Page 3 of 3
Re: Vintage Rics - Are they really that fragile?
Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2012 12:02 pm
by ilan
jdogric12 wrote:doctorwho wrote:To put this in perspective, remember that classical musicians play Stradivarius, Guarneri, and Amati instruments on stage ... if they were fragile after 300-400 years, they'd all be in museums (the instruments, not the musicians!

).

True, but the wildest orchestra show is still tamer than the tamest rock show!
True, but tell that to poor David Garret, who tripped and landed on his 300 years old Stradivarius, destroying it beyond repair. It was a magnificent instrument, insured for $5.5 million. I had the opportunity to hold it and look at it closely, about a year before the mishap.
mikko wrote:People often say that vintage instruments sound & play better. I agree, but why´s that? Why can´t the very same factory who made those great vintage instruments, anymore manufacture instruments as good as them? Or can they? (I´m not talking only about RIC but musical instrument manufacturers in general)
IME not true for Rics. Some of the best Rics I played were recent models.
Re: Vintage Rics - Are they really that fragile?
Posted: Sat Nov 03, 2012 6:35 am
by manta
And then there's the German-made cardboard Rickenbackers:
Pete Townshend Interview
"Townshend Talking"
From the April 1980 Issue of Sound International
Do you remember the first time you smashed a guitar?
PT: Beck was around. I think Roger first saw him when he was in a band called The Triads or The Tridents or something and he came back and said there was this incredible young guitar player. And Clapton was around and various other people who could really play and I was very frustrated because I couldn’t do all that flash stuff. So I just started getting into feedback and expressed myself physically. And it just led to when, one day, I was banging my guitar around making noises and I banged it on this ceiling in this club and the neck broke off, because Rickenbackers are made out of cardboard. And everybody started to laugh and they went, ‘Hah, that’ll teach you to be flash.’ So I thought what I was going to do, and I had no other recourse but to make it look like I had meant to do it. So I smashed this guitar and jumped all over the bits and then picked up the 12-tring and carried on as though nothing had happened. And the next day the place was packed. It turned into another form of expression for me: it was a gimmick of course.
AND
How did you happen to choose a Rickenbacker?
PT: I liked the look of it, I think because The Beatles were using them. They picked theirs up in Germany, they were real German ones.
Re: Vintage Rics - Are they really that fragile?
Posted: Sun Nov 04, 2012 11:41 am
by Blackstar
I won't gig with my walnut '76 4001 because it's too precious to me - bought as a teen with paper route money (and the walnut finish cost me an extra $10). I will gig with my '89 Blackstar even though it's worth more than the 4001.
Re: Vintage Rics - Are they really that fragile?
Posted: Sun Nov 04, 2012 12:26 pm
by pag
Any older guitars can have issues of fragility but I wouldnt generalise and say all vintage Ricks are fragile.
When I got my CS in 1991 it gave me the opportunity to leave my RM
at home still get a great classic Rick sound and not worry about damaging a rare bird by banging into low ceilings
or mic stands etc.
I still have a little ding in the end of the CS headstock from one of its first gigs at a club with a low ceiling so its as well Ileft the RM at home that night.
(looking at the photo I havent learned my lesson yet!)
I never leave a guitar on a stand when not onstage myself and I would urge anyone with a great guitar or a vintage one to do the same.
The RM below (DA24) had no real issues except for a bit of a crack in the fretboard/neck at the headstock
but I fixed that by bleeding Superglue into the crack and the neck was always as straight as a die.
I have had 3 RMs and apart from the ex-John Lodge one that had a bent headstock before I bought it the other two were as tough as nails.
I was in a new wave/punk band in 79 using DH163 (Gibb Bass)and I used to bend the neck on parts of a couple of songs to do a bit of
extreme vibrato basically just showing off!
Mr.Hall got it in one...its down to rarity and if you have another bass very similar but replacable if lost or damaged it makes sense to use that one
for some gigs.
Listening to Mark Walkers A/B demo of a 1968 and a recent Rick that sound really similar shows that modern Ricks still have it.
I still think theres a market for real replica vintage 4001 basses though.
Old Ricks are ok to gig with and they should be played regularly but I know where people are coming from if they decide to leave them at home.
Re: Vintage Rics - Are they really that fragile?
Posted: Sun Nov 04, 2012 4:16 pm
by bartyclue
Couldnt resist sharing this pic from a halloween. Me playing my vintage baby.
Re: Vintage Rics - Are they really that fragile?
Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2012 7:29 pm
by teeder
Cool picture!
Re: Vintage Rics - Are they really that fragile?
Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2012 9:05 pm
by walker
Yeah, Brian. Nice shot! A couple of great CS basses there. Nice mojo on yours, Pete! Easily recognizable as your "live bass."
Re: Vintage Rics - Are they really that fragile?
Posted: Wed Nov 07, 2012 12:58 am
by doctorwho
Re: Vintage Rics - Are they really that fragile?
Posted: Fri Nov 09, 2012 7:21 pm
by felig
If a vintage bass is still playable after 40+ years, then it's durable. The string tension is the most demanding thing your bass will have to endure over time. I've got a 70s era neck-through Epiphone whose neck snapped in the through the body portion between the two pickups...that's fragile. Otherwise, you can bust anything, even a Steinberger, but that doesn't equate to fragile.
Re: Vintage Rics - Are they really that fragile?
Posted: Fri Nov 09, 2012 7:34 pm
by Seans
Wow, 2nd post in 7 years Fred, good post though

.
Re: Vintage Rics - Are they really that fragile?
Posted: Fri Nov 09, 2012 9:11 pm
by felig
Thanks--man, those seven years went by quickly! I plan to be more active here, nice forum.
Re: Vintage Rics - Are they really that fragile?
Posted: Fri Nov 09, 2012 9:27 pm
by jps
felig wrote:Thanks--man, those seven years went by quickly! I plan to be more active here, nice forum.
Welcome, Fred, as late as it may be!

Re: Vintage Rics - Are they really that fragile?
Posted: Fri Nov 09, 2012 9:30 pm
by BAD RONBO, KiLLeR DWaRfS
i had no problem gigging with all my different year ricks in standard tuning...but that last band really made it difficult with the step down tuning. and with how strongly i played with that band, i had to go to 110-50 strings to keep the tension up. drop "D" was a challenge which was actually low c# ,so since at this point they were my '64 and '68, i decided to retire them and get other firewood to burn on. since "my" retirement from said band, my ricks are in happy standard tuning and back with 105-45 since 1990.
Re: Vintage Rics - Are they really that fragile?
Posted: Fri Nov 09, 2012 10:48 pm
by walker
I hear you on the deep subs, Ronbo. Those Ricks can take the low tunings like a champ. There's a song in which I tune my E string (anywhere from 100 to 105 gauge) all the way down to B♭ and it rings true with no problem.
'The Seduction' bass iso