New 12 String Headstock Design

xcoyle · Post by **xcoyle** » Fri Jan 21, 2005 5:03 pm

Ok, lets put it to the test. It's 2007 (novelty has worn off), your on Ebay and you have a choice of buying a 2004 360/12 (old style) or a 2005 (new style) all other things being equal, which would you choose?

Second question, if you fall in the "old style" camp, what would be the $ breaking point?

jingle_jangle · Post by **jingle_jangle** » Fri Jan 21, 2005 5:46 pm

You've somehow got it in your mind that the "old" style will be preferred for some real reason. It won't, except for the reason that it's discontinued.

So what?

Assigning imaginary or arbitrary values to old and new won't prove a thing. New and old are apples and oranges, IMO, unless we want to compare arbitrary features over a pint. Futile.

johnhall · Post by **johnhall** » Fri Jan 21, 2005 6:35 pm

This feature is almost invisible. Almost no visitor in our NAMM booth has spotted this change on their own. We've even shown it to knowledgeable people saying there's something new and even then they have a hard time seeing the difference.

Actually, the effect of headstock weight is really noticeable even down there in the ounce range and the difference in sustain can be heard as well. Kenny Howes and I have been using one of these in the studio for months now and we love the difference.

xcoyle · Post by **xcoyle** » Fri Jan 21, 2005 8:01 pm

My view is very skewed, half my Rics are vintage reissue and the other half actual vintage. I'm wearing a J. Peterman shirt, change comes slowly for me.

jingle_jangle · Post by **jingle_jangle** » Fri Jan 21, 2005 8:14 pm

And when was the shirt last laundered? (Is it true vintage or reissue?)

johnashfield · Post by **johnashfield** » Fri Jan 21, 2005 8:17 pm

I so want a blueburst 360/12 with the new headstock!

jwilli · Post by **jwilli** » Sat Jan 22, 2005 5:49 am

Now that the headstock has been perfected maybe RIC can work on making all RICs guitars 21 frets........even the 650 Series. Thank you.

longhouse · Post by **longhouse** » Sat Jan 22, 2005 6:54 am

It may be time for me to have another Ric 12. 360 or 370 in blueburst. I do love my Phantom Teardrop 12 though... My savings account just trembled.

brian · Post by **brian** » Sat Jan 22, 2005 9:53 am

I guess one thing for those to consider who want to order a Twelve string with the new headstock is when to order. It states on the Ric website "This design will be slowly phased into production on all non reissue 12 string models over an unspecified period of time". So I guess you would have to wait until you see one in the dealers if you were placing an order and not buying an in stock instrument.
I do like the COY but would have to decide which model and if I want another Ric 12 with the new headstock.

jwilli · Post by **jwilli** » Sat Jan 22, 2005 10:27 am

Hmmm, maybe a Blueburst 350/12V63. (that extra set of Black guards should come in handy.....)

jingle_jangle · Post by **jingle_jangle** » Sat Jan 22, 2005 10:40 am

I think Blueburst would look incredible with silver guards.

dale_fortune · Post by **dale_fortune** » Sun Jan 23, 2005 6:40 am

In 1974 I built a custom 330/12 WBBS (that's what we called them back then) same as 360/12 WBBS.It had an Ebony F.B. and dot inlays, pretty much like all other Ricks except I cut the peg head slots completely thru for ease of string changing. Dick Burke loved the idea, even said they had already considered it in the 60's but weren't going to change production, didn't want to take away any strength from the peg head. On it's own it's fine,
but if knocked over on a hard surface, tests showed that it could break or crack the Maple. Well that custom 330/12 WBBS serial# NJ 6505 of November 5th 1974 was stolen in 1982 along with a 1953 Telecasterfrom my Guitar Shop in Tustin Calif. It would be pretty easy to indentify with it's Brown Finish/Ebony F.B./and Peg Head Slots, a one of a kind for that era. So an old idea has come full circle to be a new idea, I like that.

tony_carey · Post by **tony_carey** » Mon Jan 24, 2005 12:47 pm

I like the new design, but it wouldn't sway me one way or the other. I think that it demonstrates Rickenbackers commitment to improvement, but I wouldn't imagine that anyone has refused to buy a Ric 12 on the strength that they are awkward to tune. Having said that, I wouldn't think for one moment that that was the intention.
It is very much in keeping though, that a NEW modification like this, should be so retro. It is just the sort of lateral brilliance that we should expect from JH & our beloved Rickenbacker.

johnhall · Post by **johnhall** » Mon Jan 24, 2005 6:52 pm

As Dale said, we tested this in the 60's originally but the design was pretty ingrained at that point. (That's also why this design isn't available on any of the vintage reissue models either.)

The guitar that was at the show is actually the one from my studio that Kenny and I have kicked around for many months just to see if we could break it or find some other problem. We wouldn't have done it if there was any more damage likely and we certainly didn't succeed in breaking it.

scoobster28 · Post by **scoobster28** » Tue Jan 25, 2005 5:51 am

How do I get a job working for Rickenbacker where I get to "test" guitars for structural strength and such. That sounds like it would be a great occupation...except destroying one would really break my heart!