Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

Wondering if anyone can tell me when and why Ric started "reversing" the order of the octave pairs on their 12's ? Virtually every other electric 12 I've ever encountered, including my 1967 330/12 has had the high octave chorus string "first" and then the heavier fundamental string .. i.e. skinny / fat from low to high. All the modern Rics I've seen have the strings "reversed".. i.e. fat / skinny from low to high. Thoughts ?

Your 1967 330-12 had the strings and nut changed before you bought it. Yes, Rickenbacker did make the first prototype with the "acoustic 12" arrangement, then flipped the pairs for the next prototype, and it's been that way ever since on all production 12-string guitars. Any Rick 12 that you see with the "acoustic 12" arrangement of the strings instead of the Rick standard arrangement has had the strings changed.

RIC started doing this with George Harrison's 12 string; IIRC Suzi Arden's was strung in the "acoustic"/octave string first order: http://www.rickresource.com/rrp/raritiesarden.html

Tom Petty and Mike Campbell also string their Rics traditionally. Before acquiring the famed 625/12 in 1977, Campbell and Petty owned two acoustic 12-strings and a Vox 12, thinking all 12-strings were strung this way. But the Ric way is low to high. Always has been since they made both Harrison's and Campbell's 12-strings, as far as I know.

We're all saying the same thing. The first "prototype" I referred to is the Suzie Arden guitar, which has the "acoustic," or "high-low" stringing. The second is George Harrison's guitar, which has the "low-high" stringing which has been Rickenbacker standard ever since. And the third, a 620-12, is the one owned by Mike Campbell. I don't know if Mike Campbell changed his stringing to "high-low" from the Rick standard or not. But every Rickenbacker electric 12 since has the "low-high" stringing from the factory.

iiipopes wrote:I don't know if Mike Campbell changed his stringing to "high-low" from the Rick standard or not. But every Rickenbacker electric 12 since has the "low-high" stringing from the factory.

As I just stated: all of his and Tom's 12-string Rics are strung traditionally.

I tried reversing the high E and B pairs once and really didn't notice much of a difference

whojamfan wrote:I tried reversing the high E and B pairs once and really didn't notice much of a difference

What worries me is that "not much of a difference" means you noticed some difference. That's really scary.

iiipopes wrote:

whojamfan wrote:I tried reversing the high E and B pairs once and really didn't notice much of a difference

What worries me is that "not much of a difference" means you noticed some difference. That's really scary.

Well, see, I was using some vintage strings made from the fillings of old bluemens teeth on the first go, and the second set was a First Act set from Walmart

I've just re-strung my 620/12 the other day.
Thank God I am primarily a bassist!
Nothing has ever taken that long to do or been so fiddly!!
Worth it for the sound, though!

I have always suspected that the low-high stringing was done out of a concern that electric players would break strings if the traditional acoustic stringing was used. By putting the heavier gauge string first, you effectively shield the thinner string from the initial attack of the dowstroke. But I have no idea if this is actually why they did this. It may also be that they thought the traditional stringing was too bright, though I'm not sure how much anyone at Ric has ever been concerned about their guitars being too bright.

I always used to thing that the low ones should go first and when a first saw a 12, I was a bit shocked. I guess I was just born a Rick-Lover!

For me, Tuning a Rick 12 string is easier with strings low/hi. The Tuners for the low strings are like a regular Guitar & speeds things along. Then just tune the Hi strings & you're ready to go. It might have been a common sense thing origianlly.

Glenn