Phasing out "R" tailpieces?

spencer · Post by **spencer** » Tue Jun 17, 2003 7:01 am

Hello everyone -

This would be my first post and I was promted to
write after reading a quote from John Hall over on voxtalks. He said he'd considered dropping the
"R" tailpiece from production. I don't really believe this but to be honest, it wouldn't bother me.
I just joined the ric ranks about a month ago by
getting a 87' 330 jg. It's absolutely fab. The only thing I wasn't too apmed on was the "R" tailpiece. The first thing I did was order a vintage style trapeze to replace it. At first it
was just aesthetics driving me to do this mod.
No offense, but the "R" is a bit too much, it kind of looks like a fancy belt buckle...
I just dig the vintage look (Harrison's 12) but
after I completed the operation, I found that it
really improved the overall string tension and I'm convinced that it also improved the sustain somewhat. It just seems to play better and I swear
it's like a pound or two lighter.
Anybody with me out there?
I know this is a rather common mod.
What do you say - J.H.?

Love the forum and honored to be a part of it.
Another rabid ric fanatic has been born...

-Spencer

dave4004 · Post by **dave4004** » Tue Jun 17, 2003 7:18 am

Go down to the Rickenbacker Guitars section of this forum and look for the whole Broken "R" Tailpiece thread.

Oh, and welcome!

admin · Post by **admin** » Tue Jun 17, 2003 7:18 am

Welcome to The Rickenbacker Forum.

The trapeze tailpiece is an easy modification and I am pleased with the result following its indtallation on my Model 350. The "R" tailipece has been an Icon for so long I cannot imagine Rickenbackers without it.

Dropping the "R" would be a change to the Rickenbacker line that I consider would not be well received by the majority of Rickenbacker enthusiasts. While pure speculation on my part, I suspect that it may be replaced eventually but not any time soon.

spencer · Post by **spencer** » Tue Jun 17, 2003 7:59 am

Yeah - I just went back and checked out the Broken "R" archives. Jeeze, I didn't realize it was such a vast subject. I don't want to give the impression that I'm completely anti-"R", I just personally like mine without it. It's a personal preference like strings, I guess.
And I definately agree with you Peter - it is an icon and I know people would freak if they dropped it.

shamustwin · Post by **shamustwin** » Tue Jun 17, 2003 10:24 am

Can I buy a coupla hundred R tailpieces? You know, just in case.

corey · Post by **corey** » Tue Jun 17, 2003 10:30 am

I'm with you Jerry - all this "phasing out the R" talk is a little distressing.

paul_yan · Post by **paul_yan** » Tue Jun 17, 2003 1:32 pm

Welcome aboard, Spencer.

Do you plan to sell your R?
If yes, let me know.
I'll try to make a belt buckle out of it.

mortivan · Post by **mortivan** » Tue Jun 17, 2003 1:57 pm

Hey Paul, cool idea!

philipnewz · Post by **philipnewz** » Tue Jun 17, 2003 2:01 pm

Hi Spencer.
I know the R's have their fans but it doesnt grab me either. Neither my 360v64 and 660/12 have them. I think you summed up my feelings with the belt buckles comment.
For all that, I'd be very surprised if Mr Hall was too serious. Maybe if an R let go slashing the tendons of a recording star then Ric lawyers would suggest it but no-one else with a passion for Rickenbackers would, even those like me that prefer the trapeze.

shamustwin · Post by **shamustwin** » Wed Jun 18, 2003 4:51 am

Philip,
How do you like your 660/12? I've been trying to find one in a music store so's to try before I buy. The regular 12 necks are too thin for my hands. I assume it's quite easy to play? How's the tone? I tried out a 1992 620/12, and was surprised the tone went from Jingle jangle to a warm tone at the neck pup. I wasn't expecting the warm tone. But the neck...

The only thing about the 660's is that trapeze tailpiece looks so cheap...

corey · Post by **corey** » Wed Jun 18, 2003 6:58 am

Yeah, I've always thought the Trapeze looks like something I could have made in shop class - and the R looks more professionally done.

spencer · Post by **spencer** » Wed Jun 18, 2003 7:15 am

Um, you know, I don't think I'll sell my "R" anytime soon. I've been catching some really beautiful spanish mackeral on it. Using a wound third as a leader, of course.
I just found out something a little irritating last night, though. I ran my serial# on the ric site last night and found out that my 330 was manufactured in june of 97', not 87' as I was told. The discouraging thing about it is that I bought it from my step-dad who owns a vintage/used guitar store. He is the guitar guru in the area and I called him this morning to give him some **** about not being able to date a ric. Something about switched tags.
Anyone out there know him?
Kent Sonenberg - Legends Music?
Anyway - I quickly got over the fact that it's ten years younger than I thought. I mean I play the thing, ya know? I learned a long time ago that I don't want anymore guitars that I'm afraid to take out of the house, or knock over, or let other people play, etc...
It's a waste.

P.S. - Today is Macca's birthday!
Did you guys know?
Happy Birthday Paul!!!

philipnewz · Post by **philipnewz** » Wed Jun 18, 2003 12:44 pm

Jerry
I love the 660/12. I had never played a 12 string before I bought it. Its easy to play and sounds beautiful. I have briefly tried two 360/12's recently in music shops unamplified and couldnt see how I would be able to play them as the neck was so narrow and strings close together. Technique I guess.
The chequer binding and full width inlays add a touch of class that can't be matched by a big shiny R
My Gear - http://www.hartal.co.nz/gear.jpg

shamustwin · Post by **shamustwin** » Wed Jun 18, 2003 3:19 pm

Thanks Philip. Nice lava lamp.

shamustwin · Post by **shamustwin** » Thu Jun 19, 2003 4:48 am

Philip,

Did you try your 660/12 out before you bought?