Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

Here's the thing. I bought my RIC 4000 new in 1976. The shop where I bought it installed a neck p'up prior to delivery, because I don't like the binding or the triangle fret markers. Now no one wants to buy it because of the "compromised" neck joint that hasn't budged in 44 years.

For those who don't know (like I didn't), the 4000 was the black sheep, with a "set-neck". The authorized dealer didn't warn me about that either.

I'm considering returning it to single p'up, pulling two pots and a switch, and resurrecting the blank scratch guard for the purpose of reselling to the paranoid masses.

Which is really a shame, as it has great tonal range. It's only real problem is the factory bridge. But that is by design.

Should I make it look like an unmolested 4000? Or use it as the firewood buyers seem to think it is?

That might look nice over my fireplace, not in it.

I LOVE modded instruments that no longer interest collectors. They are safe to bring out and play, like you did. Three of the five basses I now own & use are in that category. You should show it here before showing it to the masses.

modded and modded back doesn't make it stock, I don't think you'd get your moneys worth out of the repair. the collectors damage has been done, and cannot undone (or un routed in this case). The instrument will always be a 'player', a mod job, or a restoration and nothing is wrong with those imho, they're just worth quite a bit less money than stock examples in good condition.

radapaw wrote:modded and modded back doesn't make it stock, I don't think you'd get your moneys worth out of the repair. the collectors damage has been done, and cannot undone (or un routed in this case). The instrument will always be a 'player', a mod job, or a restoration and nothing is wrong with those imho, they're just worth quite a bit less money than stock examples in good condition.

+1

Although the bass isn't a mint example for the collector's market, one thing you do have going for the sale is that you are the original owner and you had the modification done, so that's the perfect provenance that a buyer could ask for. We've seen numerous examples of mods done who knows when by who knows who.

Thank you all for your thoughts. While it is true that the damage is done (in terms of collectability), no one would ask me for "photos without the scratch guard" if there was no neck p'up.

Happyface, I listed it here for sale some time ago. Zero response.

Here she is.

Interesting coincidence. I, too, have a modded 4000. Also white.

It looks great. I'm surprised you weren't getting any bites... maybe try talkbass? Not that I'm looking atm, but what were you asking?

Renfield wrote:Thank you all for your thoughts. While it is true that the damage is done (in terms of collectability), no one would ask me for "photos without the scratch guard" if there was no neck p'up.

Happyface, I listed it here for sale some time ago. Zero response.

Here she is.

Cool bass!

radapaw wrote:It looks great. I'm surprised you weren't getting any bites... maybe try talkbass? Not that I'm looking atm, but what were you asking?

I don't recall. When I asked here on the forums, folks suggested a range of $1,600-$2,150.

What would you consider a fair price, if you WERE looking?



Isaac: Love it!

I think that sounds right, I would expect under 2 grand. Lots of folks out there are asking the sun and the moon, but I see unmodded 4001's of the same vintage, in fantastic shape, selling around 1200-1500 fairly often.

I see nothing wrong with that bass, George, unless it has structural issues that are not visible
The alleged downsides of that bass are well balanced by the pros of being white finish and rounded edges which is an advantage if you like those features
And the price is cool an more than affordabe for European standards

RIC actually made 4001S basses that probably had the same route that was done by your music store tech back in the day. The aftermarket tailpiece replacement sticks out like a sore thumb though, so I'd find a more recent, stable casting to replace it with.

aceonbass wrote:RIC actually made 4001S basses that probably had the same route that was done by your music store tech back in the day. The aftermarket tailpiece replacement sticks out like a sore thumb though, so I'd find a more recent, stable casting to replace it with.

LOL. Man, you guys have death-ray vision!!! I put an AllParts tailpiece on it a few years back b/c tail lift was awful on the original. Well, I put the original tailpiece back on a couple weeks ago. Warts and all, she's back to modded original.

The original mute foam is a wad of sticky goo now, so I left the mute strip and bolts in the bag. Put it with the original bridge p'up cover.

rickinroma wrote:I see nothing wrong with that bass, George, unless it has structural issues that are not visible
The alleged downsides of that bass are well balanced by the pros of being white finish and rounded edges which is an advantage if you like those features
And the price is cool an more than affordabe for European standards

Thanks, Francesco. It used to be white. LOL.

I bought at an inopportune time in the annals of Rickenbacker. Seems like they decided to stop producing the 4001S just as Paul and Chris were making it popular. I was 18 in 1976 when the Wings Over America tour sent me searching for one. I found the bound bodied 4003 uncomfortable in an instant. Also didn't care for the triangle-ish inlays. And "Ric-O-Sound" seemed like a gimmick. But that 4000 felt just right.

As I am not the most gentle user of basses, I'm pretty sure any structural issue would've presented itself in the last 44 years. Neck is still straight and I've got about .15mm relief at the 12th fret. Plays like butter.

Now that I'm retired, I need to find some young turk to take her on to the rock stardom she deserves.