4001 compared to 4003 - What Real Improvements?
Moderators: rickenbrother, ajish4
-
jwr2
-
clankchris
- Member
- Posts: 279
- Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 6:43 pm
), send me an e-mail ...
Garret,
Welcome to the forum. It's nice to see another Walnut 4001. You don't see them too often.
I would agree that the big difference is that the 4001 was originally designed for flatwound strings and had a trussrod that was often used improperly. To adjust, the rod needs to be loosened, the neck manually straightened then the rods are tightened, unlike most which a tightening the rod moves the neck into place. Using the later method can pop the fretboard off and bend the rods.
I personally like the thinner neck that the 4001s have and play with Flats. Someday I will probably get a 4003 or 4001C63 that I will string up with Roundwounds.
Here's a photo of my '76 Walnut to keep yours company. Any other Walnuts out there?
Welcome to the forum. It's nice to see another Walnut 4001. You don't see them too often.
I would agree that the big difference is that the 4001 was originally designed for flatwound strings and had a trussrod that was often used improperly. To adjust, the rod needs to be loosened, the neck manually straightened then the rods are tightened, unlike most which a tightening the rod moves the neck into place. Using the later method can pop the fretboard off and bend the rods.
I personally like the thinner neck that the 4001s have and play with Flats. Someday I will probably get a 4003 or 4001C63 that I will string up with Roundwounds.
Here's a photo of my '76 Walnut to keep yours company. Any other Walnuts out there?
Garret,
Welcome to the forum. It's nice to see another Walnut 4001. You don't see them too often.
I would agree that the big difference is that the 4001 was originally designed for flatwound strings and had a trussrod that was often used improperly. To adjust, the rod needs to be loosened, the neck manually straightened then the rods are tightened, unlike most which a tightening the rod moves the neck into place. Using the later method can pop the fretboard off and bend the rods.
I personally like the thinner neck that the 4001s have and play with Flats. Someday I will probably get a 4003 or 4001C63 that I will string up with Roundwounds.
Here's a photo of my '76 Walnut to keep yours company. Any other Walnuts out there?
Welcome to the forum. It's nice to see another Walnut 4001. You don't see them too often.
I would agree that the big difference is that the 4001 was originally designed for flatwound strings and had a trussrod that was often used improperly. To adjust, the rod needs to be loosened, the neck manually straightened then the rods are tightened, unlike most which a tightening the rod moves the neck into place. Using the later method can pop the fretboard off and bend the rods.
I personally like the thinner neck that the 4001s have and play with Flats. Someday I will probably get a 4003 or 4001C63 that I will string up with Roundwounds.
Here's a photo of my '76 Walnut to keep yours company. Any other Walnuts out there?
-
clankchris
- Member
- Posts: 279
- Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 6:43 pm
I have a '77 Walnut 4001, but it doesn't look anything like Walrus's. Mine isn't an even brown colour all over, it's a burst shading, like FireGlo. It's commonly mistaken for AutumnGlo, (one of I which, I also have) which is a satin version of the same brown burst.
Two wrongs don't make a right, but three rights do make a left.
Sorry for not responding sooner.
I've been corresponding with a noted NW Luthier (who works on everything , not just Ricks), which has been an awesome trip into historical and current Rickenbacker lore. I absolutely consider him a Rickenbacker "Lore Master"!
I'll try to be as direct and to the point as I can ( and leave any emotion out of it ).
He feels the 4003 is far superior!
1) Updated Truss Rod System design.
2) Precision CNC Manufacturing.
3) Pickup Manufacturing Quality - Higher Output's very good but performance could be better!
4) Much more "Tech Friendly" instrument.
Real Facts! ( That should make all of you 4003 guys beam with pride, as well you should! ) I really do hate this "my Ric's Better than your Ric" stuff. Even if yours is!
The Bridge/Tailpiece location on 4001's and 4003's up to 85' is not quite where it aught to be for easy intonation. I guess we're all just sqeaking by.
He turns the Bridge/Saddle System around to adjust intonation from the front instead of the back. This requires modifying the string mute or removing it and removing some metal from the tailpiece for clear access to the adjustment screws.
I use Allen Head screws on my original 72' Rick Bridge, so I don't feel the need for any more changes than that.
Major Statement: The increased Neck Size on 4003's is not a structural improvement (and provides no more strength or stability than 4001 Necks). It just makes 4003 necks thicker.
If you install washers between the Truss Rod nuts and the Metal Blank of your 4001 Truss Rods you should be able to gain more control over your neck relief. Or actually replace the Blank with harder Metal ( I used Brass ), but still add the washers!
The only Fret difference is that they don't file 4003 frets down to the same width and height as frets on 4001's. ( not harder or better )
For the 4003, I completely acknowledge the technological advances in Precision Manufacturing and design improvements. Very nice.
For the 4001, if like myself you are able to address these design shortcomings to be able to control neck relief and intonation as well as any electronic issues a 20 or 30 year old Bass may have then I feel that's a great way to go.
If you can't though, then please send that old dog down my way and let me see what I can do to keep it comfortable for the rest of it's daze!
I've made a life's work of reviving these old relics.
As to the "Collector" or the "Player"! I think the only value there is in a Collector is it's Playability! Oh, that was dangerously close to "emotional"!
If you're afraid of playing it and harming it ( send it to me ) just take your belt off or slide it to the side if your pants will fall off without it. Wash your hands before you play it and wipe it down after you play it! Pretty easy stuff. I had to learn that from someone else too. Oh ya watch out for; the Microphone, the Ceiling, the Guitarist, the Singer, the Cymbals! ah that could go on forever. You get it. But dings happen! Just play it and live!
Take care
Garret
I've been corresponding with a noted NW Luthier (who works on everything , not just Ricks), which has been an awesome trip into historical and current Rickenbacker lore. I absolutely consider him a Rickenbacker "Lore Master"!
I'll try to be as direct and to the point as I can ( and leave any emotion out of it ).
He feels the 4003 is far superior!
1) Updated Truss Rod System design.
2) Precision CNC Manufacturing.
3) Pickup Manufacturing Quality - Higher Output's very good but performance could be better!
4) Much more "Tech Friendly" instrument.
Real Facts! ( That should make all of you 4003 guys beam with pride, as well you should! ) I really do hate this "my Ric's Better than your Ric" stuff. Even if yours is!
The Bridge/Tailpiece location on 4001's and 4003's up to 85' is not quite where it aught to be for easy intonation. I guess we're all just sqeaking by.
He turns the Bridge/Saddle System around to adjust intonation from the front instead of the back. This requires modifying the string mute or removing it and removing some metal from the tailpiece for clear access to the adjustment screws.
I use Allen Head screws on my original 72' Rick Bridge, so I don't feel the need for any more changes than that.
Major Statement: The increased Neck Size on 4003's is not a structural improvement (and provides no more strength or stability than 4001 Necks). It just makes 4003 necks thicker.
If you install washers between the Truss Rod nuts and the Metal Blank of your 4001 Truss Rods you should be able to gain more control over your neck relief. Or actually replace the Blank with harder Metal ( I used Brass ), but still add the washers!
The only Fret difference is that they don't file 4003 frets down to the same width and height as frets on 4001's. ( not harder or better )
For the 4003, I completely acknowledge the technological advances in Precision Manufacturing and design improvements. Very nice.
For the 4001, if like myself you are able to address these design shortcomings to be able to control neck relief and intonation as well as any electronic issues a 20 or 30 year old Bass may have then I feel that's a great way to go.
If you can't though, then please send that old dog down my way and let me see what I can do to keep it comfortable for the rest of it's daze!
I've made a life's work of reviving these old relics.
As to the "Collector" or the "Player"! I think the only value there is in a Collector is it's Playability! Oh, that was dangerously close to "emotional"!
If you're afraid of playing it and harming it ( send it to me ) just take your belt off or slide it to the side if your pants will fall off without it. Wash your hands before you play it and wipe it down after you play it! Pretty easy stuff. I had to learn that from someone else too. Oh ya watch out for; the Microphone, the Ceiling, the Guitarist, the Singer, the Cymbals! ah that could go on forever. You get it. But dings happen! Just play it and live!
Take care
Garret
http://www.myspace.com/greenvilleglorylane
Rickenbacker; '72 FireGlo 4001, '81 JetGlo 4001. '90 Alembic Flame-Koa Persuader.
Custom Hand-Made(Self) 4-String Natural Maple Bass.
Ampeg B-15R & B-15E Bass Amp (2-15 All-Tube 100w Stack, both S/N 1)
Rickenbacker; '72 FireGlo 4001, '81 JetGlo 4001. '90 Alembic Flame-Koa Persuader.
Custom Hand-Made(Self) 4-String Natural Maple Bass.
Ampeg B-15R & B-15E Bass Amp (2-15 All-Tube 100w Stack, both S/N 1)
-
loverickbass
- Veteran RRF member
- Posts: 1409
- Joined: Mon Jul 29, 2002 5:00 am
When I bought my '68, someone routed it for a Guild pickup so it's got a big rout at the neck position. Subsequently, I had pickguards made for both the 4003 and the 1/2" spacing. I honestly can't tell much difference BUT there's that half hour difference swapping out the pickguard and soldering...
"If you think you can or if you think you cannot - either way you are right." Henry Ford.
-
clankchris
- Member
- Posts: 279
- Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 6:43 pm
I think that a thicker neck may not be as important as it's design, Garret.....
...However, I've noticed my Fender J Bass neck move a lot more than my cheap Squire P bass neck... so, to me the thickness counts as something in my book....
With that being said, I don't have a problem with the thinner necks either, as long as they are just as stable as the thick ones...
...However, I've noticed my Fender J Bass neck move a lot more than my cheap Squire P bass neck... so, to me the thickness counts as something in my book....
With that being said, I don't have a problem with the thinner necks either, as long as they are just as stable as the thick ones...
-
thinneckrick
- Intermediate Member
- Posts: 573
- Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 5:59 am
- Contact:
I don't slap, so I don't know if I would be troubled by the neck pickup being there . . . but when I was testing out amps at a local music store, I was plugged into an Ampeg combo and messing around with tones and such, and this one guy who gigs a lot in the Savannah area came up and complimented me on the Ric and asked if he could try it out. I said sure. He proceeded to slap and funk the hell out of it, and it sounded AMAZING. And the amp was set up so that I could get close to the "Geddy" sound. He told me afterwards that the Ric was probably the best bass for slapping he'd ever played. Right afterwards, the store manager, also a bass player, came by because he heard the slapping, and he sat down with it and did a ton of slapping, chords, and tapping.
I dunno, but it seems like, if you're good enough, ANY bass is fine for slapping. They sure didn't have anything bad to say about the Ric in that regard (or in any regard for that matter).
I dunno, but it seems like, if you're good enough, ANY bass is fine for slapping. They sure didn't have anything bad to say about the Ric in that regard (or in any regard for that matter).