Reproduction Pre-1974 Aluminum Tailpiece / Bridge
Moderators: rickenbrother, ajish4
- Captain Bob
- Member
- Posts: 237
- Joined: Thu May 27, 2010 6:47 pm
- Contact:
Re: Reproduction Pre-1974 Aluminum Tailpiece / Bridge
I'm in...
As John Fay suggested, the ability to lower the action to a greater degree would be helpful. Moreover, the sand cast bridge sometimes sits on the 3 tailpiece screw heads that may raise it ever so slightly impeding the ability for it to rest fully on the floor of the tailpiece.
As John Fay suggested, the ability to lower the action to a greater degree would be helpful. Moreover, the sand cast bridge sometimes sits on the 3 tailpiece screw heads that may raise it ever so slightly impeding the ability for it to rest fully on the floor of the tailpiece.
1964 4001S Fireglo
-
- Member
- Posts: 327
- Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2014 9:26 am
Re: Reproduction Pre-1974 Aluminum Tailpiece / Bridge
Any conjecture on what the brass tubes are where the mute screws would be? Some kind of over-the string mute assembly, perchance? it's beautifully machined, and better looking then the Hipshot, wish Ric would license something like this if they don't want to make an upgraded bridge themselves. I can't see any downside to an arrangement like that, they get a piece of it for doing nothing, players get a more easily adjustable bridge that looks unlikey to ever tail lift. Win/Win.
- Kopfjaeger
- Advanced Member
- Posts: 1908
- Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 8:49 am
Re: Reproduction Pre-1974 Aluminum Tailpiece / Bridge
No idea about any of the features of this tail piece. i wish the luthier would have responded to the repeated messages I sent him about it. Sadly, he did not.
It's a bit of a departure from the current design with keeping the same foot print. More aesthetically pleasing, in my opinion, than the Hipshot. In having a new "sandcast" type replacement made perhaps think outside of the box a little and design a better one. My two cents.
Sepp
It's a bit of a departure from the current design with keeping the same foot print. More aesthetically pleasing, in my opinion, than the Hipshot. In having a new "sandcast" type replacement made perhaps think outside of the box a little and design a better one. My two cents.
Sepp
Vintage/Classic Rickenbacker Enthusiast!
1972 4001 Jetglo
1973 4001 Burgundyglo
2011 4003 Jetglo
1986 4003 Shadow
1972 4001 Jetglo
1973 4001 Burgundyglo
2011 4003 Jetglo
1986 4003 Shadow
- DriftSpace
- Member
- Posts: 458
- Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2012 10:07 pm
- Contact:
Re: Reproduction Pre-1974 Aluminum Tailpiece / Bridge
+1Kopfjaeger wrote:In having a new "sandcast" type replacement made perhaps think outside of the box a little and design a better one.
It would be a huge opportunity missed to not do this.
Re: Reproduction Pre-1974 Aluminum Tailpiece / Bridge
That's very interesting,and uber-cool-looking.Kopfjaeger wrote:Perhaps something lie this??
Don't see what the point of the 2 brass tubes might be. (nostalgia for scraped knuckles?)
I do prefer the design concept to the separate piece design of the factory bridge/tailpiece.
- chefothefuture
- Advanced Member
- Posts: 1886
- Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2005 6:00 am
Re: Reproduction Pre-1974 Aluminum Tailpiece / Bridge
I would even welcome a redisign of the bridge insert.
Insetting the saddles to compensate for neck lift....
Insetting the saddles to compensate for neck lift....
-
- New member
- Posts: 19
- Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2014 7:02 pm
Re: Reproduction Pre-1974 Aluminum Tailpiece / Bridge
Do it in brass, and you'll have my interest.
-
- New member
- Posts: 30
- Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 7:03 pm
Re: Reproduction Pre-1974 Aluminum Tailpiece / Bridge
I'm thinking maybe those brass tubes are there for an optional mute assembly? Maybe they are removable if you would choose not to use the mute?
Re: Reproduction Pre-1974 Aluminum Tailpiece / Bridge
Something as massive as a 4001/3 tailpiece cast in brass would weigh at least a pound, and change the tone of the instrument. Brass is fine for the 4003S5 bridge inserts, and BadAss bridges because they're not that big, but I'm trying to keep my basses at 9lbs or less these days.
Re: Reproduction Pre-1974 Aluminum Tailpiece / Bridge
+1!
I wouldn't do it in anything except aluminum.
I wouldn't do it in anything except aluminum.
- DriftSpace
- Member
- Posts: 458
- Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2012 10:07 pm
- Contact:
Re: Reproduction Pre-1974 Aluminum Tailpiece / Bridge
However, that's another advantage of CNC over sand casting; with CNC you already have a CAD file, so -- in the event that someone wanted a brass tail as opposed to aluminum -- it's just a matter of putting different material in the machine, as opposed to properly preparing a sand mold, preparing the alloy, and then having to clean-up each individual piece afterwards. There's little reason someone wouldn't be able to get a tail made out of whatever material they want if someone already has a CNC machine set-up to do it.
I'm also in the aluminum camp, but if someone wants a 1-pound brass tail on their instrument: go nuts.
I'm also in the aluminum camp, but if someone wants a 1-pound brass tail on their instrument: go nuts.
-
- New member
- Posts: 19
- Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2014 7:02 pm
Re: Reproduction Pre-1974 Aluminum Tailpiece / Bridge
I'm more than willing to take on an extra pound in exchange for tone and balance. Hell, I'd take on 10 pounds.aceonbass wrote:Something as massive as a 4001/3 tailpiece cast in brass would weigh at least a pound, and change the tone of the instrument. Brass is fine for the 4003S5 bridge inserts, and BadAss bridges because they're not that big, but I'm trying to keep my basses at 9lbs or less these days.
Extra weight on the tail is less noticeable when you're playing than weight added anywhere else, anyway.
Re: Reproduction Pre-1974 Aluminum Tailpiece / Bridge
I wonder if that much of a change would make the tone so different that the pickups wouldn't sound as good. I've heard Rick pickups don't sound great on other kinds of guitars because they are voiced for those bright all-maple bodies.
Re: Reproduction Pre-1974 Aluminum Tailpiece / Bridge
yes, when the saddles are all the way back, unfortunately something almost every Ric requires, the bottom of the saddle rocks on the oval screw heads in the base.Captain Bob wrote:I'm in...
As John Fay suggested, the ability to lower the action to a greater degree would be helpful. Moreover, the sand cast bridge sometimes sits on the 3 tailpiece screw heads that may raise it ever so slightly impeding the ability for it to rest fully on the floor of the tailpiece.
easy fix, this is what I do...
https://www.flickr.com/photos/136764860 ... datetaken/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/136764860 ... datetaken/
- Captain Bob
- Member
- Posts: 237
- Joined: Thu May 27, 2010 6:47 pm
- Contact:
Re: Reproduction Pre-1974 Aluminum Tailpiece / Bridge
For some reason, I couldn't open those links without having to create a Yahoo acct. I'll simply guess you have replaced them with flatheads. This what I have done on the '64. Actually, mine are factory screw's with the crown of the screw ground more flat, leaving the same area of purchase securing the tailpiece.
Also, brass castings were mentioned ...these are to be pre-74 aluminum reproductions like the originals. Hopefully, contributing to a portion of that era's instrument tone and appearance.
Recall, this is restorer Larry Davis who seeks to gather and poll everyone's thoughts, and not Hipshot.
Also, brass castings were mentioned ...these are to be pre-74 aluminum reproductions like the originals. Hopefully, contributing to a portion of that era's instrument tone and appearance.
Recall, this is restorer Larry Davis who seeks to gather and poll everyone's thoughts, and not Hipshot.
1964 4001S Fireglo