JOHN LENNON - Rickenbacker question.....

Paul also had a Casino, which he used on 'Ticket to Ride', so Paul at least had his by February 15th 1965. Maybe all 3 of them got them at the same time. I dunno if Paul sanded his down, but he used a Casino (unsanded) on tour in 1989.

 

Very cool! I wonder what songs on Abbey Road feature George on his Casino? For most of the album he used his Les Paul (and possibly his Rosewood Tele).

 

Paul got his first, probably in 1964. His was a 1962 model, with the smaller early '60s headstock, and European-made Selmer-Bigsby tailpiece. He played it on the "Help!" album. Presumably Lennon and Harrison liked his guitar and wanted their own. McCartney also played the Casino a lot on "Chaos and Creation."

 

Paul never sanded his Casino.
He sanded his Rick Bass in 1968.

 

...after giving it a psychedelic paint job, as seen in "Magical Mystery Tour."

 

I think he used his Casino for Oh Darling. The song ends on A6 chord and George then playes the chord behind the saddles (picks the strings between saddles and the Bigsby vibrato). He could be heard rehearsing the ending between the outtakes, see Rockband audio.
I have a Casino with trapeze bridge and this effect sounds similiar but not close enough, has some really wierd overtones. A friend of mine has a Casino with Bigsby on it and it sounds 100% accurate with the Bigsby.

Ondra

 

Here's George in his Sgt Pepper suit with his stripped Casino as a prop from the video clip to 'Ding Dong'.

 

Entirely off topic, but I love this picture of John with his cherry red strat from 1980.

 

That was a trendy new model for 1980, called simply "The Strat."

 

Almost everybody I know (myself included) with a Casino/Sheraton/335-type guitar eventually ditches the pickguards; I think they look better without them.

 

I suppose it could be, but just because an acoustic guitar has a pickup in it doesn't mean it's an electric. Ask anyone who plays the acoustic guitar in a live setting with the help of a pickup if they play an acoustic or an electric guitar. By electric guitar, I meant a guitar designed from the ground up to be played through an amp. The J-160E did come with a pickup on it, and can be amplified, true, but it's pretty clearly an acoustic guitar, and I'd wager it was used as an acoustic guitar by the lads far more frequently than it was used as an electric.

 

Agreed!
However, J-160E was originaly designed by Gibson as an electric guitar! It had ladder bracing (instead of x bracing) to dampen the acoustic sound and reduce feedback while being amplified. The acoustic sound is as a sort of bonus for guitarists on tour. It does play louder acoustically compared to solid top or even hollow body electrics but is compromised as an acoustic guitar, has quite unique sound I must say.
I think that the current J-160E Standard has the x bracing to improve the acoustic sound though.

Ondra

 

Ladder bracing was common on many lower-end Gibson acoustics from the 40s, 50s and 60s, and most of them did not come with a pickup installed. Here's some good information about the bracing used in Gibson acoustics.

It may be true that Gibson chose to use ladder bracing on the J-160E for it's ability to dampen acoustic sound, and feedback from the pickup, but considering that Gibson had a thriving electric division, it seems unlikely that the J-160E was ever really considered an electric guitar. Electro-acoustic, maybe - it delivered the benefits of amplification to the acoustic guitarist of the 50s and 60s. But even today, the J-106E is made by Gibson's acoustic division in Montana, not their electric division in wherever it is... Nashville?

Anyway, it's a small point. I don't mean to argumentative about it. When I said John had four electric guitars in the early days, I just meant purpose-built electrics. It's like the difference between a Fender Stratocaster and, say, a Taylor 514ce - they both are guitars, both have six strings, both have pickups, and both can be played with amplification. But one is, really, an acoustic.

 

Here's a thought: what's the possibility he used the 325 during the studio overdubs/re-recordings of the Shea Stadium '65 set, at CTS Studios in Jan '66? As John had played his 325 onstage, would it not have been the natural choice to use it again, to accurately replicate the sound of that instrument?

 

Sounds like the right choice to me to "sweeten" the live tracks unobtrusively.

 

agreed - but I'm certain that on many of the early tracks (and I Feel Fine) we are hearing the sound of the J-160E through an amp

 

It seems that The Beatles turned up for that session expecting to re-do their voices only, and that they had to send out to Denmark Street for hired instruments. So who knows what they used. There are no glaring anomalies in the sound of 'I Feel Fine' and' Help!' the two songs completely newly recorded, but...

 

We are.

Interesting. I suppose their 'regular' instruments would have been available on Denmark Street to varying degrees.
So they couldn't have heard the tapes at all prior to that? (or was it a last minute idea?)

 

There doesn't seem to be a clear cut answer to that. There is a long interview with the engineer from that day on the web somewhere I'll try to track it down. Certainly the session seems a bit piecemeal, what with 'Act Naturally' and 'Twist and Shout' being sourced from the album and the unreleased Hollywood Bowl tape, bass being added to some songs, and organ to 'I''m Down', two songs being remade entirely, five being untouched (apart from adding screaming from the Hollywood Bowl tape) yet two of those being cut from the movie.

 

I still can't understand why they included 'Act Naturally' (despite Ringo's popularity) and yet cut 2 songs out, including 'Everybody's Trying To Be My Baby' which sounds ok on Anthology 2. Unless there was some sort of camera issue on those songs.

 

Yes, apparently those two songs were in the first print viewed by Epstein, so it seems as if the visuals were good enough (anyway a lot of the film has shots not related to the songs they're synched to) but someone decided two songs should be cut. It can't have been George Martin because the sound is very acceptable on those songs and anyway they remade two others from scratch. So it seems maybe there WAS a problem with the picture... What we need is for the pre-edit print to turn up....
It is odd that, despite all the over-dubbing and remakes, they leave off two songs that didn't require any 'sweetening'. In fact the whole story just gets harder to understand!

 

It is indeed a mystery. If this does ever turn up on an official DVD, I wonder if the disc-dubbed version of 'Act Naturally' will be included? To me, I just don't think they could get away with it anymore. People who aren't familiar with the story behind it would probably think that the Beatles mimed! The overdubbed songs I can live with. If you manage to find that interview anytime, please post it.

 

Couldn't find it online but parts of the interview are in the recent book "Revolver: How The Beatles Re-Imagined Rock'n'Roll" by Robert Rodriguez.

 

ok, cheers.

 

So what exactly is John playing here during the 'Pepper' sessions..?