Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

I thought it would be interesting to survey RIC 12-string owners (those that own at least one solid-body 12 and one hollow-body 12) to find out their favorite RIC/12 and their reasons.

The criteria can include:

Solid-body models vs hollow-body.

Neck width preferences, 660/12 vs all the other models.

Esthetics.

Playability.

Weight of the guitar, comfort.

Overall tone, sound, vibe, "jangle-factor".


Be sure to consider all your RIC 12's: modern, vintage, vintage reissues, limited editions.


Thanks for you response...Ron

This one:
Not only do I consider the '60s 360/12 NS to be the 'classic' Rick 12 string, they're supposedly fully hollow, which beats the 360/12CW and 370/12RM because they're made with solid blocks under the bridge. However, it's unlikely I'll ever have the money for a real '60s 12er, so I'll most likely try to find a CW or 381 once I have the cash.

I had a regular-production 360/12 MB VP at one point, and I really miss that Rick 12 sound. Once you get hooked, it will haunt you forever!

As far as solid versus hollow, I think that hollow-bodied 12 strings sound better overall than their solid cousins, which sound a bit more "tinny" to my ears. That being said, I'd definitely consider a 660/12 if it didn't have that big W-I-D-E neck on it.

Easy.


This one:
Basically the greatest stringed instrument ever made.
Heck, I've never even touched one and I can say that with absolute certainty.

it is coin toss between 88' 370/12rm passive and 91' 660/12tp for me..

why? : i do love all my 60's 360ns style rics for their beauty and 70's and 80's solid and hollow ones for their solid feeling but when it comes to taking one out of the rack and play it for *that great ric sound* it is always between those two almost modern ones.

the early 90's 660/12tp is the winer for its neck comfort; 370/12rm passive wins the body and sound contest. if only they would make one that would combine those two features - early 90's 660/12tp neck on 360 body with the neck ending all the way under the bridge - dreams ...dreams... so

if i had to choose just one i would go with early 90's 660/12tp and put that third pickup and bright cap in it since it is easier to live with bit uncomfortable body than with the narrow neck. as for the solidbody versus hollowbody it is non-issue - i can make solidbody sound like hollowbody with decent eq and good reverb and vice versa..

At the moment I do not have any Rick 12 string models, but I used to have a 660/12 and a 730/12L, plus I have played others over the years, at confluences and stores. To me, the 600 series bodies feel too small, I prefer the 300 series body (I have come to the realization I just like bigger body guitars, as the same goes for Duo Jets, Les Pauls, etc.). The wider neck of the two I have owned feel much better than the thinner necks for a 12 string instrument, the thinner neck are great with 6 strings on them.

Has to be the regular, modern production model 360/12. Mine is a '96. I may be in the minority here but I prefer the 24 fret neck. Both aesthetically and structurally. My 360/12 is the most comfortable, balanced, easiest playing guitar I own.

I have to admit that I don't hear much difference between Rickenbacker solid body and semi-hollow guitars. I think the 300's are more comfortable to play than the 600's. Still,the differences are subtle.

This one:

Frank M, I'm gonna borrow your (old) pics again:




Frank Maiale's '87 1993/12 is my favorite Ric 12-string model...EVER. I hope to not only get to meet Frank and play this beauty, but own it one day. It would be a great companion to my 1997SPC with "R" tailpiece. This is my DREAM 12-string, and the Jake Kety signature model.

I had this 1993 and the 1997SPC, I'd be all set for Rickenbackers, anything else I got would be extra.

CW-12 for hollow (among those I own) and 660/12 for solid (first new Ric I ever bought.)

I have a '66 360/12 and an '02 660/12. String spacing doesn't bother me on the 360/12. It's a breeze to play. I prefer that to the 660/12 for recording, it just sounds warmer. 90% of the time I'll play the 660/12 live, just cause I tend to trip over cables, drummers, etc., and the 660 is a bit more replaceable.

This is a TOUGH one! I have a 360/12 AFG and a 660/12 AFG, and they certainly BOTH have their plusses, and issues:

The 360/12 is easier to play while sitting; when I'm performing, the 660/12 requires a strap (no big deal).

The 360/12 string spacing requires me to practice a bit, after not playing for a while, before it feels comfortable again.
The 660/12 feels good right out of the case. However, if I immediately switch from my 360 to my 660, the 660 neck feels REALLY WIDE!

I've found that a thin pick works best when playing the 360/12, and I can use a medium pick on the 660/12, which I prefer.

I sometimes wish that the "octave" strings were reversed, and that the RIC 12-strings were strung as a standard 12-string; especially on the Low E string. To my ear, the bass string overpowers the octave string, but that's what makes a Rick a Rick.

They both look AWESOME! - the beauty of Rickenbacker guitars is unmatched.

In a perfect world, I would have a hybrid of the 660 and 360 12-string guitar; A neck width somewhere in between the 360 and 660, a 360 body (or a 330 body with binding), strung as a "standard" 12-string, with toasters in a deluxe case.

All of this being said, I wouldn't trade my 360/12 OR my 660/12 - they are the coolest electric 12-strings on the planet.

Now, if only my 360/12C63 would show up...!

Bob

For mordern production I prefer the 360C63 because of its 7 1/4" fretboard radius. This makes it much easier to play IMO. I also like how lively it is due to it being hollow with an X braced top. That being said any '60s 330 or 360 meets this criteria.

360/12F. Hoo-boy.

I quite like my re-necked '66 360/12 - I really dig the 60's new-style 12'ers in general.

360/12 CW LH FG due to it's playability.