My 4001C64 report

anonymous · Post by **anonymous** » Sat Apr 05, 2003 2:29 am

Well, except for the cosmetics and the absolute eye catching McCartney design, this is not the best of my Ricks in any way shape or form.

1) Horseshoe is NOT like the older ones and V63. The output is thin like an older 4001. This was rather dissapointing.

2) The toaster is warmer, hotter and makes a nice blend with the horseshoe.

3) The sound is NOT like a V63 at all IMO.

4) With lots of neck tweaking, changing the factory rounds to Thomastik's, I still can't stop the buzz (it is evident on all strings.

5) With 30 years experience tweaking Ricks and all the problems associated with them. I would think for $2000 this bass would not have such problems.

6) It seems that the nut has been cut to only accomocate 100-45 gauge strings.

7) For the large amount of $, I'd say forget it and get yourself an older(70's)4001.

Just my opinion, and I'm sticking to it. I have owned at least 30 Rick basses through the years and still own my original 74, that puts the 4001C64 to shame. The exception being that it doesn't duplicate (HIS or THE BASS visually).

That's it. I wish I could be more positive, but if you know Rick basses, you are paying a lot of money for a reversed headstock, which looks odd on righty basses, but rather special on Paul's as we all know. Still try one before buying. Philly that's the report.

johnhall · Post by **johnhall** » Tue Apr 08, 2003 1:04 pm

I'm wondering if you bought this instrument for the wrong reasons. It's a pretty accurate replica of a 1964 model, warts and all, so why should it be compared at all to your 1974 and especially a V63?

bigbajo60 · Post by **bigbajo60** » Tue Apr 08, 2003 7:21 pm

When I bought my first "real" bass back in 1977... it was a MG 4001. I was inspired to buy this bass because young Mr. McC had inspired me to pick up the bass in the first place.

Now that I finally have the option... nay, the LUXURY... of owning a "warts and all" replica of the bass guitar that I first lusted after oh so many years ago... I will scrimp and save and toil and sweat to have that bass.

I think I epitomize the type of person who Mr. Hall and company built these "C" instruments for... honest to goodness Rickenbacker afficionados. And I will take Mr. Hall at his word when he says that these reissues are "as accurate as possible".

My "dos centavos".

admin · Post by **admin** » Wed Apr 09, 2003 4:34 am

John Hall makes an interesting point. Is it fair or reasonable to compare the specifications and sound of a 1964 instrument with those made in the 1970s and beyond?

There is an almost universal phenomenon in history, at least in my view, in which the events of yesteryear are elevated, indeed distorted to reflect a life experience that is grander than grand.

This can be seen with regard to persons, places, performances and, of course, guitars.
Should you doubt this position, go back and listen to the skiffle music of Liverpool or talk to those who heard the Beatles play for Larry Parnes. In fact, have a good listen to the Beatles' Hollywood Bowl or Shea Stadium performances which I consider make this point quite well. The events are watersheds in music history but they often pale by comparison when judged by the standards and expectations of today.

In the case of the C Series, there is much romance, however, I think it only reasonable that they are going to sound differently from those instruments made in the last couple of decades. Pickups, components, hardware, and finishes have changed slowly over the years and we had adapted to that change.

The "C" instruments have replicated, as closely as possible, the sound and feel of those of the late 1950s and 1960s that they attempt to reproduce. That these instruments sound and behave differently from our favourite 1970, 1980, 1990 or 2000 instrument is not surprising. While they are an accurate reproduction, our perceptions change over the years. I quite agree. If you want to be sure of the sound and feel, it would be important to try these instruments out before you purchase one. But the same can be said for any instrument.

The "C" Series offers us a new standard. Having said that, for what standard are we searching? In my own case, I would have to say that some of my favourite instruments sound better than they look and others look better than they sound. This may explain, at least in part, why most of us have more than one guitar.

I have to think that there may be a 360/12C63 in my music room one day. George Harrison really started things going for me and I would dearly love to have one. Whether this "C" series instrument will sound exactly like his, I am not sure. I am betting that I will be hard pressed to tell the difference. While I don't have the Harrison look at present, my beatup old 1966 450/12 really comes very close to the Harrison sound. I call your name.... I call your name...

beatlesgear · Post by **beatlesgear** » Wed Apr 09, 2003 6:32 am

As always, there is reason that guitars change over the years, they are improved upon. The C series was designed to give you a replica of an instrument that was created almost 40 years ago. I laugh when I read about people to complaining about the Kauffman tailpieces on their 325C58s. Why do you think they were dropped?

eddied · Post by **eddied** » Wed Apr 09, 2003 6:57 am

My post was a personal assessment on what I expected the C64 to play and sound like. I absolutely love how it looks. That's it.

Comparing to my own personal collection, yes I thought it would play, and sound close to my V63, which is an earlier (84) model. The horseshoe pickup on the V64 is totally different from the V63 horseshoe. I didn't expect that. It is similar to the stock treble pickup in most 70's Rick's IMO. It has no beef and it is very trebly.

Yes Mr. Hall I did buy it, but for another reason. It was the closest to McCartney's and I wanted one. I can be disappointed though, with the way it plays and sounds, which I am.

For $2000 I hope that's not asking for too much. I still forever love Ricks and I may still even get the Wings model if I chose to do so. I just gave a personal review and consider that I should be respected for my opinion, after being an owner and player of Ricks since 1974. I feel that I certainly know them as well as most players. I love them more than any other bass on the planet.

squirebass · Post by **squirebass** » Wed Apr 09, 2003 7:09 am

But Nick, if you are a right-handed player, it is NOT a replica of a circa 1964 4001S because it has that unsightly reversed headstock. Why this was done on the right-handed basses, I don't know, but can you imagine how the c58 folks would've HOWLED if the headstock on the 325c58 had just been reversed for no apparent reason. I guess that it would cost Rickenbacker lots of money to offer the bass with two different neck configurations, but this was a huge disappointment for me as well as many others when the C series was first announced.

I got to play a C64 at the Dallas Guitar Show a couple of weeks back, and it sounded and felt great, but I'm not buying one with that reversed headstock on it!

I'm sorry I feel that way, Rickenbacker produces incredibly consistent, high-quality works of art, and their CEO is extremely responsive to customer wishes, but the headstock thing was SO disappointing to me back when the C series was announced. Ask Mike Parks, he's had to listen to all my venting about it!

Now, where did I put my high blood pressure medication....

rickfan63 · Post by **rickfan63** » Wed Apr 09, 2003 8:17 am

I love my V63 and want to get a C64S. I would hope it would sound a little different. As long as that great Rickenbacker tone is there, I wouldn't be too concerned about it. As long as the horseshoe on the C64 held up.The originals sometimes had a habit of losing power after a time so I've heard. Perhaps someone else has more knowledge on that.

bottom4 · Post by **bottom4** » Wed Apr 09, 2003 12:38 pm

Mr. Hall, I've owned a 4001V63 for 18 years now and have been considering the new C64. Two things have been holding me back: the reverse name plate - not so much the reverse headstock - I kind of like that and the second thing is: I assumed that the sound and feel would be very close to my V. Now the neck on my V is slim, flat and fast its a greeeaat bass. How does the C differ from the V given the toaster, horseshoe etc. Please help me make up my mind

By the way, I have a 4004 Cii on order - how's the production going?

A Rick player since 1976

Regards,

Andy

simer4001 · Post by **simer4001** » Wed Apr 09, 2003 6:57 pm

I agree with Ed on all of his points except for one major difference. I love these basses. (C64/C64S) I love the authenticity and the history. I love the concept of where this bass comes from and what it has come to represent to most of us. You say Paul influenced you to play bass? Well this is where it comes from. This is the bass. I can't believe I'm going to say this, but it was well worth the wait. After all the bitching and moaning I did, they are well worth it. I'm glad they are here, and I am going to appreciate them for what they are and what they mean to me as a Beatles/McCartney fan. For me, buying these basses mean the same to me as buying the Hofner's. Are the Hofner's great basses. No. They are nice basses, but not the best. And I don't care. Is my V63 a better bass? I think it is. Is my Fender Jazz a better bass? I think it is. But they are no longer my favorite basses. (Not that the Jazz ever was, but you get my point). Thanks for finally getting them out!

Thanks RIC!

beatlesgear · Post by **beatlesgear** » Wed Apr 09, 2003 7:42 pm

Gene Schillaci said:

"But Nick, if you are a right-handed player, it is NOT a replica of a circa 1964 4001S because it has that unsightly reversed headstock."

You're right it's not, but that isn't what the right handed 4001C64 is supposed to be, is it. It's supposed to be a mirror image of the left handed McCartney bass. Didn't most '64 4001S basses come with a thumb rest? Why aren't you complaining about that too?

I play bass left handed, so I'm happy. However, I play guitar both right and left handed.

I have a 360/12C63 on order in both lefty and righty. I have to say that as a left handed player, I have never liked the right handed inlays on a 360 that are put on a lefty model. So, a mirror image 360/12 with the inlays going the "right" direction, gives me wood a mile long.

squirebass · Post by **squirebass** » Thu Apr 10, 2003 1:50 am

I guess that's my problem with the whole thing, what the 4001C64 was "supposed" to be.

I understand the Beatle thing, and the left-handed deal is just fine with me, but I also thought that I'd be able to get a bass that I wanted, that being a right-handed bass as it really was in 1964. I just never thought it was possible that it would be so important to a right-handed player to get a bass with a turned around headstock "just like Paulie's"..

I wish they'd been referred to as the "Beatle series" or something like that, so that what was being offered was clear. Instead, the information trickled out over a period of weeks, about what the right-handed bass would really look like. I was ready to be one of the first ones to order.

Lastly, not all basses from that era came with thumb rests.

beatlesgear · Post by **beatlesgear** » Thu Apr 10, 2003 3:30 pm

Look at the five models offered in the C series, who played them? That photo of the 4001C64 has been up on the RIC website since the second month of 2001. In regard to the headstock, there is no mystery there.

squirebass · Post by **squirebass** » Thu Apr 10, 2003 6:41 pm

Nick, I was talking about when they were announced. Sure they are out on the website now.

But I don't want to belabor the point here, I'm not attacking the work you and the rest of the team did on the C series. All of you did a great job, I just wished you could have thrown us a frickin' bone here, with respect to the right-hand model.

beatlesgear · Post by **beatlesgear** » Fri Apr 11, 2003 3:45 am

When were they announced? NAMM 2001. The pic of the bass pretty much went up at the same time.

I understand what you're saying about the righty version, but try to take some good advice from me. Mr. H. knows what's going on, give him some time and some slack. If you complain too much, it's never going to happen.