For the serious collector

jaybic · Post by **jaybic** » Tue Nov 15, 2005 5:36 pm

that's pretty impressive looking

rickfan60 · Post by **rickfan60** » Tue Nov 15, 2005 5:38 pm

"Am I the only person who find's that headstock absolutely hideous?"

No.

jnbass · Post by **jnbass** » Tue Nov 15, 2005 10:56 pm

ditto

light saber from Darth Tater...

ilan · Post by **ilan** » Tue Nov 15, 2005 11:24 pm

I wonder why RIC didn't make the 4008 headstock like the 12-string headstock.

ken_swearingen · Post by **ken_swearingen** » Tue Nov 15, 2005 11:51 pm

I love it,at first I thought it was a little strange the more you look at it ,its ingenious

wints · Post by **wints** » Wed Nov 16, 2005 12:42 am

Far better to my eyes that the later elongated 8 headstock which just looks far too big for the bass.

As ever, beauty is in the eye of the beholder...

jojo99 · Post by **jojo99** » Wed Nov 16, 2005 12:47 am

I bet at the time RIC wished they could have made it look like the 12-string compact headstock, but it wouldn't have worked due to string thicknesses and tensions. The Spudstock(r) seems as if it was designed for the constraints of the tuning pegs used, and for minimal weight. An anomoly of RIC design, IMO... elegance is conspiciously absent...it has the vibe of a prototype ...where's Roger Rossmeisel when ya need him, eh?

marc67 · Post by **marc67** » Wed Nov 16, 2005 2:34 am

...or a longer 4001 style headstock if the 12 string compact headstock idea wouldn't hold?

rickaddict · Post by **rickaddict** » Wed Nov 16, 2005 4:09 am

I prefer the Mr. Potatohead 'stock to the newer one. The newer one is just too darned long. It wouldn't keep me from buying one, though!

bobcat · Post by **bobcat** » Wed Nov 16, 2005 9:10 am

I think it would look gorgeous if they used a design similar to the 12-string guitar headstocks that they make. *That* is a brilliant design.

jojo99 · Post by **jojo99** » Wed Nov 16, 2005 3:26 pm

The enlongated cresting wave headstock must make those basses quite neck heavy, I'd imagine. I think it's clever the Spudstock uses guitar tuners for the octave strings....why use a bigger and heavier bass tuner if you don't have to? The 12-string style headstock requires the two long routs on each side of the headstock-- i'd imagine that'd make a bass weak in sustain, and too fragile. I think the ideal headstock would be a slightly enlonged cresting wave headstock, with heavy-duty banjo style tuners handling the octave strings. This design would look like a regular bass from the front, and the octave tuners would be accessed from the back of the headstock, giving the advantage of knowing exactly what string you are tuning.

jnbass · Post by **jnbass** » Wed Nov 16, 2005 9:39 pm

Potato head?

you don't know the power of the Carb Side!

jnbass · Post by **jnbass** » Wed Nov 16, 2005 9:41 pm

"Who" are you...

nattiep · Post by **nattiep** » Wed Nov 16, 2005 9:53 pm

Hahahah! Darth Tater!

wints · Post by **wints** » Thu Nov 17, 2005 1:44 am

I wonder where the Entwistle 4001/8 went...?