Why was the 200 Series not more popular?

admin · Post by **admin** » Wed Nov 15, 2000 9:18 am

I may be mistaken but I feel that the 200 Series was not as successful as Rickenbacker would have predicted based on the research they conducted and the efforts they went to in producing this line. I am interested views of why the Series was not more successful. My perception is that RIC guitars have been stereotyped as being the "jangly one" and many guitarists are not aware of their versatility. Here is an example of the fine looking headstock on the 2050 El Dorado.

markthemd · Post by **markthemd** » Wed Nov 15, 2000 9:55 am

Balance,weight,marketing and sound will all play a big part in what sells.

Then there is that person who finds that it does the job for them and the general public see that and they then run with it.

If John Lennon had picked a 330 instead of a 325...I'll bet the 325 would have been a discontinued model long ago.

The basses were winners due to limited marketing of USA made product in the UK and by default (almost) the Rickenbackers won out over the Euro product.

McCartney ,even in studio photos,made the 'endorsement' and Chris Squire said "hey! nice bass " and took it to the bank.
Geddy Lee loved the tone Chris got and he ran with it.Even with his modifications it sold a ot of product.
Since the 1980's ended...who is a BIG Rick player in the new crowd?

I for one am not seeing anyone .And this group of youth is (seemingly) not interested in fretted musical instruments like my generation is/was.

Geezer rock will only last so long and then what?

One other comment on the 2000 series basses was the cutaways and neck joint.To my eyes they were poorly conceived and not as pleasing to the eye as the 4000 series.

Rob_Farrell · Post by **Rob_Farrell** » Wed Nov 15, 2000 10:05 pm

There are alot of bassists using Rickenbackers in the local music scenes in New Jersey and New York in the USA. (I'm one of them..)

I don't want MTV or M2 all too often, but when I do turn it on, I don't see any of these newer bands that are signed to major labels playing Rickenbacker basses.

There are a handful of bands using Ric guitars, cali punk rockers "Suicide Machines", Hootie n the blowfish, The Insomniacs (Estrus Records), and Oasis to name a few.

Maybe Rickenbacker should take a proactive stance on finding NEW artists to give signature series to, rather than keep making ltd. editions of musicians who are already proven. If kids see some hot new band, and the bassist or guitarist is using a Ric - then they'll want one. So - to give some newly signed band's bassist 2 or 3 4001 or 4003 basses could mean a sharp increase in sales.

I wanted a Ric in high school because all of my guitar heroes played them: The Beatles, Who, REM, Smiths, The Jam, and (local boys) The Smithereens.

and to stay on topic - why the 200 series was "not so popular" - they were ugly. The instruments were not pleasing to the eye. The same could be said about the 480 series, but I would rather have a 480 than a 200 new off the production line any day of the week. Maybe it was the choices of colors and hardware... they were crafted well enough. And maybe because the "kids" didn't see one on MTV. Maybe they should have given a few out to... oh... Korn and made a 7-string version or something *heh*.

Ok - that's all from me.

-Rob

markthemd · Post by **markthemd** » Wed Nov 15, 2000 11:54 pm

I want to say this about the 480 guitar...

It was a good idea to have a guitar that used the 4001 bass shape ,but the guitar itself just didn't make it.
It was not classic sounding and it had no guts ,so in a time when guts was the thing...it layed like a dead fish on the shore.

It could/should have been better.

I would love to see something like it redone and make another stab at it.

admin · Post by **admin** » Thu Nov 16, 2000 3:17 am

I would like to hear from those people who have had the chance to play either a 200 series guitar or 2000 series bass. It would seem that they lacked aesthetics in the eyes of some but having seen on played by Joe Walsh as a slide I was taken by the great sound and his decision to use the instrument, albeit a 250 Glen Frey. Perhaps you are correct Mark, here I am interested because I saw a star with one.

admin · Post by **admin** » Thu Nov 16, 2000 3:30 am

While we are on the subject of the Model 250, here is a photo from the Official Rickenbacker Site of Glenn Frey with his Limited Edition.

milo · Post by **milo** » Thu Nov 16, 2000 8:21 pm

I think part of the reason that the 200 series (and before it the 430) is not very popular is twofold. Rickenbacker is known for high quality semi-hollow bodies with a unique sound and has had very little competition in this market, especially in recent years. Because of this, I think that the solid bodies (which have huge amounts of cheap and expensive competition) are probably perceived by most as entry level or student type guitars.

sir_andrew_of_left_coast · Tue Nov 21, 2000 10:37 am

I saw your post in the other category, inviting me to "jump in" this discussion. So, here I am, folks... the guy with a 260 El Dorado.

admin · Post by **admin** » Tue Nov 21, 2000 5:37 pm

Thanks Andrew. As you mentioned in your comments a production period spanning 30 years is a success. Your photos are great and I agree that the 260 you have is nice looking.

ric480 · Post by **ric480** » Thu Nov 30, 2000 3:52 pm

I've owned two model 480's - a 1973 that was stolen in 1981 and a 1981 that is my only guitar today. Time has dulled my memory of the 1973 but I believe I was happier with the 1981 version when I got it. The playability of this guitar can't be beat (imho) and although it may not have "guts" or a "classic sound" it certainly sounds unlike the most popular Fender/Gibsons most players prefer. I just had to be different and my 480 makes that statement loud and clear. Just my $.02.