Posted: Wed Apr 05, 2006 5:36 pm
I find it kind of funny that the SG gets so much reverence these days. Back when they were common, there were a couple well knowns that played them, but in general, nobody wanted one. This was before decent Japanese guitars hit the market and in those days you bought an SG or an EBO or EB3 bass if you couldn't afford anything better. For a while, I had a Les Paul Junior that was kind of like an early stripped-down SG with Les Paul inscribed on the TRC. I think I paid $125 for it when I was broke (which was most of the time while I was in the music business). These days, they sell used for a couple grand but they aren't any better than they were back then. My bass was a used EBO (at least until I had the fingerboard and body replaced and the wiring and pickups modded) because it was all I could afford.
I'm presently waiting for my fancy Rosewood Tele to arrive from California and hoping that it will sound as good as and have the tonal versatility and balls that my Ric 250 does. If it does, I'll be really happy with it. Go figure.....
I almost think that if Rickenbacker wanted to make a popular rock guitar they would need to introduce something which looks new and different (even if it has the same guts as other, current solid body models - which from what I can tell seem perfectly adequate). The 300 series guitars are "living history", classic Rickenbackers. The 600 series are advertised as being based on guitars from almost 60 years ago! I really don't think that JH and crew spend most of their time looking backward, but I do believe that among the ranks of potential future customers, who don't know Rics on an intimate basis, that perception is very common. Once in a while, when somebody says "Hey, have you seen that new Ric?" it might be nice if it really was something new, rather than a re-issue. Having owned a 360, a 650 and a 250 I find it hard to believe that people pidgeon-hole their sounds into such narrow categories. Whenever I read something like that, it makes me wonder whether the author has ever actually played one for any length of time? But I think you're going to have to break the mold to to change the public perception.
I'm presently waiting for my fancy Rosewood Tele to arrive from California and hoping that it will sound as good as and have the tonal versatility and balls that my Ric 250 does. If it does, I'll be really happy with it. Go figure.....
I almost think that if Rickenbacker wanted to make a popular rock guitar they would need to introduce something which looks new and different (even if it has the same guts as other, current solid body models - which from what I can tell seem perfectly adequate). The 300 series guitars are "living history", classic Rickenbackers. The 600 series are advertised as being based on guitars from almost 60 years ago! I really don't think that JH and crew spend most of their time looking backward, but I do believe that among the ranks of potential future customers, who don't know Rics on an intimate basis, that perception is very common. Once in a while, when somebody says "Hey, have you seen that new Ric?" it might be nice if it really was something new, rather than a re-issue. Having owned a 360, a 650 and a 250 I find it hard to believe that people pidgeon-hole their sounds into such narrow categories. Whenever I read something like that, it makes me wonder whether the author has ever actually played one for any length of time? But I think you're going to have to break the mold to to change the public perception.
I'd love to hear that, mainly to see if the Ric humbuckers have the required "crunch" to pull off something like that. I used to be able to play a lot of Metallica stuff, then switched to bass and now sound like a complete tool when playing my guitarist's guitar at band practice.