The 650 Series
Moderators: rickenbrother, ajish4
This excellent post was read today on alt.guitar.rickenbacker
Hello all,
But especially those people considering buying a 650 (Dakota, Sierra, etc.). I am a new Ric 650 Dakota owner, and to some degree, opinion/info posts like this one helped sway me towards that purchase.I know it's essential to some, because in many places, you simply cannot run to the store and test drive these Rics; you'll have to mailorder, which is why you read all you can then gamble. I'm glad I did it, the 650 is a fine guitar. So, my take, the scoop:
I sought a well-made American guitar, something relatively unique but a good value, and a bright guitar though not like the ubiquitous Strat sound. I play electric blues, and blues-based rock, essentially.
I have always been a Gibson player (far beyond a decade), primarily the SG and more recently a Les Paul. For starters, if you swear by these fine guitars, than the Ric 650 is a very smooth
"transition" into the Rickenbacker world. I wanted that, a different type of tone, but not necessarily such a radical change in playability and feel as might occur with other Rics. I previously examined some Rics to try (360, 325), and those guitars felt just a little too foreign an environment for me to get comfortable with. (Having said that, though, I believe that after a 650, those guitars will eventually seem more familiar to me.) The 650 bascially bridges Rics with the usual Gibson rock gig.
In some ways, the Ric 650 could be a polite custom hybrid of the Les Paul and SG. The Les Paul has wicked teeth on top and bottom, no doubt, but its primary drawbacks are its inferior neck lead playability past the 12th fret (E scale position) and its unaccomodating bulk. The neck itself, wide and fat, is fantastic (if you dig that for rock lead), but it's too damn short. The SG is awesome in this regard, giving uninhibited access to all 22 frets, and sporting a slim body that melts into you. The SG has its own distinctly thinner (brighter, hotter) tone however, and is to some people very "neck-heavy" and long. The Ric 650 has the wide neck, that Les Paul wide-fat feel, but also an SG's total access to the last note on the neck (plus two extra; 24 frets, but I've yet to figure out what to do with them). In addition, the 650 body is TINY, and extremely slim. The 650, though, doesn't necessarily feel so neck-heavy, perhaps because the whole neck runs all the way through the butt end of the body. It is, however, basically as much an arm stretch as the SG. And, the thickness of the neck is actually MORE a grab than a Les Paul. It can be straining for heavy barre chording on smaller hands, feeling like a baseball bat after a while.
We're talking about stock guitars here; pickups change the variables, obviously... The Ric 650 comes with a bridge humbucker, and a neck humbucker, Les Paul-like, with the same controls; 3-way switch, tone and volume pot for each. The SG is bright, but growls, not piercing and sharp like a Strat. The Les Paul is thick and full, occasionally tripping over itself into muddiness. The Ric 650 is sort of a cross between those two sounds. It doesn't have that "sparkle" chime I've heard from some Rics, but instead has a very warm growl, not too sharp, not too muddled, somehow making distinct all the mid range sounds. With a Les Paul, I can push the limits of the pickups with crunch/overdrive effects to a point where a chord so heavily distorts, you can't distinctly hear each note (mostly the high ones). The Ric 650, regardless of what extreme distortions I attempted to run it through, always maintained its "composure," so that you can hear each note very clearly in nearly any chord. As well, it hardly hisses, zips, crackles, and clicks when using such heavy distortion during lead work. This makes a Ric 650 very ideal for heavy rock with complex chords containing high notes; the notes all ring out with distinction, yet still seem weighty with thickness and heaviness(unlike, say a Strat).
Unfortunately, for lead-- balls out rock lead with all the speedy cliches, and go bananas blues/Hendrix wrapping the strings around the
neck-- the tension on the 650 seems so tight. (Perhaps a swap to lighter .008-strings is all that's needed, I don't know yet, but I'm going to try, because stock, it's too tight.) Plus, the baseball bat neck width makes you work harder to wrestle out a lead-- it's like the neck is fighting your efforts to strangle it while squeezing out rock chops-- it doesn't seem to like it, though it can be done.(Unlike, say, a Strat, where you can manhandle the neck like a toothpick, and literally pull the strings clear off the neck at will.) The SG has the perfect neck, here. I say so, because it's damn near the ultimate lead/rhythm electric in my opinion, and doesn't always reveal the impression that it can't decide whether or not it wants to do lead or rhythm, whereas the Ric 650 seems torn between the two duties.
Little things: My factory set-up was on the mark for me; just low enough action to escape fret buzzing. The natural oil finish and workmanship are simply superb. Now, that's one thing very special about a Rickenbacker, I've learned. For $650-700 you can buy an American made guitar, with excellent fit and finish, gorgeous materials, a unique sound and body design (neck-through), double truss rods, a case... huh? I love Gibsons, die-hard, but you cannot compare
the value against a Ric. I bought a Les Paul, and forget about much it cost, because I'll jump off a bridge, and the fit and finish was just very good (i.e., NOT SUPERB), the intonation and action still giving me funky voodoo... buy a basic SG for the same money as a Ric 650, and you'll get a freaking "gig bag." Huh?!! Nevermind, because if you're used to Rics, I'll just get teased, and if you're used to Gibsons, you'll be astonished. So, see for yourself. Guitars all play differently, of course, but if you're mail-ordering a Ric, so long as it comes as it did from the factory, I'd doubt it's necessary to lose sleep over whether or not you're getting a lemon. In contrast, in the case of a Gibson, a Les Paul in particular, you MUST examine it and play it first (i.e., some are just garbage, which for the price Gibson demands, is inexcusable). And, I did. No question, the Ric is my finest guitar of half a dozen quality brands, and it's supposed to be a BUDGET, low-end Rickenbacker.
Random thoughts: Strumming over the pickups is like playing over a canyon. No doubt, this is a part of the unique tone... there's a lot of space for those vibrations to mingle over the pickups, which are raised off of the body. The fretboard is raised off the body relatively high, seemingly like a cliff, not in line with the pickups and body as with so many electrics. I've seen this in an old 1976 Flying V, and not usually since. The humbuckers' magnet screws are also covered by some black material, making the pickup itself an all or nothing raising/lowering affair. How much this affects the sound, I don't know. I like it stock, perhaps because I'm so accustomed to a common sound from my Gibsons; it's warm and polite, yet most definitely rocks. The bridge and saddles have all the relevant adjusters, of course (intonation to and fro, double raising/lowering), easily accessed. Unlike a tune-o-matic bridge, the strings rest on little wheels, VERY cool-- a sharp or worn tune-o-matic saddle will occasionally cut a string and break it during heavy lead freak outs. A standard Strat saddle will sometimes get the string stuck in a funky position with some sweat/gunk from palm-heeling, and rudely pop back during vibrato dive-bombing or strumming. The 650 frets are nice and fat....
As this is long, I'll leave now, but hopefully, this will be of some useful reference to somebody thinking of trying out a Ric 650. I'm very pleased with it, so far. It's just enough of the "old school" rock solid-body electric guitar, and plenty of the funky Rickenbacker thing, in style, sound, and build. It definitely makes me want to explore the more traditional Rics further in the future. The value for its quality cannot be beat-- this still utterly amazes me, doing a
head-to-head examination between my Les Paul and the 650.
Cheers from a new Rickenbacker player,
Morten and Mingxing
Hello all,
But especially those people considering buying a 650 (Dakota, Sierra, etc.). I am a new Ric 650 Dakota owner, and to some degree, opinion/info posts like this one helped sway me towards that purchase.I know it's essential to some, because in many places, you simply cannot run to the store and test drive these Rics; you'll have to mailorder, which is why you read all you can then gamble. I'm glad I did it, the 650 is a fine guitar. So, my take, the scoop:
I sought a well-made American guitar, something relatively unique but a good value, and a bright guitar though not like the ubiquitous Strat sound. I play electric blues, and blues-based rock, essentially.
I have always been a Gibson player (far beyond a decade), primarily the SG and more recently a Les Paul. For starters, if you swear by these fine guitars, than the Ric 650 is a very smooth
"transition" into the Rickenbacker world. I wanted that, a different type of tone, but not necessarily such a radical change in playability and feel as might occur with other Rics. I previously examined some Rics to try (360, 325), and those guitars felt just a little too foreign an environment for me to get comfortable with. (Having said that, though, I believe that after a 650, those guitars will eventually seem more familiar to me.) The 650 bascially bridges Rics with the usual Gibson rock gig.
In some ways, the Ric 650 could be a polite custom hybrid of the Les Paul and SG. The Les Paul has wicked teeth on top and bottom, no doubt, but its primary drawbacks are its inferior neck lead playability past the 12th fret (E scale position) and its unaccomodating bulk. The neck itself, wide and fat, is fantastic (if you dig that for rock lead), but it's too damn short. The SG is awesome in this regard, giving uninhibited access to all 22 frets, and sporting a slim body that melts into you. The SG has its own distinctly thinner (brighter, hotter) tone however, and is to some people very "neck-heavy" and long. The Ric 650 has the wide neck, that Les Paul wide-fat feel, but also an SG's total access to the last note on the neck (plus two extra; 24 frets, but I've yet to figure out what to do with them). In addition, the 650 body is TINY, and extremely slim. The 650, though, doesn't necessarily feel so neck-heavy, perhaps because the whole neck runs all the way through the butt end of the body. It is, however, basically as much an arm stretch as the SG. And, the thickness of the neck is actually MORE a grab than a Les Paul. It can be straining for heavy barre chording on smaller hands, feeling like a baseball bat after a while.
We're talking about stock guitars here; pickups change the variables, obviously... The Ric 650 comes with a bridge humbucker, and a neck humbucker, Les Paul-like, with the same controls; 3-way switch, tone and volume pot for each. The SG is bright, but growls, not piercing and sharp like a Strat. The Les Paul is thick and full, occasionally tripping over itself into muddiness. The Ric 650 is sort of a cross between those two sounds. It doesn't have that "sparkle" chime I've heard from some Rics, but instead has a very warm growl, not too sharp, not too muddled, somehow making distinct all the mid range sounds. With a Les Paul, I can push the limits of the pickups with crunch/overdrive effects to a point where a chord so heavily distorts, you can't distinctly hear each note (mostly the high ones). The Ric 650, regardless of what extreme distortions I attempted to run it through, always maintained its "composure," so that you can hear each note very clearly in nearly any chord. As well, it hardly hisses, zips, crackles, and clicks when using such heavy distortion during lead work. This makes a Ric 650 very ideal for heavy rock with complex chords containing high notes; the notes all ring out with distinction, yet still seem weighty with thickness and heaviness(unlike, say a Strat).
Unfortunately, for lead-- balls out rock lead with all the speedy cliches, and go bananas blues/Hendrix wrapping the strings around the
neck-- the tension on the 650 seems so tight. (Perhaps a swap to lighter .008-strings is all that's needed, I don't know yet, but I'm going to try, because stock, it's too tight.) Plus, the baseball bat neck width makes you work harder to wrestle out a lead-- it's like the neck is fighting your efforts to strangle it while squeezing out rock chops-- it doesn't seem to like it, though it can be done.(Unlike, say, a Strat, where you can manhandle the neck like a toothpick, and literally pull the strings clear off the neck at will.) The SG has the perfect neck, here. I say so, because it's damn near the ultimate lead/rhythm electric in my opinion, and doesn't always reveal the impression that it can't decide whether or not it wants to do lead or rhythm, whereas the Ric 650 seems torn between the two duties.
Little things: My factory set-up was on the mark for me; just low enough action to escape fret buzzing. The natural oil finish and workmanship are simply superb. Now, that's one thing very special about a Rickenbacker, I've learned. For $650-700 you can buy an American made guitar, with excellent fit and finish, gorgeous materials, a unique sound and body design (neck-through), double truss rods, a case... huh? I love Gibsons, die-hard, but you cannot compare
the value against a Ric. I bought a Les Paul, and forget about much it cost, because I'll jump off a bridge, and the fit and finish was just very good (i.e., NOT SUPERB), the intonation and action still giving me funky voodoo... buy a basic SG for the same money as a Ric 650, and you'll get a freaking "gig bag." Huh?!! Nevermind, because if you're used to Rics, I'll just get teased, and if you're used to Gibsons, you'll be astonished. So, see for yourself. Guitars all play differently, of course, but if you're mail-ordering a Ric, so long as it comes as it did from the factory, I'd doubt it's necessary to lose sleep over whether or not you're getting a lemon. In contrast, in the case of a Gibson, a Les Paul in particular, you MUST examine it and play it first (i.e., some are just garbage, which for the price Gibson demands, is inexcusable). And, I did. No question, the Ric is my finest guitar of half a dozen quality brands, and it's supposed to be a BUDGET, low-end Rickenbacker.
Random thoughts: Strumming over the pickups is like playing over a canyon. No doubt, this is a part of the unique tone... there's a lot of space for those vibrations to mingle over the pickups, which are raised off of the body. The fretboard is raised off the body relatively high, seemingly like a cliff, not in line with the pickups and body as with so many electrics. I've seen this in an old 1976 Flying V, and not usually since. The humbuckers' magnet screws are also covered by some black material, making the pickup itself an all or nothing raising/lowering affair. How much this affects the sound, I don't know. I like it stock, perhaps because I'm so accustomed to a common sound from my Gibsons; it's warm and polite, yet most definitely rocks. The bridge and saddles have all the relevant adjusters, of course (intonation to and fro, double raising/lowering), easily accessed. Unlike a tune-o-matic bridge, the strings rest on little wheels, VERY cool-- a sharp or worn tune-o-matic saddle will occasionally cut a string and break it during heavy lead freak outs. A standard Strat saddle will sometimes get the string stuck in a funky position with some sweat/gunk from palm-heeling, and rudely pop back during vibrato dive-bombing or strumming. The 650 frets are nice and fat....
As this is long, I'll leave now, but hopefully, this will be of some useful reference to somebody thinking of trying out a Ric 650. I'm very pleased with it, so far. It's just enough of the "old school" rock solid-body electric guitar, and plenty of the funky Rickenbacker thing, in style, sound, and build. It definitely makes me want to explore the more traditional Rics further in the future. The value for its quality cannot be beat-- this still utterly amazes me, doing a
head-to-head examination between my Les Paul and the 650.
Cheers from a new Rickenbacker player,
Morten and Mingxing
Life, as with music, often requires one to let go of the melody and listen to the rhythm
Please join the Official RickResource Forum Facebook Page https://www.facebook.com/groups/379271585440277
Please join the Official RickResource Forum Facebook Page https://www.facebook.com/groups/379271585440277
This guy really brought it to the point! For myself I can say that I don't feel that the neck of my 650 Dakota is very thick (it's very, very wide but not thick, like a D-form somehow), on the lower frets it even is much too thin for my liking. Also I don't have problems with thicker strings. I tried 009s, and you could bend the high E-string to the other end where the low E lies, felt like rubber! I use 010s now, and bending is really easy, it felt never easier to me on a guitar that is equipped with 010s. So what are we gonna learn from this story? Guitar playing is a very personal thing.
Life, as with music, often requires one to let go of the melody and listen to the rhythm
Please join the Official RickResource Forum Facebook Page https://www.facebook.com/groups/379271585440277
Please join the Official RickResource Forum Facebook Page https://www.facebook.com/groups/379271585440277
Have a look at this Modified Model 650.
Life, as with music, often requires one to let go of the melody and listen to the rhythm
Please join the Official RickResource Forum Facebook Page https://www.facebook.com/groups/379271585440277
Please join the Official RickResource Forum Facebook Page https://www.facebook.com/groups/379271585440277
-
sir_andrew_of_left_coast
- Veteran RRF member
- Posts: 729
- Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2000 6:38 am
I've seen this before, and I don't know what is gained by this...
I think the RIC humbuckers are great.
Shaving the heel of the neck is unnecesary; access to the 24th fret is already quite easy.
The tuners work fine, although I know there has been a recent switch from Schaller to Gotoh.
To each his own...
I think the RIC humbuckers are great.
Shaving the heel of the neck is unnecesary; access to the 24th fret is already quite easy.
The tuners work fine, although I know there has been a recent switch from Schaller to Gotoh.
To each his own...
Member #03
Re: The 650 Series
I love love LOVE my 650 C!!! I was wanting a Ric guitar and of course the argument with myself raged on for months.. what finish , what style... new or used ,, you know , the same mental conversation I'm sure everyone on this forum has had with themselves at least once. after MUCH consideration , and breaking my own tendency to be an absolute purist, I decided on a JG 650C new , old stock and this is hands down the most versatile guitar I have ever laid hands on !!! I could go on for pages but I'll paraphrase here.. bridge pick up gets all the jangle you need , neck p/u is all the beef you could ever hope for and middle position is the absolute best of all worlds!!!if you have been tickling the notion on a 650 ...buy the next one you see!! I swear you will not be disappointed I think my poorTele has actually been crying because I barely even touch her anymore but hey , whatcha gonna do?RAS is a very serious circumstance!!!!!
but I do have one question .. is this the elusive "greyglo" I've heard of?? it was produced in mid 2007 about the era those have been known from right? and I don't have a regular Jetglo to compare it to ....
but I do have one question .. is this the elusive "greyglo" I've heard of?? it was produced in mid 2007 about the era those have been known from right? and I don't have a regular Jetglo to compare it to ....
- Attachments
-
- Hpim2424.jpg (7.83 KiB) Viewed 1690 times
♪♫♪♫I need new strings, these ones have a bunch of dang wrong notes on 'em ♫♪♫♪
http://www.reverbnation.com/#!/thesubtleties
http://www.reverbnation.com/#!/thesubtleties
-
electrofaro
- Senior Member
- Posts: 3611
- Joined: Sun Apr 26, 2009 3:25 pm
Re:
Ooh, firegloating :padmin wrote:There can be no doubt that the preferred colour of Rickenbacker enthusiasts is Fireglo. I agree that a Fireglo 650 would look great.
I'd been tracking a 650C "allblack" (would fit my rugby shirt!) before succumbing to Firegloating myself - it looks interesting combined with the light fretboard.
'67 Fender Coronado II CAB * '17 1963 ES-335 PB * currently rickless
Re: The 650 Series
What was that nine years ago about translucent colors? ...
-
electrofaro
- Senior Member
- Posts: 3611
- Joined: Sun Apr 26, 2009 3:25 pm
Re: The 650 Series
I think they were refering to basses having those translucents?nukebass wrote:What was that nine years ago about translucent colors? ...
I was rather noting the Schaller for Gotoh change someone mentioned - is/was that on 600-series?
'67 Fender Coronado II CAB * '17 1963 ES-335 PB * currently rickless
Re: The 650 Series
I think that post was referring to the 650c which, I believe, was only available in jetglo before '01?
-
electrofaro
- Senior Member
- Posts: 3611
- Joined: Sun Apr 26, 2009 3:25 pm
Re: The 650 Series
Well, C for Charcoal, as the one pictured above tends to go more towards Greyglo based on the picture - could be just photographic alteration of courseCouscous wrote:I think that post was referring to the 650c which, I believe, was only available in jetglo before '01?
'67 Fender Coronado II CAB * '17 1963 ES-335 PB * currently rickless
-
deaconblues
- RRF Consultant
- Posts: 2390
- Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 5:14 pm
Re: The 650 Series
That's still too black to be a Greyglo, IMO. I have an '07 325JG and can attest that the black that year was a bit "milky."