Bassassin

That's Mev Taylors shop in Edinburgh selling that. Serious good deal. Just checked their website, they have a Westone Thunder II (2x P pup version) for £195. Must...resist..... Jon.

[quote name='LukeFRC' timestamp='1397506331' post='2424667'] I dunno if she said but your other half was going to get it off me (contact via ebay) as a present for you when you we on sabbatical, but it didn't work out for whatever reason, I think neither of us were sure on a value. [/quote] No, she never told me! I'm very touched by that. I did go through a pretty awful time back then & sometimes wonder if I'd be around now if it hadn't been for her. She is lovely. J.

[quote name='RhysP' timestamp='1397511239' post='2424746'] I had one exactly the same as that in the early 80's - it was a total pile of sh*t. [/quote] There you go - you should have bought a Kasuga copy - they're ace. [quote name='Big_Stu' timestamp='1397502293' post='2424592'] Nothing whatsoever - only your reluctance to say something to the effect that [i]"Yes I'm such an expert & I've got so much spare time in my life that I will monitor every single Rick or alleged Rick that is offered for sale on BC, decide on their validity - and personally finance any legal action that may arise from my offer"[/i]. After all - by wanting BC to open the door again it's what you're expecting of them. It's a straight question - are you up for it?[/quote] The problem with your straight question, Mr Big_Stu, is that what you've done is dream up an entirely hypothetical & unrealistic scenario and then attempt to back me into a corner where I'm forced to agree to some random set of fantasy preconditions you've pulled out of thin air - or perhaps from somewhere darker, damper & more whiffy. Sorry mate, not playing. I don't "want BC to open the door" - I've already expressly stated that I do not care. I have no vested interest and this is purely a hypothetical discussion because it's not going to happen anyway. On balance the current position is plainly the best/least scary for the owners & mods on BC, I'm only involved in this discussion because the ban on genuine Rick sales appears irrational, there is a simple solution to the problem of Fakers being sold, because they're easy to ID, and plenty of other places allow Rick sales and don't seem to get prosecuted by RIC. Now someone please correct me if I'm wrong here, but as far as I can tell, many pre-owned items of an infinite variety of types get re-sold secondhand all around the world, and the original manufacturers of these items sue absolutely no-one, ever, over these sales. Much like Rickenbacker International Corp has sued no-one, ever, for re-selling an original Rickenbacker bass. The more you think about this, the more downright loony the whole thing seems. If Hall's seen this thread, he must be absolutely p!ssing himself! J.

[quote name='Big_Stu' timestamp='1397500254' post='2424560'] Yes, but would you be willing to be [b][i]the[/i][/b] one, because you consider it to be so easy, to carry the can IF JH carried out his threats of legal action against BC if your self-confidence is mis-placed and you - as sole responsibility - do let a rogue copy appear on here. Simple, you (or the others who want the facility but none of the responsibility) are so confident of your own knowledge that you in effect sign a blank cheque for BC to defend any action JH might bring, should you be wrong and let a bootleg Rick appear in "for sale". No-one has said he would - but he would take action in the above two scenarios, you don't think he would - you could well be wrong. Lucky you! You nearly talked yourself into a very precarious legal position there. [/quote] All I've said is that I'm confident in my ability to tell a Faker from a real one, it's not misplaced self-confidence but knowledge based on years of near-obsessive interest & study! What's so hard to accept about that? I'd invite you to go & find a single example of a Rick - or copy - where there is any real ambiguity over which it is. Trust me, it'll take you a while. Interesting you mention the JBs - they were about the least "authentic" of the vintage copies, superb instruments but really only cosmetically resembling a Rick. To a greater or lesser extent, that's true of all copies, the point being that they were/are [i]copies[/i], not counterfeits, none of the manufacturers were interested in copying every last detail & idiosyncracy of the real thing. Like I said, if you know what to look for, it's very easy indeed. This site's of interest - to me mainly because it shows various uncommon vintage copies, which is my area of interest - but is certainly helpful in clarifying what's real & what's not: [url="http://www.joeysbassnotes.com/Fakericks.htm"]http://www.joeysbass...m/Fakericks.htm[/url] J.

[quote name='Big_Stu' timestamp='1397498328' post='2424531'] You're not answering the question - if it's as easy as you say & so confident that Hall is bluffing - are YOU going to be the one that carries the official legal responsibility of authenticating every "Rick" that is offered for sale on here - IF it was to happen? [/quote] I've already said I'd be happy to be involved in a vetting/authentication process. I don't know how "legal responsibility" would work in this context but I'm sufficiently confident in my knowledge of Rickenbackers & the various copies not to consider that to be a risk. And again I'll ask - why on Earth would Hall take action over the sale of a genuine used Rickenbacker? This is all rather irrelevant, I've been discussing this with a mod via PM and it ain't gonna happen, whatever anyone says. Shame in a way I suppose - Ricks might be the most Marmite of basses but they're historically important, intersting and desirable to a lot of people. I've always had GAS for an early 70s checked bound/full-width inlays/toaster/wavy Grovers 4001 in naturally darkened Fireglo - and BC is the only place I'd trust to get a decent one at a sane price, if I ever went mad enough to go for it. And no - no-one ever made a copy with this exact spec. J.

[quote name='Big_Stu' timestamp='1397493382' post='2424465'] Brave words! So - are you going to volunteer to be legally liable for all losses and costs suffered by BC if JH sues? [/quote] They're not "brave words" - it's a simple fact. Hall wouldn't sue because selling a legitimate Rickenbacker is 100% legal in every way. The man might like to bluff and bluster but that doesn't make him an idiot. J.

[quote name='ambient' timestamp='1397487675' post='2424394'] Would it be down to the owners of the site if someone did advertise a fake bass ? I doubt it, it'd be the responsibility of the seller. [/quote] Ebay & Gumtree remove listings for Fakers because if they do not, they can be accused of facilitating the sale of counterfeit goods. The same would happen if BC allowed the sale of Fakers, which is why this part of the ban is 100% appropriate. What's not appropriate, or indeed in any way sane or logical is to extend that ban to authentic instruments, just in case a copy got listed by mistake. As I have said numerous times, the differences between copies & genuine Ricks are clear, obvious, and easily recognisable. Anyone with a good level of experience with either, or both, would be able to tell them apart, just like the good folks on RickResource can. The main differences are so fundamental that no amount of customisation or modification could change them. What's the problem everyone has with this? J.

[quote name='uncle psychosis' timestamp='1397478703' post='2424250'] Sometimes its worth making a stance against "injustices" but sometimes the stakes are so unimportant that its just not worth it. [/quote] Broadly speaking I'm 100% in agreement about this part, and for that reason I'm out of this thread unless I have anything factual that's relevant to contribute. It's really not that important in the grand scheme of things that have grand schemes. As you were. J.

[quote name='lemmywinks' timestamp='1397467525' post='2424071'] You ever had those moments where you seriously consider buying a lefty because it's so cheap, then have to remind yourself that you won't actually be able to play the thing? [/quote] Yes, yes I do. It would be a proper challenge to learn, wouldn't it? Luke - really wish I'd hung around long enough to buy that SG of yours! Still my dream g*it*r, one day I'll give in & blow a stupid amount of money on a mid-80s SG2000 or 3000. J.

[quote name='ambient' timestamp='1397474144' post='2424164'] No ones answered my question yet, how come Talkbass allows sales of Rickenbacker basses ? And how do they vet (if they even do) whether a bass is the genuine article ? [/quote] 1 - because it is perfectly legal. 2 - copies of Rickenbacker basses are all, every last one, very different to real ones and are therefore very easy to identify. I could add 3 - TB is evidently not afraid of empty, inane and groundless threats the way we plainly are. Good grief, the way I'm going on, you'd think I actually gave a sh!t! I really don't. J.

That's an RSB Deluxe II - I've got a lovely blueburst r/h one, with a badly twisted neck, had it from new in the 80s and it was my main bass for about 15 years until the twist made it unplayable. That's a crazy bargain - these are fantastic basses, and any lefty JapCrap fans here should be scrapping over that. Wonder how mine would look with a lefty neck... J.

[quote name='hiram.k.hackenbacker' timestamp='1397428443' post='2423914'] Can the genuine article infringe its own trademark then? [/quote] Very interesting point - theoretically, perhaps it can. If the 4003/4001 body shape wasn't trademarked until 1999, then examples which precede this date could be considered to be infringements. Perhaps more interestingly, it's technically possible for Hoshino Gakki Ten (owner of the Ibanez brand) to demonstrate that they were producing instruments of this design, carrying their brand as early as 1971. A company which was launched in 1984 (RIC) might struggle to prove historical rights to these design elements. I doubt Hoshino would consider doing any such thing, but the idea's an amusing one. J.

[quote name='chaypup' timestamp='1397392163' post='2423418'] Westone Superheadless for sale - the BIN is very reasonable was tempted to go for it until I read my old post about not getting with them [url="http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Westone-Super-Headless-Bass-Guitar-/251504032736?ssPageName=ADME:B:SS:GB:3160"]http://www.ebay.co.u...ME:B:SS:GB:3160[/url] [/quote] No BIN on it now - presumably someone bid & it disappeared. How much was it? J.

[quote name='Annoying Twit' timestamp='1397368935' post='2423182'] Would Jon want to put himself in the firing range of John Hall should he (Jon) make a mistake. I bl***dy well wouldn't. [/quote] Absolutely. As I've said, the current crop of Chinese/Taiwanese/whatever copies bear little more than a cosmetic resemblance to genuine Rick basses, and as far as vintage copies are concerned, I'm 100% confident in my ability to tell a well-crafted, professionally manufactured instrument from shonky overpriced American tat. ([i]Joke[/i], Rickenlovers. ) I would need exceptionally clear & detailed pics of certain areas of build & componentry but as I've said, the differences are very clear, with no margin for error if you know what you're looking at. This is an interesting theoretical discusssion for me - I'm happy to respect the mods' original & any future decision but in the event the community chose to allow RIC sales again, I'd be happy to help verify provenance. I can't accept that Hall would try to cause trouble over the sale of a genuine Rickenbacker - the notion seems frankly ludicrous and of no benefit to anyone, least of all him. John Hall is clearly a highly confrontational & aggressive character but I don't think he's actually mentally ill. I've had a few run-ins with Mr Hall himself, the official RIC forum and some of the less open-minded members of RickResource over the years and as a result have done a little digging myself regarding RIC's trademarks, US trademark law and whether or not there are any grounds under which sales of Rick copies are illegal in the UK. There's a tendency to assume that RIC is a huge, wealthy, powerful multinational corporation with a permanent flying squad of attack lawyers on 24-hour standby. The reality is that "Rickenbacker International Corporation" is a little family business owned in its entirety by John Hall and his wife. I doubt Hall's bluff, bluster & mythical C&D letters are any more than that - bluff that he has neither the resources or (in the case of privately-sold secondhand copies) legal right to back up. I'm certainly not advocating calling that bluff, but isn't it interesting that the CEO of a major instrument brand has nothing better to do with his time than pontificate on his own brand forums, send strings of emails to nonentities such as myself, and throw his weight around on little British bass forums. A previous poster wondered why he "allows" the sale of used Rickenbackers on TalkBass. This is likely because it's an American forum with an incredibly massive membership, there will be people far more aware of US law, and able to take him on at his own game. By comparison, over here we're distant, small, easily intimidated and have very little familiarity with the laws he's threatening us with. Anyway, a bit of Rickenbacker history is of interest when considering Japanese, Italian, British & Brazilian copies from the 70s. When all these instruments were first being made, Rickenbacker International Corp ("RIC") didn't exist. From memory, Rickenbacker was originally two separate companies, one handling manufacture & the other distribution - apparently a common US business model around the 1930s. Our Mr Hall's dad, F.C. Hall bought these two companies in the 50s and passed them to young Johnny H in the mid 80s, who subsequently amalgamated them and formed RIC. The important point is that Hall registered various design trademarks of Rick instruments in the late 90s - from which it's reasonable to infer that no such trademarks existed in the pre-RIC era, and current marks therefore cannot be retrospectively applied to instruments made before the company which registered the trademark was founded. Considering the nature of US trademark law, which requres that a trademark holder constantly pursues & challenges breaches, the existence of all these sought-after old copies must be immensely inconvenient to Mr Hall. J.

[quote name='uncle psychosis' timestamp='1397344913' post='2423122'] Because John Hall has time, money, expensive lawyers, and a seemingly litigious nature. Basschat has none of the tools required to fight that. [/quote] Yes we do. We have members who can identify a Rickenbacker copy, blindfolded and with one arm tied behind their back. J.

Always been curious when the MDF bodies were around after picking up a (99% certain) Fujigen-built no-name Precision copy, which turned out to be MDF under the rattlecan spray job. I assumed it was from the same era as the cardboard Silver Series, didn't know they used MDF on E-serials too. J.

If the issue here is that somebody might inadvertantly advertise a Faker, believing it to be genuine, and as a result BC might be on the recieving end of Hall's wrath, then what exactly would be the problem with verifying the authenticity of the instrument before allowing the listing to go live? There were/are absolutely no Rickenbacker copies which are indistinguishable from the real thing, spotting the differences is very straightforward. If it's true that secondhand sales are a thorn in Hall's side, I'd derive a tiny measure of [i]schadenfreude[/i] from exerting a little pressure on that thorn. Jon.

Definitely a bit of a project, fair enough if it stays around £100 or thereabouts. Are the solid colour Silver Series Squiers the ones with MDF bodies? Jon.

I do like Hohner Jacks - but that one's a good £100 over the odds! Jon.

If you want a bass for funk, this is what you want: In fairness, if you actually could work out how to isolate one of the Precision pickups, you'd probably be able to get a decent Motown sound out of it... Jon.

A P project I put together a few years ago: [sharedmedia=core:attachments:57742] [sharedmedia=core:attachments:57743] Having the head matching the actual body was a bit unrealistic but I do like how it turned out. Jon.

It's interesting to note that the original BBs (at least, my old '84 BB400S) had the P pickup reversed: This was fairly common in Japanese basses of the era (my Washburn SB40 also has this) and I suppose theoretically it might brighten the response of the E & A strings - although I think you'd be hard pushed to notice. I did think on the BB it made the pickup a slightly more conveniently placed thumb-anchor than a standard P layout. Unfortunately I don't have the bass any longer so I can't measure the position. Anyone else got an original BB? Jon.

I think it's fair to say that most manufacturers don't push "adventurous" designs because it's not what the current market demands. For a couple of decades now, pro players in successful acts - who influence purchasers - often tend to play Precisions, or maybe a Jazz if they're feeling daring. Of course there are exceptions but many players seem content with generic, traditional instruments. This is very disappointing to an old git like me who grew up watching my heroes playing stuff like JayDees, Steinbergers, Wals, Status, high-end Ibanez, Washburns & Aria Pros and so on. These days the bass tends to have a less prominent musical role than the 80s-era bands who used these instruments and I feel that's reflected in the conservative choices of both players and retailers. Jon.

Thanks for that, no surprise it's a modification. Wonder what it sounds like with that strange wiring? J.