Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

I read that the nut width of the 660/12 is wider than the 360/12. Also how about the depth aspect of the neck? I suppose the 660 is not only wider but fatter? I often play a rather fat neck Guild F412 acoustic 12 string, and then my 360/12.

There are no Ric guitar shops nearby. Are there any Ric players that can point out to me the differences between the 660/12 & 360/12? For example other than looks what are the sound and playability aspects? And for that matter how do the 360 & 660 6 string guitars compare?

I'm also curious as to why the early Ric 12 string players, such as George, Roger McGuinn, and Paul Kantner played the 360. I am also attempting to find out when the first 660's were used in rock history.

Also isn't there a more fancy finish option on the 660. It seems odd to me that it can be the more deluxe guitar, but the 360 has the more elegant looking "R" tailpiece.

With your comments, perhaps I'll consider adding a 660 Ric to my guitar corral.

Thank you,
Craig

The 660 is a modern variation on the early '60s 625 but with no vibrato as the "5" would indicate. The wide neck is a modern concept, but uses a trapeze tailpiece as this is what was around back in the old days prior to the NS body style and R tailpiece. The reason George, Roger, etc. did not play 600 series instruments is most likely due to the extreme rarity of 600 series guitars back then, and especially of the even rarer 12 string version, 360/12s were far more commonplace at that time.

Well, George got the second (the first with Rickenbacker's string set up) and liked it....
In interviews, McGuinn stated he got his because he saw George's .
IIRC, Kanter got his from Jorma who did not really like how it played...

Craig,

Are you having any problems playing your 360/12? If you have larger hands, you might find the 660/12 easier, because of its wider neck. However, in 2005, Rickenbacker started tightening up the octave and unison pairs on all their 300 series 12-strings, in order to increase the space BETWEEN pairs to accommodate folks who were having trouble with the skinny necks. The bottom line is that there's no right or wrong, just what feels right for you. I'm sure others can (and will) chime in to answer more of your questions.

Robert

McGuinn also said he ended up with a round front 360 New Style because he searched in vain for one like George's; hello?! Place an order!

The 660/12 has a wider neck with a more curved fretboard radius than the 330 or 360 12 strings. Nice, IMO. IIRC, those who've tried both like the chime/sustain of the hollowbody. I would tend to agree, but I am hopelessly addicted to the 330/360-OS bidy style and super cool looking slash sound hole.

Are you having any problems playing your 360/12?

I have no significant problems playing the 360. I play a lot on acoustic, and find that I have adjusted to the wide necks on the Guild F50 and F412. Also I like the feel of a wider neck a little better. One example is the Eric Clapton signature 000-28 model guitar by Martin has a much fatter neck than the standard 000 or OM-28. Those thin sleek necks are supposedly "faster" to play, but heh, if you like the Guild 12 string sound the wide neck is part of the deal. On the 360, I merely accepted the fact that I would adjust to the thinner neck, which takes about 15 seconds to do.

After owning the 360/12 for about 1 year, I just read on this blog site, that the 660 has a wider neck. It started me thinking about if I would like playing the 660. I may have to take a drive to an auth dealer to check it all out.

The question would be, does the 660 have a different sound, or is it merely constructed to have a difference in appearance only?

-Craig

hello?! Place an order!

Roger sounded less than brilliant when he made that statement, but back then the word "networking" wasn't invented yet. I suppose that you would walk into your favorite local shop, sound check a guitar, and then buy it. Especaiily when he may have needed it for a soon upcoming recording session. Or perhaps he laid awake all night, wanting to play like George no later than the very next day.

I am hopelessly addicted to the 330/360-OS bidy style and super cool looking slash sound hole.

Yes, I know it is such a great look. I saw a 360/12 sell for big bucks that had an original factory done "f-hole", instead of the tear drop opening. It did look quite swell, but cost a large sum to own it. But the sleek look of the Ric 360, as it is, was very original, and not just the same old 100's of years old f hole design. On a similar note, I like the look fo the 4003 bass just as much as the 360 guitars.

Craig

I meant to say that those who've tried both often like the greater sustain and jangle of the SOLID body 660. Everything else I said in my previous post was correct though.

I didn't find my 660/12 neck any chunkier than any recent 360/12 necks; in fact I would say it was thinner.

Also really prefer the tone of the solid body 12'ers. Maximum jangle!

They also have checkered binding, gold plastic, and stock toasters.

Yep. Go for the 660/12.

I'm on my phone right now so I can't link to it, but there are two YT videos I did, comparing the tones of a 360/12 and a 660/12. I'll post later!

The 660/12 has a wider neck with a more curved fretboard radius than the 330 or 360 12 strings.

Paul I seem to remember my 660/12 having the typical modern flat radius actually.

paologregorio wrote:I meant to say that those who've tried both often like the greater sustain and jangle of the SOLID body 660. Everything else I said in my previous post was correct though.

I always thought it was the other way around concerning the jangle....I don't know, I haven't played any 600's but I thought the agreed opinion was that the classic Ric Jangle ( Mcguinn, Buck, Beatles, even Marr ) was the dominant feature of the 300's ??

I see accordin g to the Rickenbacker website specs, that the 360 is 1/8" more narrow at the nut and at the 12th fret. Wow, now I am aware of how thin a guitar that I can actually play.

I rushed to buy this 360/12 guitar because it was a 2011 year, used guitar, that was virtually unplayed and at a great price. With one Ric in my guitar corral, now there is some time to check out getting a second Ric.

Craig

sloop_john_b wrote:

The 660/12 has a wider neck with a more curved fretboard radius than the 330 or 360 12 strings.

Paul I seem to remember my 660/12 having the typical modern flat radius actually.

Ah, you're right; the factory spec sheet states they both have a 10" radius. What guitar am I thinking of? Maybe a one off? Or else I'm confusing it with the 360/12 C63.

I probably should have said sustain and chime, rather than sustain and jangle; the solid body characteristics of the 660/12 make it more sustain-y, IIRC. so one gets even more "b-b-b-b-b-r-r-r-r-i-i-i-i-i-N-G!!!" out of the guitar.

I've owned a 360/12 from '03, a 660/12 from '91 and a 360/12V64 from '87. The V64 was by far my favorite, and I still have it. While the 660 does/did have lots of chime and sustain, I prefer the open resonance from the 360 as well as the bigger body. The 660 is small and never grooved with my larger frame. The wide neck is a major plus for the 660, so if you like wide necks, that's the guitar for you. The neck on that particular 660 was wide, but the profile was a comfortable "C" shape. That being said, one of these days I will get a 660/12 again.

Craig if I recall correctly you are from Michigan. If so you may want to give Motor City In Waterford a call. They just got a 660 in last week when I was there. It hadn't been unpacked so I'm not sure if it was a 12. They also have a 330 12 in stock so you could compare. It may be worth a drive depending on how far away you are.