Mike Rutherford Doubleneck-Notes from RRHoF Visit
Posted: Sat Feb 12, 2011 2:10 pm
An old topic from several previous threads, I know, but after visiting the RRHF on one of the last days in which the double neck was on was on display, I thought I’d add my observations to the record. Apologies if this is not the appropriate forum, but previous threads on this topic largely originated here, ...and so here this one be. For those not already bored with the topic, this may still be excruciating in detail, …so pack a lunch!
Despite information in the Resource article, questions have been raised regarding dates given for the 360and 4001, whether a solid or hollow body was really used for the 12 string, and if this instrument, with different pickguard, etc, was the same instrument used for the Selling England tour. I'll provide my observations, brief conjecture, then let those more knowledgeable determine for themselves.
Note: my reference to 'original' only refers to factory correct. Obviously, it’s anyone’s guess what is or is not truly original.
So, at the risk of appearing, as 'jon' so eloquently put it, like " … some sort of obsessive weirdo...", here goes…
Neck/Fretboard
Courses ran in standard (non-Rick) 12 string order on what looked like a white plastic nut. The finish on both necks went all the way to the binding, so no peek of fretboard in between. Frets were oxidized but showed no visible wear at all. The 12 fretboard was darker and showed more grain contrast than the bass. 12 markers were crushed pearl and noticeably more yellowed than the pearloid markers of the bass. Both were full width.
Body
The finish was checked throughout, with fine checks starting on bass side to larger, more significant checking on the 12 side, particularly around the sound hole. However, there were very few signs of use (yet see pickguard knobs below). I didn’t see any chips or scratches … just a lot of fingerprints.
The checkerboard binding was slightly rounded on edge. No binding visible on sound hole but, in just the right angle of reflected light (which required me to almost crawl on the floor like an idiot!), I could see a depression in the finish, particularly in the corners of the cat’s eye, that looked like binding under black …so I’d assume it’s there. The inside of the sound hole was black, but was only very light and looked more like overspray rather than real intent. Unfortunately, the angle and lighting of the display didn’t allow for much of a view, but clearly the recess inside the body extended quite deeply and the upper inner side that I could see appeared comparable in depth to my 360. Assuming they’d object if I broke the glass and measured the body thickness, I guessed the body was a bit thicker than my 4001based on scaling to the width of the jackplate. One view from the ‘Farm’ pics shows this.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sonicreali ... 130883229/
Pickguard
The one-piece pickguard we know, and perhaps not so much love, showed very little signs of wear. I couldn’t see any pick scratches in the dim light. However, and most interestingly, there were hand- drawn lines marked on the pickguard (appeared to just be ball point pen) for settings on all four of the 12 string control knobs (none on bass side), suggesting it at least had been ‘dialed in’ for some purpose. These are barely visible in the RRHF photo, but I never would have noticed them.
Electronics
Pickups were all Hi-gains and bright covers showed very little wear, scratches or oxidation. Some rust on adjustment screws. Knobs were black tops on 12 (no blender control) and silver tops on bass. Both jackplates appeared original and both had what would have been the ROS jack removed. Serial numbers weren’t clearly visible. There was a green wire attached to one of the bass jackplate screws with the loose end stripped (ground wire?).
Hardware
The 12 string bridge (sans cover) appeared to be the original 6-saddle with some oxidation and surface rust on screws. Curiously, the high-E saddle had 3 equidistant slots filed with the strings in the outer pairing. However, I can’t say the strings appeared any closer to the binding edge than on my standard 360. The “R” tailpiece was bright chrome with virtually no sign of wear or scratches and lacked the casting roughness under the scroll “R” of earlier tailpieces, so I assume this was a replacement (others may have better knowledge to date this change).
Bass bridge/tailpiece appeared to be original with extensive wear, scratching and some oxidation. Mute pad and adjustment screws had been removed. Interestingly, the unused bass strap button remained in place and appeared oxidized and original.
Tuners
12 string tuners were double- line Kuson, completely and uniformly oxidized, and appeared original. Bass tuners were bright chrome with no visible oxidation.
I always thought the SEBTP double neck was probably the most elegant DN I had ever seen, and my reaction to the 'Farm' pictures echoed 'Bad Ronbo, Killer Dwarfs' comment in that it "…went from beautiful to 'oh my God, what did you do?' ". However, seeing the actual instrument in person not a foot away, the pickguard seemed only a minor blemish in what was still a beautiful guitar. A pleasant surprise.
All in all, the work of joining the two appeared masterfully performed. The body maintained a uniform thickness across both bass and 12 string and there was no visible joint, mismatch, seam or abruptness observed. The top edge flowed across both necks as if designed from Santa Ana. There was only the slightest change in length at the bridge end, but even this was gracefully sculpted (geez, I sound like an art critic!.."subtle, yet unassuming …a bit precocious..").
So, my two cents of conjecture on this purely academic (if entertaining) enterprise:
Regarding the question of a solid body 12 rather than a 360, I think it’d be difficult to rout the inside past the sound hole edge to the depth I could see. Also, the character of the checking in the body finish changed in both depth and degree from the 12 string courses up. I would think a thinner hollow body shell would respond faster to temperature changes than a solid body.
I’m inclined to believe this is the original and probably only Rutherford Ric DN. Had there been a second instrument, I'd suspect word would have been out long ago. If so, then it obviously was refurbished/refinished since, as mentioned previously, period pics show a bound sound hole, different pickguard, PU's, elec setup. More telling, neither the finish, frets nor pickguard showed any significant sign of wear, …not a chip!; certainly nothing like one would expect after a year of extensive tour use.
I'm wondering if this rework was done after the SEBTP tour in prep for later use as a backup DN. All in all, it shows little signs of real use, yet time was taken to mark the 12 controls for specific settings. There are pictures on the web of rehearsals around the Lamp period with both the Ric (with original pickguard) and the Microfrets Baritone, before being made into a double neck, so clearly the Microfrets was already in mind. Comments have been made as to the unreliability and/or durability of both the Microfrets and later DK doubleneck, so I wonder if, after the wear and tear of the SEBTP tour, the Ric was refurbished, set up for tour, then taken on the road, but only as a backup.
It’s anyone’s guess…
So, that’s my addition to the historical record.
BTW, Tony Banks' ARP Pro Soloist was also in the display.
Despite information in the Resource article, questions have been raised regarding dates given for the 360and 4001, whether a solid or hollow body was really used for the 12 string, and if this instrument, with different pickguard, etc, was the same instrument used for the Selling England tour. I'll provide my observations, brief conjecture, then let those more knowledgeable determine for themselves.
Note: my reference to 'original' only refers to factory correct. Obviously, it’s anyone’s guess what is or is not truly original.
So, at the risk of appearing, as 'jon' so eloquently put it, like " … some sort of obsessive weirdo...", here goes…
Courses ran in standard (non-Rick) 12 string order on what looked like a white plastic nut. The finish on both necks went all the way to the binding, so no peek of fretboard in between. Frets were oxidized but showed no visible wear at all. The 12 fretboard was darker and showed more grain contrast than the bass. 12 markers were crushed pearl and noticeably more yellowed than the pearloid markers of the bass. Both were full width.
Body
The finish was checked throughout, with fine checks starting on bass side to larger, more significant checking on the 12 side, particularly around the sound hole. However, there were very few signs of use (yet see pickguard knobs below). I didn’t see any chips or scratches … just a lot of fingerprints.
The checkerboard binding was slightly rounded on edge. No binding visible on sound hole but, in just the right angle of reflected light (which required me to almost crawl on the floor like an idiot!), I could see a depression in the finish, particularly in the corners of the cat’s eye, that looked like binding under black …so I’d assume it’s there. The inside of the sound hole was black, but was only very light and looked more like overspray rather than real intent. Unfortunately, the angle and lighting of the display didn’t allow for much of a view, but clearly the recess inside the body extended quite deeply and the upper inner side that I could see appeared comparable in depth to my 360. Assuming they’d object if I broke the glass and measured the body thickness, I guessed the body was a bit thicker than my 4001based on scaling to the width of the jackplate. One view from the ‘Farm’ pics shows this.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sonicreali ... 130883229/
Pickguard
The one-piece pickguard we know, and perhaps not so much love, showed very little signs of wear. I couldn’t see any pick scratches in the dim light. However, and most interestingly, there were hand- drawn lines marked on the pickguard (appeared to just be ball point pen) for settings on all four of the 12 string control knobs (none on bass side), suggesting it at least had been ‘dialed in’ for some purpose. These are barely visible in the RRHF photo, but I never would have noticed them.
Electronics
Pickups were all Hi-gains and bright covers showed very little wear, scratches or oxidation. Some rust on adjustment screws. Knobs were black tops on 12 (no blender control) and silver tops on bass. Both jackplates appeared original and both had what would have been the ROS jack removed. Serial numbers weren’t clearly visible. There was a green wire attached to one of the bass jackplate screws with the loose end stripped (ground wire?).
Hardware
The 12 string bridge (sans cover) appeared to be the original 6-saddle with some oxidation and surface rust on screws. Curiously, the high-E saddle had 3 equidistant slots filed with the strings in the outer pairing. However, I can’t say the strings appeared any closer to the binding edge than on my standard 360. The “R” tailpiece was bright chrome with virtually no sign of wear or scratches and lacked the casting roughness under the scroll “R” of earlier tailpieces, so I assume this was a replacement (others may have better knowledge to date this change).
Bass bridge/tailpiece appeared to be original with extensive wear, scratching and some oxidation. Mute pad and adjustment screws had been removed. Interestingly, the unused bass strap button remained in place and appeared oxidized and original.
Tuners
12 string tuners were double- line Kuson, completely and uniformly oxidized, and appeared original. Bass tuners were bright chrome with no visible oxidation.
I always thought the SEBTP double neck was probably the most elegant DN I had ever seen, and my reaction to the 'Farm' pictures echoed 'Bad Ronbo, Killer Dwarfs' comment in that it "…went from beautiful to 'oh my God, what did you do?' ". However, seeing the actual instrument in person not a foot away, the pickguard seemed only a minor blemish in what was still a beautiful guitar. A pleasant surprise.
All in all, the work of joining the two appeared masterfully performed. The body maintained a uniform thickness across both bass and 12 string and there was no visible joint, mismatch, seam or abruptness observed. The top edge flowed across both necks as if designed from Santa Ana. There was only the slightest change in length at the bridge end, but even this was gracefully sculpted (geez, I sound like an art critic!.."subtle, yet unassuming …a bit precocious..").
So, my two cents of conjecture on this purely academic (if entertaining) enterprise:
Regarding the question of a solid body 12 rather than a 360, I think it’d be difficult to rout the inside past the sound hole edge to the depth I could see. Also, the character of the checking in the body finish changed in both depth and degree from the 12 string courses up. I would think a thinner hollow body shell would respond faster to temperature changes than a solid body.
I’m inclined to believe this is the original and probably only Rutherford Ric DN. Had there been a second instrument, I'd suspect word would have been out long ago. If so, then it obviously was refurbished/refinished since, as mentioned previously, period pics show a bound sound hole, different pickguard, PU's, elec setup. More telling, neither the finish, frets nor pickguard showed any significant sign of wear, …not a chip!; certainly nothing like one would expect after a year of extensive tour use.
I'm wondering if this rework was done after the SEBTP tour in prep for later use as a backup DN. All in all, it shows little signs of real use, yet time was taken to mark the 12 controls for specific settings. There are pictures on the web of rehearsals around the Lamp period with both the Ric (with original pickguard) and the Microfrets Baritone, before being made into a double neck, so clearly the Microfrets was already in mind. Comments have been made as to the unreliability and/or durability of both the Microfrets and later DK doubleneck, so I wonder if, after the wear and tear of the SEBTP tour, the Ric was refurbished, set up for tour, then taken on the road, but only as a backup.
It’s anyone’s guess…
So, that’s my addition to the historical record.
BTW, Tony Banks' ARP Pro Soloist was also in the display.
Thanks for taking the time to add to the knowledge base for this historical instrument. 
paging "blue man" !
Thanks Ken and welcome aboard.
