‘67 modded 330 (335) vs new 330, need help and insight

[RicUpNorth]

Looking at a 60’s 335 (vibrato). The body/bridge/and tailpiece are the only real original parts. It has been changed to HB1 pickups and new Kluson tuners. Pickguard has also been replaced with a new Ric guard. Biggest mod was that at one point it had full size humbuckers, but the holes were filled with maple and tinted very well to match the original Fireglo.

I’m a huge fan of the HB pickups (I have a 260 with the older version that is my #1 guitar). I look at the tuners as likely better than 55 year old tuners.

Is there anything special about the older 330’s that makes this better than a new one? I know it is x-braced, not sure how that’ll affect tone or sound. Has the smaller headstock as well.

Would love any insight from all you experts!

[iiipopes]

As with any used instruments, if you can, unless you have significant experience in looking at used instruments, have an independent knowledgable luthier check out items such as integrity of all the glue joints, neck alignment, truss rods, fret wear, etc., especially since a significant amount of wood was taken out of the top for a substantial period of the guitar's life. The next consideration is, of course, price. There are those out there who will pay a premium irrespective of condition and modifications simply because it is a 1967. As for me, I am a player, not a collector, so it would have to be one #&!! of an instrument to pay more than the cost of a new one. You didn't say what was being asked for the used/modded guitar. HB-1 pickups are thick enough tonally that given the same pickups on both guitars, I don't think the bracing makes any difference tonally. It might if you reverted to toaster pickups, for the reasons other afcionados give about the resonance and sustain of the bracing.

[RicUpNorth]

As with any used instruments, if you can, unless you have significant experience in looking at used instruments, have an independent knowledgable luthier check out items such as integrity of all the glue joints, neck alignment, truss rods, fret wear, etc., especially since a significant amount of wood was taken out of the top for a substantial period of the guitar's life. The next consideration is, of course, price. There are those out there who will pay a premium irrespective of condition and modifications simply because it is a 1967. As for me, I am a player, not a collector, so it would have to be one #&!! of an instrument to pay more than the cost of a new one. You didn't say what was being asked for the used/modded guitar. HB-1 pickups are thick enough tonally that given the same pickups on both guitars, I don't think the bracing makes any difference tonally. It might if you reverted to toaster pickups, for the reasons other afcionados give about the resonance and sustain of the bracing.

Well I bought the ‘67, and it is on the way (Tuesday, fingers crossed). I appreciate all that insight!

He offered it at $2k shipped. Given the vibrato and pickups I would have wanted, cheaper than a new one. I worked in a used shop for several years, and it’ll get a good once over and go in to somebody more knowledgeable if I see anything odd. Seller sent me the setup specs, and it was perfect for what I would set it up to. I’m definitely not buying it to collect, the modifications made it a players guitar. I’m excited to take it to my gig in a week and play it loud though my Fender. I’ll post pics when it comes!

[iiipopes]

Well I bought the ‘67, and it is on the way (Tuesday, fingers crossed). I appreciate all that insight!

He offered it at $2k shipped. Given the vibrato and pickups I would have wanted, cheaper than a new one. I worked in a used shop for several years, and it’ll get a good once over and go in to somebody more knowledgeable if I see anything odd. Seller sent me the setup specs, and it was perfect for what I would set it up to. I’m definitely not buying it to collect, the modifications made it a players guitar. I’m excited to take it to my gig in a week and play it loud though my Fender. I’ll post pics when it comes!

So you can compare your wiring to stock wiring, the original wiring diagrams are available on the Rickenbacker factory website, as well as the current version of the owners manual. Yes, this has the old hairpin truss rods, so be careful if you need to tweak them after the long trip, and if you want to change make/model/gauge of strings. I like D'A XL115W (wound 3rd) strings as the 11's put a little more down force over the bridge which to my ears helps tone and sustain, and the wound third G-string is easier to intonate.

[RicUpNorth]

Well I bought the ‘67, and it is on the way (Tuesday, fingers crossed). I appreciate all that insight!

He offered it at $2k shipped. Given the vibrato and pickups I would have wanted, cheaper than a new one. I worked in a used shop for several years, and it’ll get a good once over and go in to somebody more knowledgeable if I see anything odd. Seller sent me the setup specs, and it was perfect for what I would set it up to. I’m definitely not buying it to collect, the modifications made it a players guitar. I’m excited to take it to my gig in a week and play it loud though my Fender. I’ll post pics when it comes!

So you can compare your wiring to stock wiring, the original wiring diagrams are available on the Rickenbacker factory website, as well as the current version of the owners manual. Yes, this has the old hairpin truss rods, so be careful if you need to tweak them after the long trip, and if you want to change make/model/gauge of strings. I like D'A XL115W (wound 3rd) strings as the 11's put a little more down force over the bridge which to my ears helps tone and sustain, and the wound third G-string is easier to intonate.

Thanks so much for all the tips!

I’ll have to look at the wiring when I get it. It may be, though I doubt it, original. I’m used to how the hb2’s are wired on my 260, so this will take some getting used to. Though I have a 620, and assume this will be similar, but with humbuckers instead of high gains.

Even if it’s a double truss rod, it’s still different than the modern ones?

I picked up my usual strings, per my other Rics, today, 12-52’s with a wound g.

Have rehearsal, and it’s scheduled for delivery, tomorrow. Hoping it arrives so I can bring it there.

[iiipopes]

Even if it’s a double truss rod, it’s still different than the modern ones?

Yes. You don't just turn the nuts like you do on most other manufacturers' truss rods, and even the newer Rickenbacker truss rods. There are many places on this forum and otherwise you can get all the details. But to summarize: they are not single length rods. Each rod is folded over on itself to impart tension to the neck, hence the nickname "hairpin." You have to loosen the strings, set the neck where you want it, then snug the nuts. This is to make sure the pins stay in the correct orientation in their neck slots and don't torque out, which will damage the rods, cause the neck to warp, or worse, put stress on the underside of the fret board, popping it off the neck. Since you are going with 12's, you will need a truss rod adjustment, since the guitar will probably arrive with 10's on it. Yes, the neck can take the 12's, but it will require a complete setup.

In case anybody questions that the neck can handle 12's, remember that the same neck and truss rods is/was used for the 12-string guitars. The factory 12-string set is a 10's set. Without going through all the math, suffice to say that the tension with the factory strings on a 12-string guitar is roughly the same overall tension as if there were such a thing as a 14's 6-string set of strings. So the neck can handle any reasonable set of strings, when adjusted properly.

[collin]

In case anybody questions that the neck can handle 12's, remember that the same neck and truss rods is/was used for the 12-string guitars. The factory 12-string set is a 10's set. Without going through all the math, suffice to say that the tension with the factory strings on a 12-string guitar is roughly the same overall tension as if there were such a thing as a 14's 6-string set of strings. So the neck can handle any reasonable set of strings, when adjusted properly.

90% of vintage Rick 12-strings (particularly 1964-1966) either need a neck reset or have had one.

It’s fair to say they cannot handle the tension of normal strings, and I highly recommend anybody using 8s on early 12-string models.

The modern era instruments are a totally different ball game but 60s Rickenbackers are not well equipped to use large gauge, high-tension strings, even on the 6-string models.

[iiipopes]

In case anybody questions that the neck can handle 12's, remember that the same neck and truss rods is/was used for the 12-string guitars. The factory 12-string set is a 10's set. Without going through all the math, suffice to say that the tension with the factory strings on a 12-string guitar is roughly the same overall tension as if there were such a thing as a 14's 6-string set of strings. So the neck can handle any reasonable set of strings, when adjusted properly.

90% of vintage Rick 12-strings (particularly 1964-1966) either need a neck reset or have had one.

It’s fair to say they cannot handle the tension of normal strings, and I highly recommend anybody using 8s on early 12-string models.

The modern era instruments are a totally different ball game but 60s Rickenbackers are not well equipped to use large gauge, high-tension strings, even on the 6-string models.

Even if this is the case, the purpose of my post was not to debate 12-string instruments, but to assure the OP that a set of 12's will be fine to string up his recent purchase.

[collin]

In case anybody questions that the neck can handle 12's, remember that the same neck and truss rods is/was used for the 12-string guitars. The factory 12-string set is a 10's set. Without going through all the math, suffice to say that the tension with the factory strings on a 12-string guitar is roughly the same overall tension as if there were such a thing as a 14's 6-string set of strings. So the neck can handle any reasonable set of strings, when adjusted properly.

90% of vintage Rick 12-strings (particularly 1964-1966) either need a neck reset or have had one.

It’s fair to say they cannot handle the tension of normal strings, and I highly recommend anybody using 8s on early 12-string models.

The modern era instruments are a totally different ball game but 60s Rickenbackers are not well equipped to use large gauge, high-tension strings, even on the 6-string models.

Even if this is the case, the purpose of my post was not to debate 12-string instruments, but to assure the OP that a set of 12's will be fine to string up his recent purchase.

You said that because the same neck was used for 12-strings, that it would withstand 12s.

But the neck set failed for the vast majority of vintage12-strings.

There are a number of factors for this, but improper string gauge is certainly one of them.

I would not recommend putting 12s on a six-string vintage Rick either.

[RicUpNorth]

I did buy it, and put 12’s on last night. It calculates to 139.4 lbs of pressure. The 10’s come out to 113.7. I know that’s more pressure, but I’ll take the risk and do a reset if needed. NGD posted in the vintage forum.

[iiipopes]

90% of vintage Rick 12-strings (particularly 1964-1966) either need a neck reset or have had one.

It’s fair to say they cannot handle the tension of normal strings, and I highly recommend anybody using 8s on early 12-string models.

The modern era instruments are a totally different ball game but 60s Rickenbackers are not well equipped to use large gauge, high-tension strings, even on the 6-string models.

Even if this is the case, the purpose of my post was not to debate 12-string instruments, but to assure the OP that a set of 12's will be fine to string up his recent purchase.

You said that because the same neck was used for 12-strings, that it would withstand 12s.

But the neck set failed for the vast majority of vintage12-strings.

There are a number of factors for this, but improper string gauge is certainly one of them.

I would not recommend putting 12s on a six-string vintage Rick either.

When this guitar was made, Ernie Ball 10's Slinky's were just coming into the market. The "standard" set of strings were 12's. Not for the neck, but for my fingers, I have a set of 9's on my 1981 360-12 FG WB Ckbd. That equates roughly to a set of 12's on a 6-string instrument. It has hairpin rods. The neck is perfect, and has been since new. Please back off of your reactionism.

[RicUpNorth]

Surprisingly, the neck angle is still right where I want it and the 12’s have been on for a few days now. I did lower the bridge a bit, but that was just for personal taste.

[collin]

When this guitar was made, Ernie Ball 10's Slinky's were just coming into the market. The "standard" set of strings were 12's. Not for the neck, but for my fingers, I have a set of 9's on my 1981 360-12 FG WB Ckbd. That equates roughly to a set of 12's on a 6-string instrument. It has hairpin rods. The neck is perfect, and has been since new. Please back off of your reactionism.

We're not talking about early 80s Rickenbackers, that's a different scenario entirely (24 frets, which greatly strengthened the neck joint...).

These guitars were designed for large gauge flatwound strings. As the dozens of neck resets that I've done on 60s era Rickenbackers has proven, the guitars were not equipped to withstand the string tension of 12 gauge flats.

Will they damage every guitar? Certainly not. Have large strings on a full-scale 60s Rickenbacker led to neck issues? Absolutely.

As for your "reactionsim" line, I wouldn't speak to this subject if I didn't have a lot of experience with it. And I'll continue speaking on this subject as much as I please.

[iiipopes]

RicUpNorth - enjoy the 12's on your guitar. I'm sure they will be just fine.