Lets talk about horseys

Vintage, Modern, V & C series, Fretless, Signature & Special Editions

Moderators: rickenbrother, ajish4

Re: Lets talk about horseys

Postby (Kopfjaeger) » Thu Dec 24, 2015 4:55 pm

Gene,

Yes, the factory magnetized horsie on my 84 v63 was poorly aligned. The entire pup was off-kilter and I was not impressed with the string to string balance. The pole screws on the very rare 80's bobbins were quite a bit larger tan the 60's slotted filster head pole pieces, but still even with the extra coverage, balance sucked. Once I pulled the pup surround screws out and shifted the pup over, the tone improved dramatically. While the 60's pole pieces were slotted, they were not adjustable. Well, that's not 100% accurate. All the pole pieces were were slotted machine screws, threaded into the bobbin. The center two screws were able to be adjusted up or down, if you were careful. The outboard ones were way more tricky since the windings could be severed if adjusted. The D string on the future 69 Geddy bass was a little weak. After talking with Mark, he suggested a quarter turn longer and wham!! It all came together perfectly, tone wise!

Sepp

pups.jpg
Vintage/Classic Rickenbacker Enthusiast!
1972 4001 Jetglo
1973 4001 Burgundyglo
2011 4003 Jetglo
1986 4003 Shadow
User avatar
(Kopfjaeger)
Advanced Member
 
Posts: 1908
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 9:49 am
Location: NY/NJ Area

Re: Lets talk about horseys

Postby (bassman4001) » Thu Dec 24, 2015 5:42 pm

To me there's not much difference between between the new high gain and the reissue horseshoe soundwise. It is pretty to look at (RI horsey) and heavier. I really want a Lollar replacement horseshoe which is built to the vintage specs. The problem is it's 600.00 smackers. But it's right on.

http://www.lollarguitars.com/mm5/mercha ... seshoeBass
(bassman4001)
New member
 
Posts: 84
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2007 12:36 pm
Location: Pittsburgh, Pa

Re: Lets talk about horseys

Postby (Captain Bob) » Fri Dec 25, 2015 1:04 pm

I really want a Lollar replacement horseshoe which is built to the vintage specs. The problem is it's 600.00 smackers. But it's right on.


I've had a Lollar installed in my Snowglo since the week after the lawsuit ended. I'm sure they are not inexpensive to manufacture. And, only Jason himself makes these, not the production folks.
Place that price in juxtaposition with finding, purchasing, and restoring an original and its reasonable.


Installed in the 4001S and restored by Sergio....7.02K

hs1.jpg
1964 4001S Fireglo
User avatar
(Captain Bob)
Member
 
Posts: 237
Joined: Thu May 27, 2010 7:47 pm
Location: Nashville

Re: Lets talk about horseys

Postby (bassman4001) » Fri Dec 25, 2015 4:31 pm

How do you like the Lollar?
(bassman4001)
New member
 
Posts: 84
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2007 12:36 pm
Location: Pittsburgh, Pa

Re: Lets talk about horseys

Postby (Captain Bob) » Sun Dec 27, 2015 1:40 pm

I like it. Presently, its as close to the real thing as you're going to find. Its noticeably of a higher quality of manufacture than an original. On the website, there is now a sheet of instructions that didn't exist when I purchased mine. And, the picture they have is not the bass version. That may be a lap steel. The bass guitar version has the aluminum base plate like an original.
I should have taken pics before I installed it. But when it arrived, I immediately went to work with a soldering iron. I did take some pics, well after the fact (below).

I have since changed the pickguard to the newer style without the humps, (Pickguardian) and replaced the white switch cover with a black one. Aceonbassworks (Dane) built the harness with proper 60's value pots. These newer basses do not have the large neck pockets of the past, but I can grab another 1/4" toward the neck with the existing route (strangely there is a greater cut out area aft of the pickup). So, I will have yet another pickguard made at some point. Sometimes I need a break from these little projects. I spent the last day tweaking my Gold Label black Hofner and my Jerry Jones Longhorn. At least I played them for an hour and a half afterward :-)

rsz_img_1887.jpg
rsz_img_1886.jpg
rsz_img_1884.jpg
1964 4001S Fireglo
User avatar
(Captain Bob)
Member
 
Posts: 237
Joined: Thu May 27, 2010 7:47 pm
Location: Nashville

Re: Lets talk about horseys

Postby (wints) » Sun Dec 27, 2015 3:19 pm

Back in the day, I had a handful of readings from the very few original horseshoe/bobbin pick ups from the 60's. I can't find the data now, but can recall them all being roughly in the 6.5-7.5K region. If there was an outsider, it was weaker, heading down towards the 6K figure, not stronger, as many suspected.

I'd guess that nearly all of the original horseshoes were pretty close to these numbers, the major difference in tone coming from the style of playing. Squire/Rutherford and McCartney/Gibb are poles apart (pun intended. :wink: ) but spec wise all their basses were probably very similar....apart from one being a lefty of course!
User avatar
(wints)
Veteran RRF member
 
Posts: 6482
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2001 12:21 pm
Location: Fla...

Re: Lets talk about horseys

Postby (Lefty4003S8) » Mon Dec 28, 2015 7:41 pm

wints wrote:Back in the day, I had a handful of readings from the very few original horseshoe/bobbin pick ups from the 60's. I can't find the data now, but can recall them all being roughly in the 6.5-7.5K region. If there was an outsider, it was weaker, heading down towards the 6K figure, not stronger, as many suspected.

I'd guess that nearly all of the original horseshoes were pretty close to these numbers, the major difference in tone coming from the style of playing. Squire/Rutherford and McCartney/Gibb are poles apart (pun intended. :wink: ) but spec wise all their basses were probably very similar....apart from one being a lefty of course!



GREAT point about tone. I used to think "If I had a Rickenbacker bass, I could sound just like Chris Squire." WOW!!! Was I delusional. :roll: :roll: :lol:
(But, in my defense, I didn't have an RM1999).
Do not drink from the toilet when taking Lyrica
User avatar
(Lefty4003S8)
Intermediate Member
 
Posts: 822
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 11:05 am

Re: Lets talk about horseys

Postby (pag) » Sat Jan 02, 2016 7:44 pm

I have a Lollar HS.
I installed it on my CS but I couldnt get the string clearance between the pole pieces and the underside of the HS magnets that I had with the RI pup.
Its a work of art and a wonderful pickup with great hands on customer service from Jason but I had to put the RI back on the bass....dont tell my wife!
I am keeping the lollar for future projects by the way.

On the subject of The Yes Album, the 21 fretter didnt have a HS on it at that time althougnwhen it was sold a HS had been put on it!
User avatar
(pag)
Member
 
Posts: 440
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2010 9:37 am
Location: Altrincham Cheshire England

Re: Lets talk about horseys

Postby (jps) » Sat Jan 02, 2016 7:54 pm

Pete, can you post a photo of the Lollar HS PU from the side to show what the clearance is between the poles and the shoes, thanks?

Rick Turner's HS PU looks like it has very little clearance to it.
Attachments
Horseshoe - Rick Turner 01.jpg
(Insert famous quote here)
User avatar
(jps)
RRF Consultant
 
Posts: 35917
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2003 7:00 am
Location: Not of this Earth

Re: Lets talk about horseys

Postby (Revbrodiddley) » Sun Jan 03, 2016 2:53 pm

Hi everyone. First time chiming in on this topic. Favorite bass sounds are the usual McCartney's Sgt. Pepper etc. sounds, but then also one I don't hear EVER: Roger Waters tone on Piper at the GAtes of Dawn and then other 60s rick sounds from the Who, the Kinks etc. So basically I'm wanting as close to a early/mid 60s RM1999 or 4001S as possible. I recently picked up a 4001v63 and was a little disappointed to find its tone VERY different from what I'm looking for, though cosmetically its outstanding and it plays beautifully! And yes, I feel justified in saying the BASS's tone is lacking and not my playing. For reference, I have a 4003 that sounds FAR and AWAY more like what I'm going for, with a 7.4k toaster in neck and a (seemingly) lower output hi gain in the bridge (weird i know!). My 4003 also has (tetrahedron) strings whereas my 4001v63 has TI's (to my ears these make a BIG difference as the TI's are the brightest, liveliest sounding flatwounds I've heard, while the (tetrahedrons) sound much more dead and thumpy like the Macca sound I'm going for).

With the 4001v63, both the toaster and the RIHS are super hi gain. So I've purchased a Dane harness, a 60s toaster measuring at 7.78k and now am on the hunt for the proper horseshoe solution. Most recently the string clearance issue was mentioned and is of some concern to me. The installation instructions (as much a disclaimer!) on the Lollar site gave me some insecurity in ordering that pickup even after convincing myself that the price was worth it. It seems to say there's a good chance the shoes won't line up perfectly due to the heat treating, one's playing style will have to take a more conservative turn due to the reduced string clearance, and it also dissuades from using the .0047 bass reducing cap that so many people say is essential for the vintage style, claiming this cap serves no purpose and will ruin the tone of the horseshoe pickup?!

So am I crazy or does it sort of seem like paying 600 bucks for a pickup that takes two steps forward...and also a step and a half backwards?

Dane's idea about rewinding or unwinding the reissue seems more economical and would also allow me to keep playing the way I've always played a rick bass at least...but does anyone else feel that a horseshoe with a treble cap is a bad combination?
(Revbrodiddley)
New member
 
Posts: 21
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2012 12:47 pm

Re: Lets talk about horseys

Postby (jps) » Sun Jan 03, 2016 3:57 pm

Revbrodiddley wrote:Hi everyone. First time chiming in on this topic. Favorite bass sounds are the usual McCartney's Sgt. Pepper etc. sounds, but then also one I don't hear EVER: Roger Waters tone on Piper at the GAtes of Dawn and then other 60s rick sounds from the Who, the Kinks etc. So basically I'm wanting as close to a early/mid 60s RM1999 or 4001S as possible. I recently picked up a 4001v63 and was a little disappointed to find its tone VERY different from what I'm looking for, though cosmetically its outstanding and it plays beautifully! And yes, I feel justified in saying the BASS's tone is lacking and not my playing. For reference, I have a 4003 that sounds FAR and AWAY more like what I'm going for, with a 7.4k toaster in neck and a (seemingly) lower output hi gain in the bridge (weird i know!). My 4003 also has (tetrahedron) strings whereas my 4001v63 has TI's (to my ears these make a BIG difference as the TI's are the brightest, liveliest sounding flatwounds I've heard, while the (tetrahedrons) sound much more dead and thumpy like the Macca sound I'm going for).

With the 4001v63, both the toaster and the RIHS are super hi gain. So I've purchased a Dane harness, a 60s toaster measuring at 7.78k and now am on the hunt for the proper horseshoe solution. Most recently the string clearance issue was mentioned and is of some concern to me. The installation instructions (as much a disclaimer!) on the Lollar site gave me some insecurity in ordering that pickup even after convincing myself that the price was worth it. It seems to say there's a good chance the shoes won't line up perfectly due to the heat treating, one's playing style will have to take a more conservative turn due to the reduced string clearance, and it also dissuades from using the .0047 bass reducing cap that so many people say is essential for the vintage style, claiming this cap serves no purpose and will ruin the tone of the horseshoe pickup?!

So am I crazy or does it sort of seem like paying 600 bucks for a pickup that takes two steps forward...and also a step and a half backwards?

Dane's idea about rewinding or unwinding the reissue seems more economical and would also allow me to keep playing the way I've always played a rick bass at least...but does anyone else feel that a horseshoe with a treble cap is a bad combination?
Let me get this straight; You are paying many hundreds of $$$ for pickups and wiring harnesses while at the same time you don't like the TI JF strings on your V63 compared to the Pyramids on your 4003? Have you tried the simple, least expensive test, yet, as in changing the strings on the V63? It does not sound like you have from what you just wrote above. I take it you have tried various pickup heights to change the balance between the two pickups, right? The '98 4001V63 I used to own could get that mid '60s tone you are looking for; I used D'Addario Chromes in a Super Soft set and swapped the .060 D string for a .055 string, but that was not for a tone change, just a feel change in the strings for me. When I got the bass it, of course, did not have the .0047µF cap in line with the HS PU, but a few years later I did put one in, for the better IMO+E, YMMV. Try getting most of the tone with the toaster and just add in the HS PU as a seasoning, depending on what you are going for.

As an aside, for many of us, the classic mid '60s tone is that of Chris Squire's, given his bass was a 1964 RM1999. 8)
(Insert famous quote here)
User avatar
(jps)
RRF Consultant
 
Posts: 35917
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2003 7:00 am
Location: Not of this Earth

Re: Lets talk about horseys

Postby (Revbrodiddley) » Sun Jan 03, 2016 4:23 pm

Got the strings on the way, my friend! That change is the obvious part for me. Sorry I didn't include it in the original post. I'm asking the questions about the less obvious bits. I've definitely experimented with pickup height but with the horseshoe particularly, there is very limited play as the lower the pickup goes, the less string clearance you have, so that at some point action must come down to compensate...which stands to negate the change in pickup height! I have spent the money on the harness, i definitely have NOT spent the money on the Lollar. I got the vintage toaster for 200 dollars...which is the same as a reissue toaster...so I don't feel I've really gone all out just yet! All good points though and I thank you for the thought!
(Revbrodiddley)
New member
 
Posts: 21
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2012 12:47 pm

Re: Lets talk about horseys

Postby (Wiker) » Sun Jan 03, 2016 5:10 pm

I have two Lollar horseshoe pickups. Bought them back in 2011 when they cost only $340 (if I remember correctly). Very high quality. The pole screws are adjustable. The bobbin is wax pottet. Due to sharp corners of the shoes I find the RIHS quit uncomfortable when resting my hand on the shoes while playing. Lollar’s shoes have rounded corners and much more comfortable in that respect.

"It seems to say there's a good chance the shoes won't line up perfectly due to the heat treating [...]" That is not a real problem. They are only warning about not to expecting the shoes to be 100% aligned. On both my Lollar HS pickups the shoes are much better aligned than on the V63 RIHS I have.

The Lollar HS has about 2-3 mm less clearance than the reissue HS. I’ve never ever experienced any problem/issue with string clearance on my Lollar HS, and my playing is very hard with a pick. (It’s hard to judge string clearance from photos, but I attached a couple bellow.)
A challenge is that Lollar HS pickups seems very sensitive to the distance between strings and poles. Have to spend some time adjusting the pole screws properly for even response between strings. Maybe this isn’t specific to Lollar HS, but only that when I set it up I always end up with the stings quite close to the poles in order to get even output between the Lollar and the neck toaster. And, in my ears the Lollar HS comes more to life when close to the strings. But I’ve never needed to have it so close that strings hit the poles (even with my hard playing).

Output from Lollar HS is a good match for 7.xK neck toaster, so the Lollar shouldn’t need to be lowered or raised to extremes in order to match output to a 7.xK toaster. On both my basses I have ended up with the strings close to being in the middle between poles and top of the shoes to get match output.

"[...] and it also dissuades from using the .0047 bass reducing cap that so many people say is essential for the vintage style, claiming this cap serves no purpose and will ruin the tone of the horseshoe pickup?!" In the .pdf he is not speaking about the Lollar HS pickup specifically, but that the cap will ruining the tone of ANY bridge pickup. I’ve had the .0047uF in-line cap installed with Lollar HS and other bridge pickups, and it "ruins the tone" the same way on all pickups (but that’s another topic ;)

Image

Image
Last edited by Wiker on Sun Jan 03, 2016 6:55 pm, edited 3 times in total.
User avatar
(Wiker)
Member
 
Posts: 407
Joined: Sat May 16, 2009 8:08 pm
Location: Norway

Re: Lets talk about horseys

Postby (Ashgray) » Sun Jan 03, 2016 5:17 pm

Just on that point about the .0047 capacitor - it's great to have the choice whether or not to use it (personally, I do most of the time), an dif you get one of Dane's harnesses, he can configure the push-pull pot to cut the cap in or out.

Did that with my 4001v63 after I'd installed a scatterwound toaster and an original horsie off of a lap steel, and have never looked back.

Ash
1976 4001 "Shadow" Fretless
1978 4002 Walnut
1986 4008 Silver
1999 4001 V63 White
2012 4004 Jetglo

_____________________

Button 6 String Fretfull
Button 6 String Fretless
NS CR5 Omni Bass Fretless
Ashbory Bass
User avatar
(Ashgray)
Intermediate Member
 
Posts: 535
Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2013 7:14 am
Location: Nailsea, Somerset, UK

Re: Lets talk about horseys

Postby (jps) » Sun Jan 03, 2016 5:27 pm

Revbrodiddley wrote:...I've definitely experimented with pickup height but with the horseshoe particularly, there is very limited play as the lower the pickup goes, the less string clearance you have, so that at some point action must come down to compensate...which stands to negate the change in pickup height!...

About 10 years ago I tried my hand at relieving that issue by bending the shoes up some (I did this on a second one, too). It made a significant difference in adjustability, and playability. 8)

Here is the first one I did:

V63 Horseshoes 03.jpg
Copyright © Jeffrey P. Scott 2004 All rights reserved.


V63 Horseshoes 05.jpg
Copyright © Jeffrey P. Scott 2004 All rights reserved.


This is the second one using a different technique to spread out the shoes:

Pickups_1200_0107.jpg
Copyright © Jeffrey P. Scott 2006 All rights reserved.
Last edited by jps on Sun Jan 03, 2016 5:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.
(Insert famous quote here)
User avatar
(jps)
RRF Consultant
 
Posts: 35917
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2003 7:00 am
Location: Not of this Earth

PreviousNext

Return to Rickenbacker Basses: by Joey Vasco & Tony Cabibe

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests