WHAT'S THE BIG DEAL ABOUT 4005s?

jingle_jangle · Post by **jingle_jangle** » Mon Nov 21, 2005 5:32 am

Yeah, I know they're rare, and come in two different basic body styles. But, aside from rarity (and consequent HUGE value...), what makes them so great?

Do they sound appreciably better, or even different, from other Rickenbacker basses, due to their semi-hollow construction? How so?

I'm curious whether their comparative rarity overshadows other aspects of their design or engineering.

This is my first thread on the bass Forum, so be patient with a newbie; educate me!

8mileshigh · Post by **8mileshigh** » Mon Nov 21, 2005 6:24 am

I don't play any of my 4005's........you mean you want me to take them out of their glass cabinets and plug them in??? Surely not

jwr2 · Post by **jwr2** » Mon Nov 21, 2005 6:27 am

people want what they can't or don't have ... the 4005 wasn't selling so it got discontinued ... the 4002 wasn't selling so it got discontinued ... the 4000 wasn't selling so it got discontinued ... now they are all rare and everybody wants one ...

chefothefuture · Post by **chefothefuture** » Mon Nov 21, 2005 6:45 am

I can remember when I ordered my first 4005
back in 1985; yes Rick still had a few sitting around.
Jimmy Di. of Sam Ash said to the folks at Rick-
Why Do I Know Why he Wants a Hollowbody?!?!?...

wim · Post by **wim** » Mon Nov 21, 2005 6:45 am

So true, Jeff.
I think you forgot the lightshows too.

s4001 · Post by **s4001** » Mon Nov 21, 2005 7:50 am

I had a '65 4005. I sold it because I never played it and I didn't like the way it sounded and played. I don't regret selling it, and the person who has it now is treating it right.

jingle_jangle · Post by **jingle_jangle** » Mon Nov 21, 2005 8:29 am

Meaning, keeping it in a glass case?

s4001 · Post by **s4001** » Mon Nov 21, 2005 10:42 am

Nope. Refinished it, fixed the fretboard, straightened the neck, fixed the hardware and digs the way it sounds.

I'm no glass case guy. I've got a '68 that I've played literally hundreds of gigs with.

marc61 · Post by **marc61** » Mon Nov 21, 2005 10:47 am

Jeff, I disagree on the 4002. It was too expensive, and stores didn't carry them.

I agree to an extent on the 4005's, but I still feel they are a cool bass which many never had a chance to try when they were available.

jingle_jangle · Post by **jingle_jangle** » Mon Nov 21, 2005 10:50 am

That's why I'm trying to get to the bottom of the sound thing. Scott, what's the diff between your 4005 and other basses you've owned? Seems to me that microphonics would be a major problem.

s4001 · Post by **s4001** » Mon Nov 21, 2005 11:04 am

Definitley. The hollowbody gave it a real woody sound. Great for some (and I did use it at coffee shop gigs and it fit right in) but not my style. Didnt' have the punch of the 4001/4003 that I love. Also, the lack of the horseshoe pup. I'm not a big fan of the solo'd sound of the toaster. Two of them didn't give a good jazz style out-of-phase tone.

Plus, the bass itself was beat to hell. I didn't have the finances or interest into resurrecting the bass. It's the Blue Boy 4005 that was pictured in the NARC.

henny · Post by **henny** » Mon Nov 21, 2005 11:04 am

They seem a tad, eh, fat and bloated, IMO.

Never played one, alas. Do they feel good?

Did Roger design it? I presume not?

jwilli · Post by **jwilli** » Mon Nov 21, 2005 11:38 am

Scott, I didn't realize that my bass was your old bass. Cool. I bought it from Tony Blair. And you are right, it was beat to hell, ha ha. Small RIC world.

leftyguitars · Post by **leftyguitars** » Mon Nov 21, 2005 11:49 am

What? You bought your bass from our Prime Minister???

s4001 · Post by **s4001** » Mon Nov 21, 2005 12:06 pm

Yeah, Tony bought it from me. I bought it in 1993. I didn't know what the heck it was when I got it. I just got it because it had 'Rickenbacker' on it. I wasn't surprised to find that spiders had set up shop in it. Scary as it is, it was in better shape than when I got it.