Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

Thanks for the update, Simon! How does the guitar sound with the new strings?

Folkie wrote:If you do restring this weekend, please let us know how the C63 sounds with the new strings.
Robert

Here are some initial impressions about the sound. OK so I now have new or new-ish TI flats on both my 12-stringers so that's no longer a distinguishing factor. One difference (and maybe not a huge one) is that I currently have 12K toasters on my 2002 360/12. I've had the 7.4K scatterwounds on it for the longest time too so I'm very familiar with that sound too. To be honest, I don't find that there is a huge difference between these two pickups (the 12Ks are a little bit louder and fuller).

What I did find is that the initial differences I noticed are still there. Without plugging the guitars in, the c63 sounds more 'acoustic' and notes have a sharper initial attack, but the note decays faster. Play a chord on it and it really rings out in your face! The body on the c63 is noticeably more resonant than my '02. In comparison, the '02 feels very solid and inert - more like a solid body guitar and notes don't attack you in quite the same way as the c63. Plugged in, there is less difference but it's still there. The '02 has better sustain on the notes which is great for songs like Mr. Tambourine Man and Turn! Turn! Turn! In a way, it sounds 'smoother' but that isn't quite the right word either. The c63 still has that sharp attack ('snap' as I noted in my early post) - think guitar solo on the song I Should Have Known Better. I think you can hear the body of the c63 in the notes too - a little natural reverb. You can certainly feel the resonance against your body. I'm surprised that there are such obvious differences. The neck pickup on the c63 sounds quite different too - I guess since it's higher up the body (I'm not sure if the neck PU has the shorter poles or was that just for the John Lennon model?). I haven't quite figured that one out yet.

I'd be really interested to hear others' experiences. I'll post an update if my opinion changes with experience.

Folkie wrote:Thanks for the update, Simon! How does the guitar sound with the new strings?

Hi Robert,

Sorry - I was taking a long time writing that follow up post and work kept interfering while I was doing it.
You had mentioned before that you played a c63 at Sam Ash. Did you notice any differences in sound? All the differences I mention are subtle - it's not like going from a 360/12 to a Les Paul!

Thanks, Simon

stsang wrote:

Folkie wrote:Thanks for the update, Simon! How does the guitar sound with the new strings?

Hi Robert,

Sorry - I was taking a long time writing that follow up post and work kept interfering while I was doing it.
You had mentioned before that you played a c63 at Sam Ash. Did you notice any differences in sound? All the differences I mention are subtle - it's not like going from a 360/12 to a Les Paul!

Thanks, Simon

Great question, Simon, although it's a little difficult for me to answer, as I never did an A/B comparison between my 360 and the C63 at Sam Ash. I can tell you quite certainly that there were differences in weight, neck shape, and feel, but, without directly comparing the two, I'm not sure how to describe the difference in tone. I think you have a real rationale for owning both, as they clearly have different tones and different vibes. As I said, I'll have to see if that C63 is still on the wall at Sam Ash, so I can give it another test run.

Just came across this 9-year old thread in the RRF archives that asks the question how close is the c63 to George Harrison's: viewtopic.php?f=106&t=22074. There are some good quotes here:

Beatlesgear wrote: A 360 that is a few serial numbers away from George's was used as a guide, plus a ton of technical data that has been collected over many years. A very small number of guitars like this were produced during this specific time frame.

The 360/12C63 isn't a signature series model, George didn't provide his guitar to the factory. Other than Alan Rogan (his tech) and George's family, I'm not sure anyone else has had what you would call exclusive access to the guitar for more than just a few minutes.

I guess what it comes down to is when was the last time you played George's guitar for comparison, lol? At the moment, the 360/12C63 prototype is the closest reproduction ever built. I'm pretty sure the only thing being re-used from the V series on this guitar are the knobs and strap buttons, everthing else is a new. Since the specs of the body, neck, fingerboard, headstock, etc. are completely different than the V64, pre-existing V64 tooling doesn't even come into play as far as I know.

johnhall wrote: The "tooling" for the head, body, neck, fingerboard, etc. exists only in software geometry. None of the existing V geometry has been utilized or referenced in the C Series, everything being newly digitized. As Nick stated, the reference for this has been a borrowed guitar only a few numbers different than George's. The digital representation is accurate to about 0.2 mm plus or minus.

So this would lead me to believe that even the 360/12V64 is 'quite' different from the 360/12c63 though I doubt a non-enthusiast could easily tell the difference.

stsang wrote:The neck pickup on the c63 sounds quite different too - I guess since it's higher up the body (I'm not sure if the neck PU has the shorter poles or was that just for the John Lennon model?). I haven't quite figured that one out yet.

Just a follow up - the neck pickup does indeed have shorter pole pieces. They are so short that they don't extend into the body cavity at all - it actually looks like the pole pieces are flush with the bottom of the PU. So the neck PU is not the same as the now standard scatterwound 7.4K pickup that (I think) is in the bridge position. That would explain its tone - very warm but clean sounding. Blends very nicely with the bridge PU too. Rickenbacker really went all out to make this as close as possible to George Harrison's 1963 model!