• 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.

Rickenbacker relic advice

#23
flat%20black.jpg
 
#25
You will not end up with a convincing relic for a few reasons:

You have no experience, so the first bass you work on will be a mess,

Rics age very differently from Fenders, due to the finish, shape, and binding, amongst other details. The way they age is quite subtle and I bet much harder to duplicate than a Fender, and we all know how few people do decent relics of those.

The fact that you mentioned getting the Dremel out says to me that the bass is as good a destroyed already.

But have fun if that's what you really want to do! Just please don't post pictures, there is enough sadness in the world already.
 
#32
Sartori said:
Play it very frequently in dive bars.

Honestly, the most frequent wear and tear I see on old used Rickenbackers is belt buckle wear on the back. Other than that, it's usually just the finish being yellowed from age.
Click to expand...

I have a 30+ year old Rick that was gigged frequently and used in several bands, and it might as well be new. That CV finish is like armor plating. Some people like that, some people hate it.
 
#35
Spike- said:
I have a 30+ year old Rick that was gigged frequently and used in several bands, and it might as well be new. That CV finish is like armor plating. Some people like that, some people hate it.
Click to expand...

Certainly, there are many, many old Rickenbackers that have little to no wear at all. Like I said, I rarely see any with anything more severe than some belt buckle wear on the back and faded/yellowed finish, not like lots of Fenders I see where more paint is missing than still there.
 
#39
Exactly. The Relic thing has gotten WAY out of hand. It's especially tacky if it is a 2 year old bass. Take the other people's advice, sell it if you can't handle that ding on the headstock and buy a new one sans headstock ding. Relicing the bass will not make the problem any better, it makes it worse.
 
#40
Spike- said:
I have a 30+ year old Rick that was gigged frequently and used in several bands, and it might as well be new. That CV finish is like armor plating. Some people like that, some people hate it.
Click to expand...

+1

Here is my '73. I don't know it's gigging history before I bought it, but I do know that it has done thousands of gigs in the 35 years that I've owned it.

Rick4001.jpg


It does have a patina of age. All the chrome is either lightly tarnished or has tiny pin pricks of rust (and I mean tiny), and one thing that you won't see except on very close inspection is that on some of the edges the laquer has taken on a milky appearance and there is a hairline crack in the laquer starting on the bass side of the nut and running around to the back of the neck - yes I've had it checked and yes, it's just the laquer not the neck that is cracked. The mute and screws, plus the bridge pup cover are long gone (I removed them about 25 years ago, put them in a safe place and lost them when I moved house).

Here's a pic of the milky laquer on the bottom edges of the headstock and the cresting wave

P1000048.jpg


I don't have any pictures of the back but all it has are a few wormtracks from the rivets on jeans or belt buckles, but these haven't gone through the finish. I play it often, it's still my main gigging bass and I play it hard, it doesn't get babied, but this is about as much much natural relicing as I've managed to put on it
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back