| Author | Message | ||
     Lee Kear (Aristeas) Senior Member Username: Aristeas Post Number: 198 Registered: 07-2002 Posted From: 210.49.55.111 |
I've noticed a few people advocating 21 fret Rics over 24 fret models. Why is this? Do the different models have different scale lengths? My 330 has 24 frets and my 660 has 21 - I can't see much difference between them and both measure approx 12.25in nut to 12th fret. | ||
| Bob Belloff (Belloff) Senior Member Username: Belloff Post Number: 302 Registered: 02-2004 Posted From: 208.253.20.67 |
Really, it is the vintage vibe thing. Blindfold a guy and have him play below the 20th fret on a RIC and he'll never know the difference. 21-fret RICs just look cooler. | ||
| Noel Christian Riddell (Longhouse) Senior Member Username: Longhouse Post Number: 258 Registered: 04-2003 Posted From: 68.217.134.174 |
String tension has always seemed stiffer on my 24 fret Rics. Just my imagination? Noel | ||
| Anthony Carey (Tony_carey) Senior Member Username: Tony_carey Post Number: 577 Registered: 10-2004 Posted From: 81.157.62.5 |
The vintage necks are normally slimmer & my favourite subject.....the pick up spacing is different, giving a different sound! The scale length is the same, which leaves more space between the end of the fingerboard & the bridge. With the same scale length, I can't see why the tension would suffer....mine doesn't. | ||
| Robert Callaghan (Red_rob) Advanced Member Username: Red_rob Post Number: 92 Registered: 02-2005 Posted From: 194.74.48.4 |
I'm a fan of 21. Although sadly in my case it pretty much just comes down to looks... No where is it more evident than on the 360 in my opinion - 21 just looks sooooo much better | ||
| Anthony Carey (Tony_carey) Senior Member Username: Tony_carey Post Number: 578 Registered: 10-2004 Posted From: 81.157.62.5 |
I think you're right Rob, they do look better, but for me it's because they come with the small headstock! So much more refined & graceful IMO. | ||
| Robert Callaghan (Red_rob) Advanced Member Username: Red_rob Post Number: 95 Registered: 02-2005 Posted From: 194.74.48.4 |
The headstock too! You're right Tony. Why did they change them? And don't get me started on the full length triangular inlays. I read that they were shortened to improve neck strength but it can't be that important if the full length inlays are still used with no problems on the vintage models. It's things like this that mean I have to save up the pennies for months and months to get my CW-12 instead of buying a modern 360-12 now! Or maybe I can't wait... | ||
| Lee Kear (Aristeas) Senior Member Username: Aristeas Post Number: 199 Registered: 07-2002 Posted From: 210.49.55.111 |
So it's just looks? Anyone have a picture that shows the difference? What could I compare my 2003 330 against? | ||
| Anthony Carey (Tony_carey) Senior Member Username: Tony_carey Post Number: 579 Registered: 10-2004 Posted From: 81.157.62.5 |
Not JUST looks Lee...don't forget the pick up spacing. I'll take a pic later & post it... | ||
| Peter McCormack (Admin) Board Administrator Username: Admin Post Number: 3508 Registered: 04-2003 Posted From: 142.166.105.220 |
The type of pickup and their position is critical to the sound produced. As one of my goals has been to achieve the 1960s Rickenbacker sound, it was important to me to have at least one Rickenbacker with a 21 fret neck. While the importance of the toaster pickup is clear, so too is their position on the body relative to the natural harmonics. Some would argue that this only applies to strings in the open position. I won't argue this point, however, how many classic songs using Rickenbackers were played with open strings in the key of A D or E? The 21 fret models are much more than nice lookers. They were the instrument that started it all. I have several 24 fret instruments which I love, however, the 21 fret models certainly have a place in my heart. |
