TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
That's one of the (many) reasons I like the unbound ones. I like the look of binding (especially checkerboard), but the smooth edges of the 'S' models won me over. For me it's sound first, then playability (including comfort), then looks. I feel lucky to have found all 3 aspects (for me), in one bass.The reason I don't own a Rickenbacker anymore is because of the sharp bound body edges. The scale length was just fine.
Nice one .That's one of the (many) reasons I like the unbound ones. I like the look of binding (especially checkerboard), but the smooth edges of the 'S' models won me over. For me it's sound first, then playability (including comfort), then looks. I feel lucky to have found all 3 aspects (for me), in one bass.
The reason I don't own a Rickenbacker anymore is because of the sharp bound body edges. The scale length was just fine.
Mine are pretty 'bling-y' (lots of chrome). I don't play 'em without shadesLess 'bling' is my thing now..
Mine, using a cheap tape measure.I swear, I think they measure that 33.25" to the front of the bridge. I tried one out and lined it up next to a Jazz Bass and there didn't seem to be any difference whatsoever. Now, if someone wants to take a pic of their Ric with a tape measure along the neck, I'd be glad to be proven wrong.
Mine, using a cheap tape measure.
View attachment 962771
View attachment 962769
View attachment 962770
I had the tape at the inside edge of the nut. I'm guessing that's close to the witness point? (I can re-take shots, easily)I always thought that the consistent and proper way to figure scale length was to double the measurement from the witness point of nut to the 12th fret. From the pic above, that would clearly make that a 33" scale neck.