330 v. 360

rider · Post by **rider** » Thu May 29, 2003 3:05 pm

Which would you choose and why - a burgundy 330 at a 30% discount or a burgundy 350 VP VC at a 25% discount. I have owned a 330 before, and like the body shape better, but the VP's on the 360 push me in that direction.

newrider · Post by **newrider** » Sat May 31, 2003 2:26 am

Oh well. I ended up with the 360, on the way for next week.

admin · Post by **admin** » Sat May 31, 2003 2:41 am

Mark: You will be very pleased with your choice, I am sure. Welcome to The Rickenbacker Forum.

corey · Post by **corey** » Sat May 31, 2003 4:19 am

Mark: The Archives on this forum are also full of useful information to help you make educated and informed choices on all things Rickenbacker.

longhouse · Post by **longhouse** » Sat May 31, 2003 2:58 pm

Mark, in my approximation the 360 Rics are much deeper, airier, and more three dimensional than any 330 or 340 could ever hope to be (current models).
I've owned two 340s (a 6 and a 12) and promptly dumped both of them. They were gorgeous to behold and a joy to play BUT my 360V64 and 1997SPC/VB outshone them in every respect.
May come down to a case of HiGains versus Toasters, but my ears don't lie to me.
To each his own however.
You made the right choice. Enjoy it!
Cheers, Noel

admin · Post by **admin** » Sat May 31, 2003 5:29 pm

Longhouse: Perhaps you have already articulated the difference in tonality between the Model 360 and the Model 1997, but I would like to hear in more detail why you prefered the 1997 over the 330 or 340.

longhouse · Post by **longhouse** » Sat May 31, 2003 6:34 pm

As a recording musician and songwriter I need instruments which bring to life the sounds in my head, inspire me to play my best, and provide the TOOL I need to create. I guess it's just that -to my ears- both the 1997 and 360 fit that bill. They look and sound stunning, they fit my hands and ears like a glove. My 360V64 was my first Ric; the 1997SPC/VB was my 4th. It's always a toss to decide which one I love the most. In short, they are the instruments which echo the sound of my soul.
Poetic waxings aside, the 1997 sounds much better than either 340 I've owned for these reasons:

1.vintage-style pickups
No doubt, HiGains have a great sound, but when compared to their Toaster top forebears, they sound like cardboard. Toasters sound ...well... like Rickenbackers should.

2.tone
I'm uncertain as to differences in top thickness between the models (which would definitely affect tone), but the 1997 jangles more than my 340s, my solos have more depth and clarity on the 1997 than the 340s, the sweep between the pickups yields many more facets of sound on the 1997 than the 340s (I liken the 340s to a black and white TV with the 1997 being a high definition, wide-screen, color model), the 1997 has more bottom than any guitar I've ever owned -the range of sound between the open low E string and the high e is unlike most guitars on the market to my ears -an amp with plenty of clean headroom will let this feature shine, the 340s don't seem to have this dramatic sweep of tones. The 1997 can be played with a sound which is as warm and clean as a nice acoustic guitar and it can be overdriven into gorgeous waves of grind and bite. In fact, some of the songs I've written on the 1997 simply cannot be played to their full effect on even a 360. There is some real magic in that guitar.

3.playability
When I think of Rickenbacker guitars, a 330 fireglo from the 60s springs to mind usually. That guitar defines the Ric look and fills me with wonder -BUT- when it comes to playability, my 1997 and 360 feel as comfortable as a mother's arms and as exciting as a brand new lover. I feel NO limitation when I'm playing either guitar (other than my own ability!). The girthier necks on (current) 330s and 340s feel like baseball bats in comparison.
Incidentally, my 650A/VT has a rather corpulent neck too which I don't mind on that guitar.
I like the ability to reach the 24th fret on 330/340 Rics, and I've been that high in a few songs, but that feature doesn't justify such chunky necks.

Maybe comparing the Ric models isn't completely fair. I would rather have a scratched and dented 330 or 340 any day over any Fender or Gibson production line guitar. So it may be splitting hairs to some people's ears. However, those of us who have found ourselves to be Ric players should liken ourselves to seasoned sommeliers (wine taste experts). We know what's good. Not like the Lotos Eaters who flock to some brand because band X or guitar hero X uses it (Strat/PRS springs to mind) and are unable to see/hear other possibilities.
I'm also not a vintage purist. I cut my teeth on the Beatles and Kinks, but I play my own music. My Rics can replicate those classic tones, but their main job is handling MY sound.

Cheers, Noel

admin · Post by **admin** » Sun Jun 01, 2003 2:01 am

Noel: I very much appreciate your passionate and informative description of the tonality and playability of your Model 1997.

corey · Post by **corey** » Sun Jun 01, 2003 6:57 am

Noel makes a very great point.. Yes, we can all play along to The Beatles/Byrds stuff, but Rics can handle ANYTHING you throw at them. Personally, I use my Rickenbackers for ambient compositions. The only limits to what you can do are ones you put in place.

newrider · Post by **newrider** » Sun Jun 01, 2003 7:28 am

The vintage pick-ups had a big influence on my decision. Regarding the PRS comment above, some may flock to them due to use by others, but beyond Tremonti and Santana I could not name a band or famous player with a PRS. I was won over by the playability and quality of construction. I dare say there are a few Rick owners that have gotton Ricks solely because of Rick player the late Mr. Lennon.
I have two PRS, but am returning to the Rickenbacker fold with this 360, due to arrive next week, and, now I'll say it's bass counterpart - a Burgundyglo 4003 is waiting in the wings. So I am anxious to get the Ric sound back. I am looking forward to my first Ric with the stereo circuit.
A different issue is that I have been under the assumption that Ricks are mainly rhythm instruments, not suitable for lead work, but some here have written of solos.
Thanks for the welcomes above and I will always respect the quality and sound of the Ricks on these pages. Wow, just heard Fogerty come on the radio - "Wrote a Song for Everyone" - nice 320 action there. But I'll ask here, is there a prettier picture than Susanna Hoffs holding her Ric? Doubt it.

dave4004 · Post by **dave4004** » Sun Jun 01, 2003 9:57 am

Well, how about Moms Mabley with her 350SH? (Thanks to David Gribble)

newrider · Post by **newrider** » Sun Jun 01, 2003 10:46 am

Moms Mabley! When I was a kid, some of the dads in my neighborhood used to share "party tapes" (in an 8-track format). Included was Redd Foxx, Rudy Ray Moore and, yes, Moms! Yesir! Flashback. I just figured today would come and go without my hearing of, much less seeing a picture of Moms Mabley. As to the above pic, I quote Phil Hartman as Frank Sinatra - "Just put a bag over the head and do your business! Am I right, Steve and Edy?"