Archive through May 23, 2005 Log Out | Topics | Search
Moderators | Register | Edit Profile

The Rickenbacker Forum » Archives - Rickenbacker Guitars Jan - July 2005 » 620 body » Archive through May 23, 2005 « Previous Next »

Author Message
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Anthony Carey (Tony_carey)
Senior Member
Username: Tony_carey

Post Number: 637
Registered: 10-2004
Posted From: 81.157.120.198
Posted on Monday, May 23, 2005 - 09:34 am:   Edit Post Print Post

Yes it is Steve....
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Steve Carsello (Steverok)
Senior Member
Username: Steverok

Post Number: 105
Registered: 03-2005
Posted From: 136.182.2.222
Posted on Monday, May 23, 2005 - 11:07 am:   Edit Post Print Post

That's a little guitar, even the length of the neck seemed super small on the 450, I thought it was a 325 size. Are the necks on the 620 longer than on the 450? I would think it would have to be.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Anthony Carey (Tony_carey)
Senior Member
Username: Tony_carey

Post Number: 639
Registered: 10-2004
Posted From: 81.157.120.198
Posted on Monday, May 23, 2005 - 11:14 am:   Edit Post Print Post

The necks are the same length Steve, they are both full scale gtrs in all but body size!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Peter McCormack (Admin)
Board Administrator
Username: Admin

Post Number: 3671
Registered: 04-2003
Posted From: 142.166.105.220
Posted on Monday, May 23, 2005 - 11:18 am:   Edit Post Print Post

The 450/12 is a very nice player and the 21 fret neck is indeed full size as Tony has mentioned. I quite like the compact body.

In terms of being photogenic, however, the 360/12V64 or the Model 1993 go to the head of the class over the 660/12, 450/12 and 620/12 models. All very nice models, I just like the shape of the Model 1993 with that f-hole and the 21 frets.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Steve Carsello (Steverok)
Senior Member
Username: Steverok

Post Number: 106
Registered: 03-2005
Posted From: 136.182.2.222
Posted on Monday, May 23, 2005 - 11:29 am:   Edit Post Print Post

Wow, I am surprised that was full scale. The feeling of holding the 450, compared to the big Ric's, is like night and day. I'm glad I went for the 360/12, even though I strongly considered the 660/12. I might have been put off by that tiny size, or at least taken awhile to embrace it. The 360 is like a big ole' banjo, it works for me. I may have liked a 360v63/12 instead, but man, they are pricey. The list price is almost two times as much as a 360/12, although they are, basically, made out of the same material. I guess that is their way of making them "exclusive".
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

paul wilczynski (Jingle_jangle)
Senior Member
Username: Jingle_jangle

Post Number: 2134
Registered: 12-2004
Posted From: 67.180.37.56
Posted on Monday, May 23, 2005 - 11:44 am:   Edit Post Print Post

Steve, that's only partly true. A whole lot of development time and money went into resurrecting the V63. Not to mention the extra work that goes into building them.

A Mercedes and a Rolls-Royce are "basically made out of the same material", too. It comes down to whether you want to (or can!) pay the extra for head-turning exclusivity.

Peter, I never quite got the appeal of "F" holes on a Rick. They look anachronistic to me. In my eyes, the "cat's eye" sound holes are a part of the Rick DNA. 1993s through 1997s look a bit forced and fakey to my eye. I know they're rare and all, but...

(OK Paul, you can start ducking now. Be sure to cover your ears!)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Steve Carsello (Steverok)
Senior Member
Username: Steverok

Post Number: 107
Registered: 03-2005
Posted From: 136.182.2.222
Posted on Monday, May 23, 2005 - 11:53 am:   Edit Post Print Post

I agree on the F hole, it makes it look more like a typical guitar (not that a Ric could ever look like a typical guitar, but it takes it in that direction). Why did they stop making the 360v64, and what is the difference compared to the new 360v63 ?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Stan Castles (Buzfluhart)
Senior Member
Username: Buzfluhart

Post Number: 607
Registered: 06-2004
Posted From: 64.207.69.29
Posted on Monday, May 23, 2005 - 11:58 am:   Edit Post Print Post

I have to agree the 'cat's eye' is the real deal, pure Rickenbacker....that's my slant on it.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Anthony Carey (Tony_carey)
Senior Member
Username: Tony_carey

Post Number: 640
Registered: 10-2004
Posted From: 81.157.120.198
Posted on Monday, May 23, 2005 - 12:20 pm:   Edit Post Print Post

I love the F hole Rics, but being British, a lot of the pics you see of the '60's British bands had Rics with F holes. To a Brit, the F hole is every bit as Rickenbacker as the slash.
I don't dislike the slash in any way, but if I could, all my Rics would have F holes...
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ken Joseph (Ken_j)
Senior Member
Username: Ken_j

Post Number: 433
Registered: 07-2003
Posted From: 198.208.223.35
Posted on Monday, May 23, 2005 - 12:28 pm:   Edit Post Print Post

I have to say that I prefer the cat's eye also. It fits the lines of Rick styling, IMHO.

Back to the thread. If you measure the lower bout of a 600 series guitar you will find that it is actually about 1" wider than a Strat or a Tele. It is the smaller upper bout that makes it seem small. I find it to be a comfortable size.