"If you cant afford a 4005"
Moderators: rickenbrother, ajish4
Ok, here's a dumb question. Explain to me the difference in sound between the 4005 and the 4003. How can it still sound Rickenbacker, if it has humbuckers and is a hollow body? I know it looks cool, and Jeffrey seems to play it more than his others, but is it looks, or sound, or both? I guess this would apply to the Cheyenne and Laredo as far as the humbuckers.
My 4005WB can get the classic tone (whatever that is as we all have our own idea of what that is!), but because of it's nice light weight, it is my favorite for gigging. Currently it sports Chromes, but back in the '70s and '80s I had various roundwounds on it and played with a pick; recordings I have of it sound incredible for the classic Squire/Geddy sound.
- rickinroma
- RRF Consultant
- Posts: 1109
- Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 11:27 pm
- Contact:
Hey Charlyg, I have to second (third?) Francesco and Jeffery . Because of the toaster in the neck position combined with the second toaster so close to the bridge (for the treble end of things) you can get that classic Ric growl. But, by playing with the EQ you can also get it to sound very much like an upright. One thing to remember is that the majority of the sound comes from the pickups - and they're the same as the toasters in the early 4001s.
I also agree with Jeffrey, my '67 is so light that is incredibly easy to play for hours...
Robert... your basses look great! Are they built in the US or built elsewhere and assembled and fine tuned in the US?
I also agree with Jeffrey, my '67 is so light that is incredibly easy to play for hours...
Robert... your basses look great! Are they built in the US or built elsewhere and assembled and fine tuned in the US?
- rickinroma
- RRF Consultant
- Posts: 1109
- Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 11:27 pm
- Contact:
-
rjs
- iamthebassman
- Veteran RRF member
- Posts: 2415
- Joined: Tue May 28, 2002 5:00 am
- Contact:
-
rjs
-
rjs
-
1rr3l3v4n7
- Junior Member
- Posts: 168
- Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2005 9:46 am



