Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

Yeah, I know it sounds like a strange question, but here's the story.

I have a 360-12 from around 1991 which is finished in red (I think the actual colour was "Chrome Red" from memory). I've noticed that whenever I pick up another Ricky 12 & strum it, the resonance (both acoustically & amplified) is much more ambient & alive than the one I have. Mine sounds tight & constrained in comparison, despite the fact that the Guitar has been serviced regularly & has only ever had the proper Ricky strings on it.

The other 12's I've played have been either Fireglo or Natural (both of which are translucent), whereas the Red is a solid non-transparent colour. Does this mean the Chrome Red is a thicker finish than the translucent finishes? If so, it would make sense that the resonance would be affected. Any advice welcomed.

Oh man - you're freakin' me out.

Actually, I think you've hit upon an old Beatle theory that if you strip the paint off the guitar, the wood seems to breathe and it sounds alot better. I've never personally noticed a difference, but it makes sense. I'd think paint would fill into the grain of the wood more than stain. You definately see more stained acoustic guitars than painted ones.

Hi Spencer,

You're absolutely right about the Acoustic Guitars (Stain vs Paint). With the 360-12 being semi-hollow, you would think the thickness of the finish would have to have some bearing on the resonance. I love the colour, but I'm quite happy to sacrifice it to get a better tone.

My only concern is that the translucent finishes are just as thick as the solid colours. Should that be the case, then maybe the Guitar I have is just a dud (it does happen unfortunately), which means refinishing it could wind up a fruitless exercise.

I ordered a jetglo 360/12. When I got to the shop, I was just about to buy it, when I happened to strum acoustically a mapleglo one. The differance was astounding, so much so, that my wife even noticed the differance & I ended up buying the m/glo one solely on acoustic sound. The m/glo had far more low end response. It really was a massive differance in sound. I don't know what, why or how come, but even seemingly identical Rics sound differant to each other. I have 2 360/6, one fireglo & one jetglo. The fireglo 'rings' more, while the jetglo is more 'rock'. They both sound like Rics though & I don't know which is my favourite.
Odd isn't it?

Perhaps it does not have as much to do with the color of the guitar as with the fact that each instrument is unique and has a different voice based on the density and grain of the wood used in its construction.... Just my thought. I have noticed that two examples of the same model with the same kind of pickups can sound very different from each other.... I guess that is why nobody can own just one Ric!

I don't know if this is true, but there is a common belief that mapleglo Ricks sound better than solid colors. The difference is attributed to the idea that the best wood is reserved for use on instruments where it will be visible. Less choice wood is therefore hidden on instruments where it cannot be seen (i.e. jetglo). I hate to spread possible misinformation like this, but that's the story I've heard repeated many times. And I'm sure I read a quote from Roger McGuinn where he said that was why he always preferred mapleglo Ricks. He might be mistaken, but I won't tell him he's wrong.

Randy, that could very well be true.... In fact, a while back I asked a question about the V63 basses in jetglo--there seem to be a fair amount of them out there, even though jetglo is not a stock color for those instruments, and I remember John Hall saying that if there is an obvious discoloration or mineral stain in the wood on these instruments, they are painted in jetglo instead of in the standard transparent finishes of mapleglo or fireglo.

I agree with you, Melissa. You can line up 10 identical guitars with the same finish, pickups, etc, and they'll all sound slightly different.
I remember when I got my first Gretsch, a black DuoJet reissue, I had two identical guitars that I played back to back and it took me hours to decide which one. My stepbrother just got a Tele 'b-bender' a few months back, and it took him two days to decide. I was eventually asked to play them too cause he needed help. lol.

I can see the way this is going.....we all have to rush out & buy more Rics, just to get that ever so slightly differant sound....I wonder if my wife will believe me?

When I bought my Les Paul, I lined up about 20 of em and played them all, then elimated certain ones, and after a few hours of rock-star type bliss, ("fetch me that one! take this one away! I HATE it! Get it out of my sight!") I found the best one, or the one I liked best.
It was a black one. Don't know why, but it was the best guitar I ever owned.
Proud owner of a '73 4001MG now.

I will say that of all the Rickies I have owned, the DESERT GOLD and MIDNIGHT BLUE finish (340s) had the most 'constrained' sound. Something in the finish? Hmmm... My JG, FG, and MG Rics all sound perfect.

Noel

AFAIK there's no difference in the thickness of solid colored Rics and translucent finishes. They're all buffed out very thin. But in any case, I don't believe finish affects the tone of electric guitars, including electric hollowbodies, in any way that can be detected, or separated from the normal variances you find from one wooden guitar to the next.

In an acoustic guitar, the top is designed to vibrate and create sound in a chamber. It stands to reason that different finish types and thicknesses will affect the vibration and therefore affect the tone. And it has been demonstrated in tests.

Not so in an electric, where the primary tone comes from the movement of the strings in a magnetic field.

To those who claim otherwise, I say prove it. Demonstrate it to me in a double-blind test using at least 5 guitars which are identical except for the finish. Use different finish types, different thicknesses, different colors, however you want it. Have one person play and record the identical passages on each guitar. Give the CD to another person who doesn't know which track is which guitar. Have him give the test to as many people as possible. Have each person rate each guitar's tone on a relative scale.

I believe the results would show no statistical evidence to validate any of the claims. And until somebody can prove otherwise, I'll continue to challenge claims like this.

As for mapleglo Rics sounding better, that's just downright silly. There's no correlation between the tone and the appearance grade of the wood, no matter how common the belief is or how famous the person who believes it.

Thanks for the thoughts guys. It pretty much seems the finish has little or nothing to do with it (I actually had a private email from John Hall verifying that fact), so there's not really any need for me to lose my lovely Red paint. Don't get me wrong, I'm not unhappy with the sound of mine (love it!!); just that those others seemed to "shimmer" a little more.


Oh well; just have to buy another one as well - problem solved!!

Tell that to John Paul and George who stripped the finish off their guitars in 1968 to get the tone and soul from their instruments.

"Tell that to John Paul and George who stripped the finish off their guitars in 1968 to get the tone and soul from their instruments."

I was about to say the same thing and add that I have one of each of the Lennon signature Casinos and the difference in tone is VERY noticable.

I can't say for sure that it is because of the finish or just the fact guitars have their own unique sound.

The Revolution model with the thin layer of nitro sunds much warmer and has a bassier tone while the '65 version is much brighter though the Elite Casino is brighter still.

So I believe the finish does play into the tone in the case of the Casino which is a hollowbody. But for different color with the same finish to affect the tone I don't believe it would.