Page 1 of 2

620/660 not recommended for male gender

Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2008 10:28 am
by steverok
Sorry, but it just looks dangerous here :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7xkZcALljEM

Re: 620/660 not recommended for male gender

Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2008 10:38 am
by JakeK
Tell that to Tom Petty

Re: 620/660 not recommended for male gender

Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2008 12:14 pm
by jingle_jangle
Not even close...
alvarezdana.jpg
edwards-pointy.jpg
killer-starrion-03.jpg

Re: 620/660 not recommended for male gender

Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2008 10:51 pm
by jimk
Man Paul, those geetars make me cringe just lookin' at 'em. :shock:

JimK

Re: 620/660 not recommended for male gender

Posted: Sat Mar 29, 2008 1:12 am
by steverok
The second one looks like a murder weapon, and I don't mean it could kill one person. It looks like it could have been used on the battle field during the Braveheart era.

Re: 620/660 not recommended for male gender

Posted: Sat Mar 29, 2008 10:38 am
by wj350
Let's not forget the vib arm on the Accent!!

:wink:

Re: 620/660 not recommended for male gender

Posted: Sat Mar 29, 2008 11:26 am
by chronictown
I still have an '80s pointy BC Rich from my philistine early-teenage years...tried on and off to sell it for years, now it's in the attic gathering dust. Never managed to geld myself on it but I think if I have boys they'll be encouraged to jam out on a certain other brand of guitar :wink:

Re: 620/660 not recommended for male gender

Posted: Sat Mar 29, 2008 12:48 pm
by jingle_jangle
I have a neighbor and friend who is in his mid-seventies and has one of the largest and complete collections of...

B.C.Rich guitars on the West Coast.

Looking at him, you'd think he was a church organist...or at least a Gibson hollowbody collector, but nooooo...

Strange world, innit?

Re: 620/660 not recommended for male gender

Posted: Sat Mar 29, 2008 3:07 pm
by melibreits
steverok wrote:The second one looks like a murder weapon, and I don't mean it could kill one person. It looks like it could have been used on the battle field during the Braveheart era.
Haha.... They don't call 'em "axes" for nothing, LOL! :mrgreen:

Re: 620/660 not recommended for male gender

Posted: Sat Mar 29, 2008 3:20 pm
by sharkboy
I've been playing guitars of that shape (650, 660/6, 660/12) for a few years, and am pleased to report no damage. I also play mine with a short enough strap that it would be very difficult to have a problem there. It is getting less likely by the day that I'll ever have a BC Rich Testicular Jabulator (tm).

A friend once used his guitar neck to relocate a rowdy (and very large) audience member from the stage and guide him back into the crowd. I'm ready with that trick if I need it.

Re: 620/660 not recommended for male gender

Posted: Sat Mar 29, 2008 4:01 pm
by jingle_jangle
WOW!!! Keith Richards is a friend of yours???

Re: 620/660 not recommended for male gender

Posted: Sat Mar 29, 2008 4:02 pm
by 1965
jingle_jangle wrote:I have a neighbor and friend who is in his mid-seventies and has one of the largest and complete collections of...

B.C.Rich guitars on the West Coast.
That's certainly sufficiently strange

Re: 620/660 not recommended for male gender

Posted: Sat Mar 29, 2008 4:52 pm
by sharkboy
jingle_jangle wrote:WOW!!! Keith Richards is a friend of yours???
Me 'n' Keef go back a bit, but it was the guy who taught it to Keef of whom I am thinking.

Do you know how much work Keith has to do to get his (remaining) teeth that color every day?

Re: 620/660 not recommended for male gender

Posted: Sun Apr 06, 2008 2:14 pm
by drumbob
That's no big deal with the 600 series, but those guitars in the pictures are definitely dangerous to one's health and wellbeing. That whole pointy thing is soooooo eighties and passe, I think.

At least, IMO.

Re: 620/660 not recommended for male gender

Posted: Sun Apr 06, 2008 2:33 pm
by paologregorio
Those guitars should each come with a cup for the family jewels! :shock: