play a vintage Rick, I've been playing guitar for 30+ years and strongly suspect that if I did pick one up I'd be able notice and identify the differences between it and my modern 620s, in a way that I wouldn't be able to do if I were asked to compare bottles of wine, Renaissance art, or any number of other things I know little about. What I'm not convinced of is that I would necessarily come away thinking that the vintage guitar was "better", as opposed to simply "different".

Of course, I might change my tune if I actually got to play one. But since I can't afford to buy one, maybe it's just as well that I remain ignorant.

[blue330]

The old guitars are great! But onstage I really think the slightly increased "weight" of the Hi- Gains can sound better. I also think maybe big neck = big sound. It's not like the new necks are that big, anyway. I will say that in my experience, the old Toaster pickups are way better than the new ones. The new ones have the Sound but are far more prone to feedback than the old ones. As for overall quality, they're all good!

[1a12]

Play play play all and any you can...one will speak to you, and you will speak through it....and then you don't have to think about any more....Dominoes line up, river flows...
Certainly then, some guitars need to be tweaked/setup for optimization, but sometimes you can tell right away if a particular model is slung around you and that neck feels right. I own a Dan Armstrong, which kind of has no personality and is very different to play...but I like it because it makes me think/play differently.

Now before I get metaphysical and start talking relationships, I'll just bow out here

I like what Jdawe put together here...(and adding) and what we have potential to come and get familiar with...

I agree with you up to a point. There is no question that connoisseurs often develop a refined ability to notice subtle details that most people would overlook. However, with guitars there is also a huge element of subjectivity -- to a large extent what feels "right" to us is whatever it is we're familiar with.
[/quote]

[rkbsound]

Adam and Mitch -- have you guys ever played together? I think you sort of run in the same circles a bit...??

Anyway, I have my first gig in 20+ years coming up - an original band with a very Feelies-ish feel, and I'm going to use my 2002 360 through a new Vox AC15C1. I was thinking of using my '66 Rick 335 as a back-up, but am wondering if the volume will change significantly. I'm going to try them at rehearsal next week, so that will give me an idea....but any experience switching from high gains to vintage toasters on stage?

Here's our facebook page -- having either of you "friend" us would be a HUGE honor! In fact, I'd love everyone to do it!

http://www.facebook.com/UnsoundMethodsRoc

[1a12]

Poof! Friended in the FB realm. A huge congrats to you and the upcoming show, that must be very exciting. Hope it fills you! Sounds like the equipment is quite in order.

Some folks like prep, others don't...(insert almond joy/mounds jingle here) IMHO..In the context of rehearsal I would think it behooves you to dial in exactly what amp/guitar tone and/or volume setting changes need to take place if any at all. I have no experience with switching toasters to high gains, I remember at one point I had two guitars with both high gains. Right now I have toasters, and mini buckers on a non-reverse Firebird 12, and I have adjusted the pickups on the 12 to where I don't have to touch anything except a slight tone backoff on my bridge p/u.

I listened to some of the songs, and I love the guitars, vocals remind me of somewhere between boon and watt and burma gettin all singy! There are some nice inventive guitar lines, I would love to see you guys when you start touring south!!

Sheez, who here wouldn't love to sing along with Mitch Miller? Seriously, many times I think I considered moving to NC and loitering until I got a job sweeping and vacuuming "Drive In" ! But heck who in their right mind hasn't?

[doctorwho]

Welcome, Filippo!

Wow, ok...

Um, yeah, there are no bad years, but that's all relative, isn't it? I would have no interest in a 330 made from about '89-current. I prefer the smaller vintage necks. I also prefer the 21-fret guitars to 24-fret guitars, which changed in the early 70's. So if I was in the market strictly for a model 330, I'd aim for a 60's example. Of course, they command more money, and there are reasons for that!

In short, if you get a recent one, you would be getting hi gain pickups, 24-fret pickup placement, and a chunkier neck (not as desirable to collectors and connossieurs).

That said, I am currently playing as my main guitar, a '98 360/12v64 FG. I was able to get the action very low and the neck very straight, so I don't mind the slightly beefier neck. And remember, a v64 has 21 frets and toasters.

Welcome and good luck with your search!

I agree with what Jason says. I find the more recent 330 neck profile to be a bit "thicker" in shape and size compared to, for example, my 1966 model 340.

[jps]

The rhythm guitarist in my band has an '08 330 and I have a '67 330, so we have a good bassis® for comparison. The '08 has a bit thicker/wider neck and the overall feel of the instrument is that of being heavier/bulky. We need to compare body and headstock profiles (of the guitars!) to how that may have changed, if any.

[Hotzenplotz]

I am sorry to spoil this, but: the differences between old and new Rickenbackers are well known, more or less.

But the original question was if the actual 330 are "ok". They are - much more than that!

E.g.: RIC uses modern CNC technologies for perfect measures, they use one of the world's best machine heads (Schaller), IIRC jingle-jangle said since spring 2010 the new varnish is "bullet proof", the finish can be polished like a normal modern car, the frets are very durable and right size, the truss rods are easy to adjust (the old ones before 1984 certainly not). Also it is very easy to find original and fitting spare parts and the 330 are equipped with strap lock screws as a standard. - And a few things more.

There is only one thing with the actual Rickenbackers that is definitively bad: the look and the quality of the actual TRCs. Sorry, but in my eyes they look very cheap and rough made: the tone of the colour and the surface does not fit to the scratch plates at all. But this a fault you can not hear while playing (maybe some here do...).
That was the reason for changing the complete plastic thing (incl. TRC) into a backside gold painted version.

And I wonder how my Rickenbacker 330 will sound when it is 30 years or older. Maybe the aging and use of the wood provides the same chime and sound people just claim for the ones that are already "vintage" in these days.

Ahh! One more thing why a new Rickenbacker is more than o.k.: It is unused and offers a full warranty for the next years! That was a very important reason for me to buy a new one, too.

[Ivan3000]

There is no such thing as a Chinese Rickenbacker, and All Ricks are top quality.

[rkbsound]

There is no such thing as a Chinese Rickenbacker, and All Ricks are top quality.

Somewhere, someone is trying to write a blues song about discovering that their "Rickenbacker" was made in China and that it won't jangle.

[Hotzenplotz]

Well, that really gives one the blues.

A few years ago there was a song by a lady called "Celis" (or similar) with a perfect line for that: ..."You trick me once, but You don't trick me twice..."

[iiipopes]

I have played old ones, new ones, in between ones. Over the years there are slight manufacturing differences in neck contour, and yes, there are those who say the acoustic properties of aged wood are better. For me, it's simply a preference as to what fits your hand and body better. Some of the necks over the years are a tad wider or narrower, or thicker or thinner, or more rounded or more flat, depending on the finishing that day. These are all preferences. Toasters (original 50's, original 60's, 12kohm, reissue), High Gains (original, transitional, button top, adjustible), HB-1 (varies over the years from @12kohm to current @15kohm) - all preferential as to shading of tone. Same with the rest of the components. They are all great instruments, because of the continuity and ongoing attention to QC.

Every person who owns a RIC instrument is partial to the particular instrument(s) he/she owns, because with these very slight differences of finish that complete the various models over the years, each can have an instrument that fits each person's playing, while maintaining the overall quality through the years.

[Hotzenplotz]

So we talk about taste, details and slight differences. - Certainly not about quality. There is no reason for any doubt.

[filoviola]

Well, thanks to all of you for the interesting replies. I now definetly have a clear idea about RICs quality. No doubt about that. I have found a '67 330 and I am working on the price right now but I guess it's out of budget. I'am eventually also a bit worried about how a 67 guitar can be easily setup, concerning tuning stability and trussrod adjustment...
I will get a 330 asap, no matter the year if the '67 is too expensive.
Ciao