correct string height on old 4001 ?

[Sir Ricardo]

.

Greetings - I'm adjusting my '73 4001, and am wondering about the 'right' string height. I know one answer is 'to your preference', but I'm also wondering if there is a Rickenbacker spec. Martin guitars have published specs on string height / saddle height for their acoustics. I'm wondering if RIC does also. And if not, what a 'typical' string height would be.

I'm assuming it's at the 12th fret, low E and high E.

Any thoughts?

thanks

Richard

[jps]

I don't recall if there is/was a "standard" height recommended/stated by Rickenbacker. I set mine at the last (20th) fret to around 2-3mm once the neck relief has been set with the truss rods. Nut slot height is a very important part of the string height, too. I set mine so that the string height at the 1st fret is the same as that of the 2nd fret when the string is pressed down at the 1st fret, for a consistent feel in 1st position.

[lumgimfong]

DK.
As a datapoint, my 4003 setup is somewhere around:
A business card fits between string and 9th fret wire with capo at I and last fret depressed ( for both E and G strings).
Action: e string is 6.5/64ths at 12th fret (no press), g string at 5/64
Neck pup height: hi as poss
Bridge pup height: to ear for even volume across all strings.
This sounds great with D'Addario Chromes ECB84 (40-60-80-100) flatwounds set.



2016 4003 FactorySetup with factory .105 Ric strings:
Action: 6/64 E and G strings at 17th fret no press.
Pickup height: Neck pickup - 10/64 at low E, 9/64 at hi G
(Measured from pole pieces no press.).
Neck relief: a (folded?)piece of paper just fits between E string and 8th fret/ G string and 8th fret with capo on first fret and press at highest fret.

[henry5]

I remember when I got my first 4001, a brand-new-at-the-time 1980 (TC915, Jetglo, stolen from me in 1986, in case anyone knows where it is), it was strung with flats and the string height was ridiculously high; almost unplayable. I didn't know any better at the time, but every time I showed it to another bassist the consensus was that you could drive a bus under the strings. I don't know what the actual string height was but it was nearer full inches than 32nds. Ironic seeing as I now love very low action. I eventually got it set up much nearer to how I like it now, with (IIRC) 35 gauge Rotos, which is what it was wearing when stolen.

[cassius987]

if there is a Rickenbacker spec. ... what a 'typical' string height would be.

I'm assuming it's at the 12th fret, low E and high E.

Do you mean high G?

I think of "typical" as 3/32'' off of the 12th fret at E, and 1/16'' off of the 12th fret at G (I use the exact same measurements on a fretless, but measure from the fingerboard). For a Ric, it is only slightly lower numbers than typical at best. I tend to add 1 or 2/16'' to those numbers for the pickup heights.

Where a Ric really deviates in setup is not in string action but in the amount of relief. My Rics don't just function better than average at lower amounts of relief, they also function worse than average at higher amounts of relief. Relief has a much bigger effect on playability than how you set the final string height. It's a weird quirk, and I think it's one of the reasons why people love them or hate them. In my experience, trying to put much relief on a Ric neck with modern truss rods will make a ski ramp effect whether it's fretless or fretted. I can't speak for the rare set neck and reverse truss rod models; nor can I test this hypothesis on my 4001FL with older truss rods. It is frozen in a dead straight relief and I haven't bothered to "fix" this because I like it.

The last bit I'll add is that, contrary to my previous method, I've taken a liking to tuning the strings down to adjust relief. While it may not be wholly necessary, I can do my setups with a bit more confidence this way.