Anyone heard of Fandel?

benecol · Post by **benecol** » Thu Apr 28, 2011 8:11 pm

They don't - they just stop people listing clones and copies; they're a comparatively small company, and are protecting their trademark - more power to them.

Joey · Post by **Joey** » Thu Apr 28, 2011 8:17 pm

Believe "Rickenbacher" moved to America, then changed the name to become more Americanized. My mother was Darinka in Croatia, then "Donna" when she moved to NYC.

benecol · Post by **benecol** » Thu Apr 28, 2011 8:22 pm

They did it long before they started producing guitars then.

DanHeron · Post by **DanHeron** » Thu Apr 28, 2011 8:43 pm

They have always been based in america according to wikipedia.

Adolph Rickenbacher was born in Switzerland in 1886 and emigrated to the United States with relatives after the death of his parents. Sometime after moving to Los Angeles in 1918, he changed his surname to "Rickenbacker".

In 1925, Adolph Rickenbacker and two partners formed the Rickenbacker Manufacturing Company and incorporated it in 1927.

ekwatts · Post by **ekwatts** » Thu Apr 28, 2011 9:02 pm

DanHeron wrote:They have always been based in america according to wikipedia.

Adolph Rickenbacher was born in Switzerland in 1886 and emigrated to the United States with relatives after the death of his parents. Sometime after moving to Los Angeles in 1918, he changed his surname to "Rickenbacker".

In 1925, Adolph Rickenbacker and two partners formed the Rickenbacker Manufacturing Company and incorporated it in 1927.

Yeah, I read that, it's always been an American company, but it's one of those fairly easily debunked pieces of information that probably get propogated in guitar magazines that haven't done their research properly (so, always then) and stuff that it was a German company.

Mages · Post by **Mages** » Thu Apr 28, 2011 9:50 pm

yeah just so no one is confused, gretsch is also american not german, epiphone is american not greek, and dobro (dopyera brothers) is american as well, not slovakian. =)

contrary to popular belief, america <3's immigrants.

benecol · Post by **benecol** » Thu Apr 28, 2011 9:56 pm

I love you Mages.

Mo Law-ka · Post by **Mo Law-ka** » Thu Apr 28, 2011 10:01 pm

Mages wrote:america <3's immigrants.

ekwatts · Post by **ekwatts** » Thu Apr 28, 2011 10:14 pm

BACK IN THE PILE!

Fran · Post by **Fran** » Thu Apr 28, 2011 11:32 pm

This is like a n00b thread

RIC copies are usually substandard, but so are Blacktops so.. whatever.

James · Post by **James** » Thu Apr 28, 2011 11:41 pm

I haven't played many of them but from what I have Ric copies don't really get close to the feel of the real thing, even if they're a good guitar they feel fairly generic. There's a bit of magic about Rics that isn't easily recreated.

I think people take that the Gibson, and to a lesser extent Fender, copies are often described as being as good or better than the real thing and then transfer that to Ric copies. They aren't necessarily bad, but they tend to be just a standard feeling guitar that happens to be a Ric shape.

benecol · Post by **benecol** » Thu Apr 28, 2011 11:46 pm

... which can only be a good think, in my opinion: I've tried to love Rics, but they are the weirdest feeling guitars for me: the strings are just so far away from the body - it's like playing a Newton's Cradle.

ekwatts · Post by **ekwatts** » Fri Apr 29, 2011 12:48 am

Definitely an image thing for me. Rickenbackers just look gorgeous, but I'll admit that I've hardly ever even touched one, let alone played one. There's a John Lennon signature with something like a 20" scale in the window of Forsythes for something like Â£2000 and it looks ridiculously good.

James · Post by **James** » Fri Apr 29, 2011 1:00 am

I can't stand the way the majority of them look. All of the 300 series look shit. I absolutely love the 4000 series basses and Bobarsecake's 620 looks great. It actually has some elegance to the design rather than looking like a 6 year old's drawing of a guitar.

Every one I've played (which admittedly has not been that many, perhaps 3 basses and 3 guitars) has been incredible, though. There's something a little quirky about how they feel but I would guess it's just that feel quite a bit different to most other guitars and you would get used to it quite quickly. They definitely deserve the reputation they have even if the more common models look ridiculous.

Fran · Post by **Fran** » Fri Apr 29, 2011 7:48 am

Arsestars 620 is the best looking imo. 360's are okay (like Peter Bucks), i prefer the rounded horns. I never like'd high gloss necks..

Gabriel · Post by **Gabriel** » Fri Apr 29, 2011 9:04 am

I absolutely adore rics, if I had lots of money I'd plump for a Fireglo 360. In time...

How nice is this!?:

arcadedave · Post by **arcadedave** » Fri Apr 29, 2011 2:20 pm

On the subject of Ric copys;

http://probass.co.uk/Home.html

Good presentation and fair cheap if theyre any good too.

Viljami · Post by **Viljami** » Fri Apr 29, 2011 2:28 pm

James wrote:I can't stand the way the majority of them look. All of the 300 series look shit. I absolutely love the 4000 series basses and Bobarsecake's 620 looks great.

I thought I was the only one who felt like this. I dare not voice these opinions usually, because "300-series? They're sooo iconic and cool" etc. etc. while I silently think to myself "..and fucking ugly (not in a good way) at the same time."

James · Post by **James** » Fri Apr 29, 2011 2:49 pm

James wrote:... rather than looking like a 6 year old's drawing of a guitar.

Fire glow.

Ankhanu · Post by **Ankhanu** » Fri Apr 29, 2011 3:01 pm

arcadedave wrote:On the subject of Ric copys;

http://probass.co.uk/Home.html

► Show Spoiler

Good presentation and fair cheap if theyre any good too.

Eugh, can't abide those buckers. They look terrible.