Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

While watching DVD1 of the 'Beatles Anthology', there was a passage where they showed the various instruments laying across chairs and stools, no one in the studio, and just some recording out takes playing in the background.

John's (new) 325 is shown several times and from angles where is it very clear to see the break angle from the roller bridge to the Ac'cent vibrato. I noticed that the break angle on John's 325 is much greater than the break angle on my own 2 yr old 325C64.

I know there have been discussions on the accuracy of the ramp on the 325C64's and even an explanation from John Hall on that it was possible the torsion spring new C series Ac'cent's was too stiff and this may appear to make the older 325 examples seem to have a deeper ramp. I think he makes a very good point, but in this case, John's 325 couldn't have been more than a couple of years old. Mr. Hall also spoke of 'relaxing' some of the future torsions springs a bit to help with the break angle issue.

Has anyone seen their break angle noticably increase with vibrato usage over the past few years? Or if the newer 325C64's did indeed
come with a more relaxed torsion spring?

I'm happy with my 325C64, but definitely would like to get more of a break angle.

The guitar in anthology was most likely nothing more than a prop.

Increasing the break angle won't give you too much of an improvement, Unless your strings are falling out of your saddles as you play, I can't imagine it's much of an issue.

Hey Nick - actually, I'm pretty sure that was not a prop, and neither were any of the other instruments.

The high E on roller bridges tends to rattle a bit - this is a common problem with them, a better break angle fixes that.

Edited to add: OK, I see what you mean - you say that it wasn't neccesarily John's 325. Maybe - but it defintely was a a real 325.

tennis_nick wrote:The guitar in anthology was most likely nothing more than a prop.

Increasing the break angle won't give you too much of an improvement, Unless your strings are falling out of your saddles as you play, I can't imagine it's much of an issue.

It was all the real stuff.......

I really doubt it's a prop - I think they used John's actual guitar. The strings are messy and untrimmed.

See for yourself: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Je53mx9 ... annel_page

My 325c64 has a steep break angle too - don't bother me none.

dpowell wrote:My 325c64 has a steep break angle too - don't bother me none.

Well, that's exactly what I want - a steep angle break. How old is your 325?

Misunderstanding, I meant the spring is unrelaxed and the strings have a sharper bend than Lennon's. It's an '07.

dpowell wrote:I really doubt it's a prop - I think they used John's actual guitar. The strings are messy and untrimmed.

See for yourself: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Je53mx9 ... annel_page

Yup - that's exactly what I was looking at. Thanks for the YT link. You can see a good shot of the break angle at 1:22

Mine's from Feb-07.

McCartney's Hofner is definitely not a prop. It is the real thing. Playlist and checking all in the right places. I can't imagine (no pun intended) that the other instruments are not athentic.

On the late 50's Capris, like JL's 58 built 325 the ramp angle of the body itself was far more pronounced than the 325c58 reissue guitars. Photos confirm this fact.

I have advice that the Ramp Angle varied between 5 and 8 degrees on that era of guitar, due to the variability of jigs and the amount of material removed on pin routers by machine operators in the factory. Those late 50's and early 60's guitars were ALL slightly different.

Hmm...doesn't look too off to me...note where the cut lies in relation to the jackplate.