+2.36 on the ESP, I just played that very one at Sam Ash not long ago, and it was killer imo. Great tone, and as far as looks go, the natural wood keeps the pointy shape from being dorky. If you do try one though, you may want to be mindful of the weight - the one I played was a bit heavy... may not be that with all of them, just a heads-up.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
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.
i wants a B.C. Rich
- Thread starter Cliff 092786
- Start date
Nope - the woods they use equal consistently heavy. the mahogany body would be light but that thick ebony top would add some weight.
That Mockingbird bass, with the quilt top, is really nice. I tried it one day, because it was neck-through and only like $600 bucks, and that seemed like a deal. Played it, a stingray, a sterling, and a couple stilettos, and it destroyed them in playability and tone. Really solid bass. It destroyed my bias against BC Rich forever.
I'm a fan of the way the Mockingbird Heritage Classic looks. I still play Yamaha, but the BC Mockingbird looks awesome.
The only one I've ever played had great playability and tone. So, if looks don't really matter, as so many of BCR's detractors say, why not get one? They're good basses! Not everyone wants to have the "boutique" or "vintage" look. Open your mind a little, pal.
If you want a B.C. Rich and you know that's what you want, then go for it
...BUT, a lot of other people here would advise you otherwise because there are some very fine basses out there that are built better than the B.C. Rich basses are for around the same price. As with ALL advice, you need to try the basses out for yourself and make sure you are testing them against other basses in person.
Some of the suggestions I would make, if you still want a "Metalesque" or aggressive look to your basses would be some Ibanez or Schecter basses. While they might not be as drastic aesthetically as the BC Rich, they still have an unconventional look and the tone is pretty harsh if you want it to be. I have an Ibanez SR500 and to be totally honest the tone is so awesome on it, it could be pink and I'd still play it. But a lot of the SR (the 500 and up, 400 and below suck IMO) and SRX series basses by Ibanez are pretty awesome ones. Schecter has the Omens, Damiens and Stilettos which are good basses as well for a beefy metal tone.
But again, this is all just advice or suggestions because most people in here just want you to get the bass that will work best for you. If you plan on getting the BC Rich and then changing the pickups in it or something, then just go for the one that feels best and plays best....but I would still recommend checking out the Ibanez SR500's, the necks are super nice, strong and fast which will make playing those really fast metal basslines much easier on your hands and give you more stamina to play longer and faster....which means more solos, right??
Best of luck in your bass hunt!
Very well said!
Well, for one, at least on the custom shop end, they hold their own against any other bass I have played. Other reasons: I like the shapes, I like the sound, It makes me happy to play it? Those all seem to be pretty good reasons to me. The recent imports I have played (admittedly only a few) seemed to be decent enough basses for their price points.
+1
When someone has to put (no offense) then that is exactly what they intend to be, offensive.
Just because some don't get BCR doesn't mean others don't. I love(d) all my BCR basses. All have had great playability, good tone, and have lasted through all the abuse I put them through. If you don't like the looks then that is fine but to imply they are junk or not worth buying is disrespectful to all of us who do find value in their instruments.
Actually I am a metal head and I HATE B.C.Rich instruments, they look nothing but plain stupid to me 
I mean, IMO they're not cool at all, they just try desperately to be different from the mainstream Gibson/Fender style with all those goofy shapes probably inspired by some black metal band logos. Which means maybe I'll get a Warlock some day, paint it pink and put a Hello Kitty pickguard on it
Or maybe it's just those amateur metal head kids who think that playing a B.C.Rich makes them more metal than they'll ever really be... In guitars the Jackson RR is also awfully popular in here thanks to certain Alexi from a certain band called Children of Bodom...
I mean, IMO they're not cool at all, they just try desperately to be different from the mainstream Gibson/Fender style with all those goofy shapes probably inspired by some black metal band logos. Which means maybe I'll get a Warlock some day, paint it pink and put a Hello Kitty pickguard on it Or maybe it's just those amateur metal head kids who think that playing a B.C.Rich makes them more metal than they'll ever really be... In guitars the Jackson RR is also awfully popular in here thanks to certain Alexi from a certain band called Children of Bodom...
My big problem with B.C. Rich basses isn't that they're goofy-looking (although they certainly aren't my visual cup of tea), but rather that I've never played one that balanced well. I think when you make a poorly-balancing bass, you're basically telling potential customers that you value the look of your instruments more than the playability. To me, that's unforgivable. Personally, if I felt the need to get a bass along the same lines as a B.C. Rich, I would be looking at the ESP LTD that somebody posted a picture of earlier in this thread.
