Rickenbacker 660/6 owners please reply

[MyBBruce]

I know this neck is great for 12 string players-what's it like for a 6 string players. I ask this question because I've read a few reviews that mention the saddles don't line up with the actual neck width. That there's wasted space making this a hard one to get fast lead riffs on. That it's basically a strumming design at best. Most Rickenbacker Fanatics don't care for the wider neck. It's bulky and feels much less balanced than the 620.

Are those above statements true? I realize it's personal preference. I have several different necks and feel that makes me a better player. I also found a website that makes an after-market Bridge that is supposed to help utilize the proper String spacing.Naturally it was a link associated with one of the above comments. I have read dozens of comments on how players love the 620 and it's a go to guitar. Is the 660 more of a specialty players axe. Most I love this guitar comments are in reference to a 12 string 660.

So we don't confuse the situation I'd like to here from the owners of the 6 string. I know you 12 stringers are happy campers. But you don't normally do bends and fast licks on a 12 string to the extent you might with just 6 strings. Any intelligent in-sight would be appreciated.

[redamber]

I am lucky enough to own both 6 and 12 string versions of the 660 - a 660/6 in Amber Fireglo and a 660/12 in Blue Burst. Whilst it is true that the neck width makes the 660/12 a breeze to play, I must confess that I find the 660/6 neck pretty comfortable. This is probably down to having somewhat stubby fingers and the style of music I play, which does not involve too many bends and even fewer fast licks. I also think that the relatively shallow profile of the 660/6 neck compensates for the width, but I accept that this is very much a matter of personal taste.

[MyBBruce]

I am lucky enough to own both 6 and 12 string versions of the 660 - a 660/6 in Amber Fireglo and a 660/12 in Blue Burst. Whilst it is true that the neck width makes the 660/12 a breeze to play, I must confess that I find the 660/6 neck pretty comfortable. This is probably down to having somewhat stubby fingers and the style of music I play, which does not involve too many bends and even fewer fast licks. I also think that the relatively shallow profile of the 660/6 neck compensates for the width, but I accept that this is very much a matter of personal taste.

Well they talk how fast the neck is on the 620. I have some big fat necked Telecasters that are awesome to play. The nut width is 1.6875 so not to far from 1.75.. Definitely a fuller profile than the Rick 660-

You must like the neck profile alot to go buy the 6 and 12 string version of the same guitar. Which was bought 1st?

[deaconblues]

The neck on these is very wide, by feel, and not all that deep. The 6 string version feels weird for me to play. You could probably get used to it once you own it long enough, though...and the 660 does have some of the best features of any Ric.

I know what you mean about wanting a range of styles, though. It's that reason and the cool features that have me considering a 660/12 as my next Rickenbacker purchase.

[redamber]

You must like the neck profile alot to go buy the 6 and 12 string version of the same guitar. Which was bought 1st?

In truth, my choice was influenced as much by colour than playability. Some years back, I had purchased a 620/6 in Amber Fireglo (which is one of my favourite Ric colours) from a dealer in the US, which I visit regularly. Naturally, I also aspired to own a 660/6 in AFG, but these are pretty rare in the UK, so eventually - in June of 2010 - I gave up searching and opted for a 660/6 in standard Fireglo. Less than two weeks after taking delivery, a 660/6 in AFG popped up on eBay in the UK and I knew I just had to have it, to match my 620/6 AFG. Then, about four weeks later, up popped a 660/12 in the rare Blue Burst colour and having put in a tentative bid, I was quite surprised to win the auction as the only bidder - the guitar cost the equivalent of less than $1,750. Since then, I have completed 'the set' by acquiring a 620/12 in Fireglo, again from the US.

I do have other Rics, but as you can guess, I have a particular fondness for the 620 & 660 models. To summarise, I now have the following in my collection:

2006 620-6 AFG
2009 620-12 FG
2007 660-6 AFG
2008 660-12 BB

Somewhere along the line, I also picked up a 2002 620-6 in Desert Gold with Black Trim (620/6BT DG), which is both rare because of the 2001 DG 'colour of the year' & black trim but also a stunning looking guitar.

[Ontario_RIC_fan]

I do have other Rics, but as you can guess, I have a particular fondness for the 620 & 660 models. To summarise, I now have the following in my collection:

2006 620-6 AFG
2009 620-12 FG
2007 660-6 AFG
2008 660-12 BB

Somewhere along the line, I also picked up a 2002 620-6 in Desert Gold with Black Trim (620/6BT DG), which is both rare because of the 2001 DG 'colour of the year' & black trim but also a stunning looking guitar.

You need a 610!!

[redamber]

You need a 610!!

Thanks Brian - my wife would say that if I need another Ric, I probably need a good solicitor/lawyer too!

[deaconblues]

Somewhere along the line, I also picked up a 2002 620-6 in Desert Gold with Black Trim (620/6BT DG), which is both rare because of the 2001 DG 'colour of the year' & black trim but also a stunning looking guitar.

Pics?!?

[redamber]

Pics?!?

My digital photos of my Rics are a bit out of date, but I will try and organise some updated pics over the Christmas holiday period.

In the meantime, it would be helpful to know:

As a relative 'newbie', am I permitted to upload digital photos to the board, or do I have to use web-based storage and give the link in my post?

If I am allowed to attach photos, can I assume that the FAQ limits on number of photos (4) and file size (>299KB/1200 pixels) still apply? Cropping and resizing images is not something I have experience of as yet.

[Tileman]

I had a 660 but didn't like the width of the neck. It was quite different than anything else I've tried. I too have a 660/12 BBR and love it. I think I would prefer the 620. even the 610.

[andyenobs]

I have both a 660/12 and a 660/6 and they are both easy to play and very versatile and in my opinion better than a 330/6 or 12.
Compact body 21 fret neck as opposed to 24 which puts the strings on less tension and just makes it easier to play.
I will sell the 330 before either of the 660s. The other advantage is the width at nut on the 660 is the same as a Taylor acoustic which I have so it's better all round.

[jps]

I have both a 660/12 and a 660/6 and they are both easy to play and very versatile and in my opinion better than a 330/6 or 12.
Compact body 21 fret neck as opposed to 24 which puts the strings on less tension and just makes it easier to play.

Aren't they the same scale length? If so, the tension would be the same with the same strings on each guitar.

[admin]

I agree that the tension would be the same for 21 and 24 fretted instruments if the scale length is the same for both.

[Tubwompus]

I have both the 6 and 12 660’s in JG.
I also have 2 330’s, 350v63 (6 and 12), a 1993+, and one of the Fab Gear 360’s.
I only mention that to demonstrate some familiarity with the different neck widths.
Thanks to my stiff, stumpy drummer fingers, the necks on the narrower 6-strings aren’t an issue for me...BUT...
Personally, I’ve found the 660-spec necks to be more comfortable to play.

I have a friend who’s a world-class player whose played with Jaco Pastorius, Lou Rawls, I could go on for days.
He LOVES baseball bat necks and he told me that my 660 is the only 6-string Rickenbacker of mine with a neck that he likes.
In fact, after the he plays it, he tells me to hide it away so he doesn’t bolt out of the house to go find one.

[iiipopes]

I agree that the tension would be the same for 21 and 24 fretted instruments if the scale length is the same for both.

This ^ There are many other factors that determine the playability of a neck: string brand, model and gauge; neck relief; overall setup with the bridge and tailpiece; height of nut slots; etc. But for any given string, the raw tension is determined by the scale length, which for most Rickenbacker instruments (not counting the 320, 325 and other short scale variants) is 24 3/4 inches.