Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

Thank God it's an oldie and no longer in production...

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?Vi ... A%26ps%3D4







HotDogAndMustardGlo, fer sure...

I saw that, but the bile kept me from posting it. That's more insult than knockoff. Blegh.

How do they manage to take a design that's so nice and make it look so cheesy...

Yechh! Gotta take my glasses OFF for that one! The way the back of the neck looks, it looks like it was a baseball bat at one time!

I love that one strip of darker "mystery wood" in the headstock laminate!

Looking at that Bass today, it seems like a pretty bad knock off. But how many of us who were teenagers in the 60s and 70s would have given our souls to have had that Kay under our Christmas trees?? Back then we couldn't all afford Fenders and Rics, etc, and Mom and Dad sure weren't gonna get 'em for us! My first guitar was a Kay SG copy, followed by a DanElectro, a no-name Strat knock off and finally a real Strat when I was old enough to work during the summer and make a few bucks. My first bass was an inexpensive old Kalamazoo that looked like a cross between a Firebird and a Mustang (basses not cars!!) I think you have to take it it's original context to really appreciate it. Even the cheesy finish has a purpose, it's what makes a Kay, a Kay! It's kind of a nod to the real thing as if to say, we can copy the body pattern but no way can we do finish work as well as Fender/Ric/Gibson, etc. Copyright protection was not as strong as it is now because nobody really took the knockoff threat seriously. We didn't have a rabid "vintage guitar" market like we do today and many companies felt that imitation was a sincere form of flattery. For the most part these guitars only appealed to kids and first time buyers and in many ways introduced those same buyers to the "real McCoys" as they got older and had more money to spend. As I said, in my case, after owning imitations as a young teen, the first thing I did was buy a real Stratocaster when I finally had some money. Even John Hall still displays the memo that Leo Fender sent his father authorizing Rickenbacker to make Fender Copies under the Fender name. Of course everything changed in the mid/late 70s when the overseas stuff was matching the quality and finish of the domestic products. At that point it wasn't "flattery" anymore; they were competing for the same buyers and dollars as the big guys.
I'm OK with this old piece, It's a throwback to a simpler time when we all weren't at each others throats over a the almighty dollar.

Those old Kays turn up now and then. Not the best looking but I agree in context they were probably pretty desirable.

http://cgi.ebay.com/vintage-1960s-kay-b ... dZViewItem

here's another one

How true Anthony Cheers a refreshing post indeed.About time im bored with spot the fakenbackers.Better talking about the real ones than Oh MG its a rockinbetter oh no wait its a guitar that nearly looks like a rickenbacker....no malice intended Paul im talking in general.

You mean this isn't a real RIC? It has the McCartney ronded horn.

I wouldn't want this now or when I was a kid, Anthony.

simer4001 wrote:You mean this isn't a real RIC? It has the McCartney ronded horn.

I wouldn't want this now or when I was a kid, Anthony.

If I ever invent a time machine, you and I can go back and find out for sure!! I do remember my beat up old Kay though, I loved that guitar...the only thing better was the one that the other guy in my "band" had. It was some kind of grotesque Japanese Gretsch knockoff, with an even worse faux Bigsby. Had to be the worst action ever on a guitar but it had that crazy "hot dog & mustard Glo" finish that Jingle Jangle mentioned and more chrome than a 59 Caddy! I guess when you're 12 years old, cheesy takes precedence over function!!

YukonCor55 wrote:If I ever invent a time machine, you and I can go back and find out for sure!!

Doesn't Gary Clauson have one?

YukonCor55 wrote:Copyright protection was not as strong as it is now because nobody really took the knockoff threat seriously.

Not true. The law then was basically the law as it is now; Rickenbacker went after the knockoff pirates then as aggressively as they needed to--there were fewer of them then, to be sure, but had not RIC pursued the defense of their intellectual property then, they would have no claim on their design now; they could possibly have put themselves out of business by permitting their designs to have life under other brands.

(Witness the major reason that Fender lost their case for protection of the Strat, Tele and Jazz Bass--the designs have been knocked off for literally a half-century. Oops.)

Rickenbacker took it seriously then and continue to defend their property against all comers. You can trivialize and oversimplify it by linking it to a chase over the almighty dollar (which makes capitalism in general look pretty bad), but if your car is stolen, you want to pinch the thieves. Why should intellectual property--paid for by its originators, usually at a substantially higher price than something as minor as a single automobile--be any different?

And--the issue of subtlety of paint schemes is, on the other hand, a simple one and one of the personal taste of whoever specified the colors and approved them, based upon their own concept of what looked good, tempered by what they thought would sell. Look at the lovely bursts that Gibson, Fender, and Gretsch have always done. There's no black magic here in getting a nicely-colored and well-executed burst. It's simply a matter of paying attention.

We coined the term, "Clown Glo" to describe a FG burst with too sudden a transition. This is "HotDogAndMustardGlo", plain and simple.

Hold the relish, please.

jingle_jangle wrote:
We coined the term, "Clown Glo" to describe a FG burst with too sudden a transition. This is "HotDogAndMustardGlo", plain and simple.

Hold the relish, please.

Agreed!