How do i respond to this post

highway_star · Post by **highway_star** » Thu Dec 15, 2005 4:03 am

I won''t say much about tone since it's very subjective. I get that argument in my band because one guy loves active basses and I just ignore him since I'm the one playing bass. However, the quality issues that guy raises are pure BS. You won't find a better-made bass in the $1000-1200 price range than a Rickenbacker 4003.

jwr2 · Post by **jwr2** » Thu Dec 15, 2005 4:46 am

I say get the Ric and get a jazz bass and get a p-bass and play all three ... or get a 4001, a 4003, and a 4004 and forget the fenders ...

grayk · Post by **grayk** » Thu Dec 15, 2005 5:11 am

The 4003 is a great bass and does have tonal variation. I have recorded my 4003 alongside my one of my P-basses. On the recording I struggled to hear the difference between the Ric on full bore and the P. The difference came when the pickups were isolated. I am not a big fan of the 4003 neck pickup, I find it to be too wooly sounding for any thing I play. However the bridge pickup on its own or with a little neck in there is incredible. So we would have to say that the Ric is more versatile than the P-bass overall. Saying that, I love the sound of a P-bass and is used about 50% of the time when playing with my bands. The Jazz is great also, but for me just doesnt always "do it" for me. Musicman Stingrays, I have a lot of years of using them under my belt. I have fallen out with them big time. I owned and used one for 5 years solid and then decided I wanted a change. I got rid of it and about 6 months later thought I missed it and bought another. It didnt get played because the sound is just not what I want now. There is an inherent nasty problem with the G on those things as well. Very thin and lifeless...on a 3 band anyway, dont know about the 2 band. For me the Stingray is the best of the bunch to set up and work on, and the build quality is excellent but my 2nd one has been sold now also. The Ric does the business in most situations no doubt.

teeder · Post by **teeder** » Thu Dec 15, 2005 6:03 am

I played nothing but my '65 Jazz for 15 years. It's a great sound, but I really liked just one tonal setting with it.
Now, my V63 has completely taken it's place as my #1 gigging bass. It has three distinctly different tones that I use, and has been much more versatile. IMO

henny · Post by **henny** » Thu Dec 15, 2005 6:09 am

Henny, true that Ricks are no Fenders. But the converse is true.

Totally, but you'll find 60-70% of bass players don't want the Ric "sound", Ed...

I'm not being anti-Rickenbacker here, I love Ric basses, (except the 4004).

Ric basses have their faults/flaws/niggles/annoyances, so do Fenders... but if you juxtapose them with the overall tonal qualities you'd deliver on stage, they far outweight any Fender, thus why I think in that respect, Fenders are the "better" bass per simplicity!

I mean, look at a Jazz - it can oink and squeel - you can pretty much get any sound you want from them, whether it be raspy, biting treble or a deep low-end thud... but there's no fat 4003 neck, no *bloody* annoying treble pickup assembly... no stupidly-overengineered MASSIVE bridge that does, well - nothing useful!... So Ric finally make a bass with the lines and playability of a Jazz bass, and what do you know? It sounds ****! (4004). Am I making sense, here?

IMO, Rickenbacker needs NEW, FRESH designs - not 4000-hybrids.

OK, rant over.

chefothefuture · Post by **chefothefuture** » Thu Dec 15, 2005 6:19 am

Hey Mark-
All the things you hate about Ricks are most of the reasons I love them...LOL!

Now when are they carting me away...

rickaddict · Post by **rickaddict** » Thu Dec 15, 2005 6:21 am

Okay, now you've gone too far Henny.

Take it back!

ghs_boomer · Post by **ghs_boomer** » Thu Dec 15, 2005 7:07 am

Way back when in 79 or 80 with my Ampegs i could just about blow out the windows with very deep bass with my 4001. IMO, is just a matter of simple adjustments and the amp that is used.
I don't think i can ever convince the guy that Ric's are diverse in tone, but i'm going to stay on him..

bobcat · Post by **bobcat** » Thu Dec 15, 2005 7:45 am

The bridge is only annoying in that it has no individually adjustable saddles. That's it. There is nothing wrong with it otherwise. The treble pickup cover is incredibly easy to remove as long as you know how to use a screwdriver. The 4003 neck, while not being a J-neck, is still incredibly comfortable, and frankly, the fact that it doesn't fan out like crazy towards the body is a HUGE PLUS. Of course, nowadays, modern bassists like to stick to the first four frets, so they wouldn't care about how fat the neck gets as they go up. Lucky for them, Ibanez capitalized on this with the "Most Comfortable Neck in the Universe Until the 12th Fret" design.

I also disagree about Ric needing completely new bass designs. I think that P-basses are a little outdated . . . a little old and tired. Should Fender then completely disregard the P-bass in making a new model? NO. Why? Because a P-bass works, and it works well. Same exact thing with a 4003/4001. The 4004 is based on the same basic design precisely because the design is what people love and it works. I've never heard one, so I have no idea how it sounds, but it's not stupid at all to stick with a basic design scheme and then vary from that. If anything, the (lack of) success of the 4005 and relative (lack of) success of the 2000-series show that 4004/4003/4001/4000 basses are what people want from Ric.

henny · Post by **henny** » Thu Dec 15, 2005 8:14 am

To paraphrase a certain Briton, "Then we disagree to the N'th degree."

And you'd make a fine Rickenbacker employee.

Snap this guy up, John Hall.

Whilst you have no business questioning my screwdriver technique (!) - the bridge design isn't sonically suited per body shape in resonating sustain. It's proven other designs such as the Badass and the new Hipshot boost sustain a lot. Fender have changed the P and J bridges over the years to suite the ever-evolving body shapes. Fact: (The Bridge is old hat, if what the management say - a new bridge design is on the horizon, great!) Not to mention the muting "system" - 20+ years past its sell-by.. but I'll let Jeff Rath cover that one!

david_schwab · Post by **david_schwab** » Thu Dec 15, 2005 8:17 am

I think we can say that any guitar and bass design can be limited to the range of sounds... a Tele sounds like a Tele, and a Strat doesn't. Neither sound like a Les Paul... etc.

Same for bass. The problem is so many players lately are stuck in this Jazz bass mentality, as if that's the only tone there is for bass. That and every bass having Music Man or Jazz style pickups. Don't get me started with that one! Ricks are great because they are still an original design.

I have a pretty versatile bass, but what's versatile? I can get tones that work with different styles of music, but that doesn't mean I try to sound like a P bass here and a J bass there. That's the problem.. too many players with no originality! In the end, I sound like me, and that's what I want...

Now as far as Ricks... they sound like a Rick. I have modded mine in the past to get other types of sounds, but now I want them to sound like a Rick, since I have other basses to use.

I guess it's why you see Strats and Teles with humbuckers and such... People are trying to get sounds other than what's native to that instrument. So Ricks have a palette of tones, and those should be usable for many types of music, unless you are either trying to imitate another bass (which is still possible to an extent) or using a distorted rock sound and trying to play jazz...

henny · Post by **henny** » Thu Dec 15, 2005 8:27 am

... That and every bass having Music Man or Jazz style pickups. Don't get me started with that one!

I'm not referring to copies/clones/fakers... they are not Jazz Basses! - I'm talking about a MIA Fender Jazz - I wouldn't compare anything less.

I have a pretty versatile bass, but what's versatile?

Adaptability, Flexibility and Popularity. Surely it's not coincidence that countless whordes of session players over the years have used the Fender Precision/Jazz over Rics/Everything else?

So Ricks have a palette of tones, and those should be usable for many types of music..

Can you give me examples, except Sgt. Pepper, Chris Squire's growl and the jangle of Suzannah Hoffs?

throw_this_away · Post by **throw_this_away** » Thu Dec 15, 2005 8:58 am

My solution to this argument is to have a Fender Jazz and a ric.

I love both designs and think that we should all have both. My rics have become my number one though, since I prefer the more unique sound (Everyone has a fender). But I will NEVER EVER get rid of my jazz. I am now looking to get a 75 reissue Jazz to go with my mexican, that way I have 2 Jazz and two rics.

highway_star · Post by **highway_star** » Thu Dec 15, 2005 9:03 am

You missed my '75 RI Jazz by a couple of months. I had one in natural. It was an OK bass, but I like my '62 RI better. I thought the '75 was too thin-sounding.

incubus2432 · Post by **incubus2432** » Thu Dec 15, 2005 9:10 am

"quote:
I have a pretty versatile bass, but what's versatile?

Adaptability, Flexibility and Popularity. Surely it's not coincidence that countless whordes of session players over the years have used the Fender Precision/Jazz over Rics/Everything else?"

What the heck does popularity have to do with anything?!?!? It has nothing to do with veratility. Just because hordes of studio players use Fender style basses more doesn't mean anything as far as versatility. They could be using them because everyone else is and if they play something different the engineers will throw fits. Maybe it is the "standard tone" that they are after andd the Jazz "fits" better. Who knows?.....but I do know that it is a poor argument against Rics having a flexible tone. I'm by no means saying that Rics are the best at everything.....and Fender basses may be better suited for most situations for session bassists (for whatever reason) but that has nothing to do with versatility. Just because one bass may be chosen more doesn't necessarily say anything about the atributes of another....price, availability, familiarity may play as much or more of a role.

Nothing like being a sheep I suppose.....