Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

Posted this on another thread, but they deserve to stand alone as well….

Great Pic! Wow!
(... sorry John, they'r all missing the skunk stripe? But you could easily win "the ugly carpet award" )

heinpete wrote:...win "the ugly carpet award" )

The Jeff Rath Award!

Nice. Is the body on the '69 that much smaller than the other two? Notice that the tailpiece end is nearly flush with the edge of the body of the '69, much like on later 20-fretters. The biggest gap between the tailpiece edge and body edge seems, in the photo, to be on the '70. So did the bodies vary in size that much back then, or year to year? I know my Dec '72 is noticeably smaller at its widest point (lower bout) compared to my April '73.

Is it just me or does the bridge pickup keep moving closer to the tailpiece.

The pickup does seem to move around a bit...
The '69 is pretty much the same size as the others; it's the
tailpiece that is actually further back. It intonates!

As for the carpet- well yes it's sort of busy, but it was
the easiest place to lay the basses.
Eye of the beholder I guess- some like Vermeer, and some prefer
Matisse....

chefothefuture wrote: Eye of the beholder I guess- some like Vermeer, and some prefer
Matisse....

But we all like Fireglo -- in most of its various shadings!

Nicely done, John. Thanks for sharing this rare trio.

WOW! to all three basses.

The migration of the tailpieces and bridge pickups is interesting. Now just to compare apples & other apples, I'm going to have to take measurements from the butt of the bodies to the bridge pickup cavities on my basses and see what kind of variation there is.

Well, that is one exceptional group of instruments John!!!

Congrats to you!!!

I'm glad to have been a help in your decision making...

on shoulder!

chefothefuture wrote:The pickup does seem to move around a bit...
The '69 is pretty much the same size as the others; it's the
tailpiece that is actually further back. It intonates!...

...I strongly suspekt, that RIC had a lots of trial and error those years and simply realised, that the '69 did not intonate well and moved the bridge too drastically in the lower position of the '70 bass, finally correcting to the right location in the '71 model?

Love the dark hue of the '69 finish. Interesting how the FG got progressively lighter from '69 to '71.

John told me that the '69 is actually Autumnglo!

Aaah... I see. Very nice.

walker wrote:Love the dark hue of the '69 finish. Interesting how the FG got progressively lighter from '69 to '71.

In "natural light" , there is a distinctly brown hue to the '69.
Very similar to a couple of Capris I had.
Paul Boyer does say in his book that in the late 60s, Autumnglow was listed for the guitars on the price sheets. (P. 125)
Paul also states that in the 60s, Autumnglow was what the factory called the darker Fireglos…
So, this bass likely fits into that category.
This bass certainly wears it well

Great pic, John. Thanks for posting..!