Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

stsang wrote:Tommy, before making any conclusions, make sure that you are using the same string gauges for comparison.

Thanks. Yeah, I'll have to check what was on before the switch to Pyramids.
I do know that since the Pyramids the action has increased a bit. I replaced the saddle and shaved the new one down a bit.

This is the guitar in question -- an Epiphpne John Lennon EJ-160. The only reason I went with the Pyramids is to get that classic Beatle tone which the Pyramids do deliver. I like the Pyramids' sound but I didn't know they might be tugging at the neck more than other strings.

How did You change the strings? I hope one after the other, keeping the other strings in tension.

Tommy wrote:I do know that since the Pyramids the action has increased a bit. I replaced the saddle and shaved the new one down a bit.
This is the guitar in question -- an Epiphpne John Lennon EJ-160. The only reason I went with the Pyramids is to get that classic Beatle tone which the Pyramids do deliver. I like the Pyramids' sound but I didn't know they might be tugging at the neck more than other strings.

Lovely guitar - be kind to her!

One string replaced at a time. Yes, I agree, tension should be maintained. My understanding, though, of a potential result of removing all strings is an eventual possibility of a popped fretboard. Nothing like that is apparent. In fact, other than that wee separation at the neck joint, the guitar is near mint. Great player.

Is it possible to see a close up picture of the cracked paint?

Btw. the dear Mr. Lennon is not a good example how to treat an instrument right. As I read in this forum a lot of his instruments had to suffer.

Hotzenplotz wrote:Is it possible to see a close up picture of the cracked paint?

Btw. the dear Mr. Lennon is not a good example how to treat an instrument right. As I read in this forum a lot of his instruments had to suffer.

It seems to me that a lot of people back in the day didn't treat their instruments as well as they should have.

elisha wiesner wrote:
It seems to me that a lot of people back in the day didn't treat their instruments as well as they should have.

And a lot of these instruments a are looking like - if they'd survived.


For a damage it was not necessary to stick it into the amp the way Pete Townshend did. Strings with high tension could do a destroying job, as well.
But before a close look at the fissure I do not want to bet on it.

I'll post a photo of the separation ASAP, but will have to wait until the end of the week/weekend. Hopefully, I can get close enough with my camera to produce a worthwhile image.

After another long day at the office, it's nice to come home to a Rickenbacker or few....

Hotzenplotz wrote:

elisha wiesner wrote:
It seems to me that a lot of people back in the day didn't treat their instruments as well as they should have.

And a lot of these instruments a are looking like - if they'd survived.

I'm actually amazed at how beat up some old guitars are. I play a lot of shows and don't always treat my guitars as well as maybe I should but I just can't fathom how it's even possible, outside of smashing it into an amp, to have a guitar in the kind of condition that I often see on ebay etc...

DoubleThink wrote:
After another long day at the office, it's nice to come home to a Rickenbacker or few....

So we had a very similar day, same happy end (with one Rickenbacker).

Enjoy!

elisha wiesner wrote: I'm actually amazed at how beat up some old guitars are. I play a lot of shows and don't always treat my guitars as well as maybe I should but I just can't fathom how it's even possible, outside of smashing it into an amp, to have a guitar in the kind of condition that I often see on ebay etc...

+1!!!

Here are phtos of what I've described in this thread. Apologies for the image quality.

In this image of the rear of the guitar, you will notice a lifting of the clear-coat along the binding, towards the left-hand side of the yellow oval. Also, there is a fine, dark line which extends along the white binding at the neck heel. This is the separation which most recently became apparent. Unfortunately, with my current photo gear, I cannot provide more detailed macro images ... unless I switch over to good, old-fashioned 35mm film....
In this image, from the perspective of the upper horn, you will notice the separation of the finish where the neck and body meet. There is no such separation at the neck/body joint by the lower horn.

None of this renders the guitar unplayable. In fact, for a player's guitar, the issue is relatively insignificant. The guitar continues to retain her tuning perfectly and she sings like a angel. It was a surprising and disturbing discovery, however.

Stephan - thanks for posting those photos. Is the crack on both sides of the neck or just one?

Your post prompted to check my 2002 360/12 and to my surprise I see what appears to be a crack in the neck joint that has been filled and sealed. The crack is only on the High E side of the neck. Strangely, the guitar plays a little easier like this with the fingerboard raised a little on the high E side. I wonder if the previous owner did this on purpose?

stsang wrote: Crack in neck joint filled and sealed?

Looks like glue creped form the joint. Photos can be deceiving though.

ken_j wrote:

stsang wrote: Crack in neck joint filled and sealed?

Looks like glue creped form the joint. Photos can be deceiving though.

Ken,

Thanks much for taking a look. (BTW, I don't mean to hijack this thread, so if I should post elsewhere, let me know)
Here's another photo I took a while ago that also has some information: The upper oval shows where it looks like the fretboard has separated a little from the body. The separation carries on a little further up the fretboard (another 5mm or so).
The lower oval shows excess glue in the neck pickup well.

It looks like something happened - either at the factory or after that. The guitar plays perfectly so I'm more curious than anything else.

All comments are welcome!