Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

Can anyone comment on this comparison ? I have one of each, and the 330 definitely sounds louder, with more of its own acoustic sort of reverb. I do have flatwounds on my 360, which could account for some of the difference. I wonder if a setup would wake up my 360 a little. It is currently at factory settings.

I have a theory on this. Corners project sound best. The sharp edge of the guitar's top forms a corner inside the guitar, and is bouncing sound down to the guitar's back, which reflects up and out the slash sound hole. I always figured that sound hole was much more than a good-looking design.

Steve and Jason: I believe that the chamber inside the 330 is slightly larger than that of the 360, at least in the case of the 360 new style.

The big question is, of course, to what extent is this heard plugged-in?

Right on Peter. Guitars with larger chambers will tend to have a fatter sound with a lighter attack.

Peter, that is the big question. I was leading up to that. I am first waiting for responses about the acoustic sound from those who own both.

Not got an amp Steve?

Yes, I have too much of everything, although I have always said that too much of a good thing is a great thing. I think the livlier unplugged sound does translate to a fuller plugged in sound, but, to what extent, I have yet to determine. It does seem like the 360 produces a cleaner sound, but I do have flats on there.

There was a time when I owned a 330 and a 360 ('02 and '03 respectively), and I had to get rid of one. I didn't hear any discernable tonal differences when plugged in, but the 330 had a bit of an acoustic volume advantage. The 360 Carl Wilson kills 'em all now (Unless I had an F, or an acoustic I suppose).

I think there is another issue of the curved top more dampened by shape and possibly even thickness. I'm sure Paul or Dale could tell you.

I think you would have to play with a quiet bunch of musicians (I have never met) to use them acoustically- they are both very quiet when played acoustically.

I think of my 335 as more acoustic than my 360.

I also think that the acoustic sound of an electric instrument is transmitted to the electric sound. 330's IMO are slightly more 'alive' than 360's, but not much in it....you can hear it though.

If you are comparing rounds with flats though Steve, the rounds will always sound brighter acoustically....so not a great comparison test.

Howdy,

I agree with Pete McCormack and Anthony Carey. My 330's have always sounded a bit ..louder unplugged than my 360. (I'm using 6-strings as my reference). It's only a slight difference, though. Rickenbacker enthusiasts like us are more likely to notice these small differences.
Only recently have I even owned/ played a 360/6. It sounds more, hmm...shall I say "solid" than my 330's. Just a bit. I can't explain

Eggman

My point was that my, not vast, grasp of physics would suggest that the curved cap of the 360 could dampen or cancel some of the free floating of the top sheet (sound board), as it would provide more "egg-like" support. Of course, if somebody fabricated a 330 with too much glue or too much bracing, it would also cancel out some of the vibration of the sound board.

In this way, governed by the same rules, even the slightly carved Gibson 335 could likely be allowed some additional resonance over a 360, as the carved surfaces are part of the sound board. There would also be the volume of space inside the 335 as a contributor to volume.

Mark, if you are referring to the 335 in my comment, I am referring to my Rick 335.

I do own an Epi Dot, however, and it is far more acoustic sounding than either Rick. I'm gonna guess that's not surprising.

Oh. Sorry. My bad.

That makes sense, but for the sake of science it would be okay for you to send me the Rick 335 for a while to do my own tests.