| Author |
Message |
|
ricslinger
|
Post subject: Re: The Sound of the 660/12  Posted: Thu Jul 05, 2007 10:57 am |
|
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2007 12:08 pm
Posts: 1172
Location: Reno,Nevada
|
|
I've just received a 660/12 Jetglo from the Ricpage and I swear to everyone out there it's a total classic!It holds its own even against the C63.The sound(through a Fender Twin Amp)is absolutely chorus-like.Sounds nothing like a Fender.The wider neck and solid body,although small,is in near perfect balance with the headstock,even with all those tuners.Not a bit top-heavy.A very well engineered guitar.I love the 300 series,but this is a 600 to be reckoned with.It can be driven both hard and soft with great sound.
|
|
  |
|
 |
|
sharkboy
|
Post subject: Re: The Sound of the 660/12 Posted: Thu Jul 05, 2007 8:20 pm |
|
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2006 1:00 pm
Posts: 185
Location: CA
|
Quote: One question you 660-12 guys can answer for me, as I'm not sure I've ever played one, even though I've played their kin:
How is the balance of a 660-12? With the smaller body and 12 tuners, it looks like it could be a tad neck-heavy, but we all know Maple is denser, therefore heavier, than a lot of other woods, and of course, my 4002 is balanced just fine.
Thanks. I use a suede (both sides) strap and have no trouble with the 660/12 or 660/6. I sling it higher than most guitarists do, which also helps me keep the neck up. Between the surprisingly good weighting, compact headstock, high placement of the body and belly friction, I have no trouble. The head does have a slight heft in the balance, but it is just noticeable. It feels to me like the neck would prefer to be perpendicular to the ground instead of up at a higher angle, as I prefer it. I do recommend a suede strap.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
jbiscuti
|
Post subject: Re: The Sound of the 660/12 Posted: Fri Jul 06, 2007 2:32 am |
|
Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2006 2:00 pm
Posts: 457
Location: New York City
|
Quote: One question you 660-12 guys can answer for me, as I'm not sure I've ever played one, even though I've played their kin:
How is the balance of a 660-12? With the smaller body and 12 tuners, it looks like it could be a tad neck-heavy, but we all know Maple is denser, therefore heavier, than a lot of other woods, and of course, my 4002 is balanced just fine.
Thanks. Mine is definitely neck heavy. Only drawback of the guitar. I think it totally nails "that sound" - Incredibly bright and jangly.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
BYRDFAN
|
Post subject: Re: The Sound of the 660/12 Posted: Fri Jul 06, 2007 4:34 am |
|
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2005 2:00 pm
Posts: 90
Location: Metepec, Mex
|
|
And what about a 350/12v63?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
studiotwosession
|
Post subject: Re: The Sound of the 660/12 Posted: Fri Jul 06, 2007 6:41 am |
|
Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2005 1:00 pm
Posts: 1848
Location: New York, NY
|
Mine is definitely neck heavy. Only drawback of the guitar. I think it totally nails "that sound" - Incredibly bright and jangly.
For sure. And it's quite blue, too.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
ricslinger
|
Post subject: Re: The Sound of the 660/12 Posted: Fri Jul 06, 2007 10:42 am |
|
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2007 12:08 pm
Posts: 1172
Location: Reno,Nevada
|
|
Try a Gibson Firebird on for size and you'll see what top-heavy really is.The 660/12 is a well-balanced kick-butt guitar.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
iiipopes
|
Post subject: Re: The Sound of the 660/12 Posted: Fri Jul 06, 2007 7:07 pm |
|
Joined: Sun Oct 08, 2006 6:07 am
Posts: 3870
|
Quote: And what about a 350/12v63? I did play a 350 years ago when they first came out, and they are definitely neck heavy.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Houka
|
Post subject: Re: The Sound of the 660/12 Posted: Sat Jul 14, 2007 3:40 am |
|
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2007 4:25 am
Posts: 60
Location: Norfolk, VA
|
Quote: Try a Gibson Firebird on for size and you'll see what top-heavy really is.The 660/12 is a well-balanced kick-butt guitar. Or try any Gretsch hollow body! It is a constant battle to keep the headstock from smacking the floor. I'm suprised to hear those that haven't found the 660 sound to have the right jangle....I recently got mine and think it has a much closer sound to the old 60's recordings than my 330/12.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
ricslinger
|
Post subject: Re: The Sound of the 660/12 Posted: Mon Jul 16, 2007 10:53 am |
|
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2007 12:08 pm
Posts: 1172
Location: Reno,Nevada
|
|
You're right on that,Houka.The combination of 12-string and toaster-tops is classic RIC guitar sound.The 660/12 is not as resonant as the 360/12C63,but has a slightly sharper attack.Plus I think it actually looks better.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
RichLauver
|
Post subject: Re: The Sound of the 660/12 Posted: Mon Jul 23, 2007 8:30 am |
|
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 2:00 pm
Posts: 6
Location: Baltimore, MD
|
Quote: Had a 620/12 before, from the early 90s, with lots of dings and scratches and heavy as a chair (the 660/12 was light as a feather!), but it sounded fantastic. The 620 and the 660 both weigh in at 8 lbs according to current specs. I've had my 660/12 MB for about 1-1/2 years now, and I want to be buried with it - I love that guitar! I got a 620/6 early this year and love it, too, just not as much. I also use suede straps and don't notice any neck heaviness - they both feel really well balanced. Anyway, as to the sound of the 660/12, I've got some samples on my web site from a CD that I did last year called "Moon and Sun". The 660/12 is handling all the electric guitar parts. Have a listen: http://www.richlauver.com/cd.htm
|
|
| |
|
|
|
