OK - here we go - I know I sound really green here for someone that has been playing bass for 28 years.
I just got my first Ric a few months ago. Have not used it much since we just moved and was preoccupied and also still sorting out a problem with the neck. But on the few gigs that I took it to I can only say that I found out how the pickups and tone works is – well – odd. Different at least than how most basses seem. Maybe it is just in my head? Anyway – was actually asking for some input on what settings are popular for getting the classic Ric tone like Yes used – or even more basic Rock sounds. Somehow the bass just does not sound like I expected. Also – I would not doubt that the pickup height in also way out of whack with what might be the norm.
So – feel free to add your favorite settings or observations. I would be curious to know.
Thanx,
- Ziggy -
Newbie Tone Control Question
Moderators: rickenbrother, ajish4
Newbie Tone Control Question
I gig - so therefore I am.
-
jwr2
Do you have one of the new Ric basses with the vintage tone circuits? or do you have an 80s or 90s 4003 or do you have a vintage 70s 4001?
anyway I will assume you have a 4003 ... I like to set a 4003 with all of the controls at 10 and then I roll off the neck volume to a 7-9 range ...
I also like to use the line 6 bass pod for tone shaping ... some like the sans amp ...
and I like an ampeg head with 10s or 15s for speakers.
anyway I will assume you have a 4003 ... I like to set a 4003 with all of the controls at 10 and then I roll off the neck volume to a 7-9 range ...
I also like to use the line 6 bass pod for tone shaping ... some like the sans amp ...
and I like an ampeg head with 10s or 15s for speakers.
Similar to Jeff I run my 4003 full open and switch in the middle and get tone with the my Bass PodXT Live and my fingers.
Sometimes I will set the switch to the neck pick up, but I basically never run the bridge pick up solo.
I also use roundwounds exclusively.
I think to get Squire's Fragile/Close to the Edge sound you need a Marshall guitar amp, too, right?
Sometimes I will set the switch to the neck pick up, but I basically never run the bridge pick up solo.
I also use roundwounds exclusively.
I think to get Squire's Fragile/Close to the Edge sound you need a Marshall guitar amp, too, right?
Listen to that sustain!
I use a toaster in the neck, an unwound treble pup with alnico5 rod magnets (basically a reissue HS without the shoes), and on my Ampeg amps (one at a time - depends on my back and how energetic I am - the tube SVT-2 Pro weighs about 80 lbs) I boost the bass, roll the mids way off, and use the hi switch but have the treble pot at mid point. On the bass, I have both volume controls up, bass tone about at 5, and treble tone at 10. Roundwounds. I get really close.
Chris at the HOB 75th celebration, used his 4001RM into an Ampeg SVT/810e combo and sounded like himdelf, so it is possible without ROS to achieve. It is tone settings, bass setup, and his hands. He also was having control/switch problems. He asked Kenny for replacement horseshoes.
Chris at the HOB 75th celebration, used his 4001RM into an Ampeg SVT/810e combo and sounded like himdelf, so it is possible without ROS to achieve. It is tone settings, bass setup, and his hands. He also was having control/switch problems. He asked Kenny for replacement horseshoes.
I have a 4003 - it is a 2002 with no modifications. I mention that as I saw a thread that was saying there is some sort of mod for the pickups.
Ampwise - usually an Ampeg SVT4-Pro with the 6x10 HLF cab but sometimes an older Acoustic 371 (370 with the 301 bottom). I use that for situations I need extra projection like on raised stages and such.
I have a SansAmp, Boss EQs and other boxes - though the Ampeg tone controls are pretty complete.
Using round wounds.
Somehow the tone just does not have what I expected.
- Ziggy -
Ampwise - usually an Ampeg SVT4-Pro with the 6x10 HLF cab but sometimes an older Acoustic 371 (370 with the 301 bottom). I use that for situations I need extra projection like on raised stages and such.
I have a SansAmp, Boss EQs and other boxes - though the Ampeg tone controls are pretty complete.
Using round wounds.
Somehow the tone just does not have what I expected.
- Ziggy -
I gig - so therefore I am.
-
atomic_punk
- Senior Member
- Posts: 5093
- Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2003 5:00 am
- Contact:
Basically, getting a 4001 and dumping the 4003...
. Seriously, you will not get what you call "the classic Rick tone" from a 4003, and that's the double truth, Ruth. Even more seriously, I can make your 4003 sound like you wish it to - like a 4001.
. Seriously, you will not get what you call "the classic Rick tone" from a 4003, and that's the double truth, Ruth. Even more seriously, I can make your 4003 sound like you wish it to - like a 4001.A Rickenbacker bass is much like the Jaguar E car - perennially ultra-fashionable.
-
4stringnosing
- New member
- Posts: 94
- Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2006 10:36 am
How to get that "Chris Squire" sound in a nutshell (feel free to pick and choose what your budget allows!) -- 1) Playing style (hard attack with a heavy pick played between pickups); 2) Stereo setup with bridge pup out to a Marshall guitar amp (great natural distortion); 3) Chorus and compression pedals; 4) Low action so you get some growly fret buzz; 5) Some kind of pre-amp/modelling amp like a PoD XT or Behringer Bass V-Amp; and 6) (IMHO the most important factor) The right roundwound strings. CS may use Rotosounds but the best results I've gotten were from DR Bootzillas and Dean Markley Fretmasters (not quite as jangly as the Bootzillas but a bit softer on your fingers and frets). Even my band noticed how "clangy" my sound was after switching to the Bootzillas, as in my guitarist's comment: "Holy ****, you sound like Yes!" As a bonus, they're coated so they retain that sound much longer.
Dreaming of one day owning a Fender bass is like dreaming of one day driving a Chevrolet Impala.
Interesting. So the 4001 has a really different sound from the 4003? I thought that the only difference was the beefed up neck.
The pickup mod was on another thread - something about taking a capacitor out or something. I will look for it and see if can link it here.
How close do you run your pickups to the string?
Oh - my thanks to all that responded.
- Ziggy -
The pickup mod was on another thread - something about taking a capacitor out or something. I will look for it and see if can link it here.
How close do you run your pickups to the string?
Oh - my thanks to all that responded.
- Ziggy -
I gig - so therefore I am.
So, bingo, dude the capacitor is the big tonal difference between a 70's 4001 and a 4003.
That's not a pick up mod, that a circuitry/wiring mod. In your case you (apparently) want to add the capacitor; it's a .0047 uF cap. The RIC site has the schematic. That's opposite of what most people do; they usually short out the cap on a 4001 to get more balls to the sound.
That's not a pick up mod, that a circuitry/wiring mod. In your case you (apparently) want to add the capacitor; it's a .0047 uF cap. The RIC site has the schematic. That's opposite of what most people do; they usually short out the cap on a 4001 to get more balls to the sound.
Listen to that sustain!
-
4stringnosing
- New member
- Posts: 94
- Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2006 10:36 am
No, no, no, NO -- this is one rumour that has to be nipped in the bud! I realize I'll be flamed for this, but the idea that a 4001 sounds "better" than a 4003 is a complete fantasy. The modern 4003 is the absolute state of the art in the Ric world (other than perhaps the 4004, which I have no experience with, so I can't comment on it).
I've owned a 1974 4001 and now have a 2005 4003 and I have to tell you, when I first played the 4003 I was blown away by every aspect of it, especially the much fuller tonal capabilities. My previous experience with the 4003 was with the early 80's models, which did not impress me very much, especially for what I perceived as "sticky" necks.
Ric has made precious few major changes to the 4001/4003 series over the last 40 years or so -- much more of an evolution than a revolution. This has given them a unique opportunity to tweak an already great product, improving it in a "two steps forward, one step back" manner. Not everything has worked, but they usually figure that out fairly quick and make the appropriate changes to improve the instrument.
Take it from a former "4001 snob" -- older certainly may mean more valuable but it does not necessarily mean "better". That's something that only applies to a select few manufacturers, probably not Fender or Gibson, but definitely Rickenbacker.
Oooh I'm in a feisty mood today -- bring on the "he's nuts!" comments!
I've owned a 1974 4001 and now have a 2005 4003 and I have to tell you, when I first played the 4003 I was blown away by every aspect of it, especially the much fuller tonal capabilities. My previous experience with the 4003 was with the early 80's models, which did not impress me very much, especially for what I perceived as "sticky" necks.
Ric has made precious few major changes to the 4001/4003 series over the last 40 years or so -- much more of an evolution than a revolution. This has given them a unique opportunity to tweak an already great product, improving it in a "two steps forward, one step back" manner. Not everything has worked, but they usually figure that out fairly quick and make the appropriate changes to improve the instrument.
Take it from a former "4001 snob" -- older certainly may mean more valuable but it does not necessarily mean "better". That's something that only applies to a select few manufacturers, probably not Fender or Gibson, but definitely Rickenbacker.
Oooh I'm in a feisty mood today -- bring on the "he's nuts!" comments!
Dreaming of one day owning a Fender bass is like dreaming of one day driving a Chevrolet Impala.
-
jwr2
I prefer the 4003 sound to the 4001 sound but both are good ... as per which is better that is subjective ...
A 60s 4001 had a horseshoe pickup wound to about 6-7k ohms and a toaster neck pickup wound to 7.4k ohms and a .0047 capacitor attached to the bridge pickup that cut the low frequency response from that pickup.
A 70s 4001 had 2 8k ohm high gain pickups and it also had the .0047 capacitor for the bridge pickup.
The 4003 has 2 11k ohm high gain pickups and has no .0047 capacitor (until the appearance of the vintage tone circuit)
The 4000, 4001, and 4003 basses all had 500k ohm tone pots until sometime in the mid 90s. A 500k ohm tone pot with give the bass more treble bite. The current 4003 has 250k ohm tone pots.
Also the 4003, the 70s 4001 and 60s 4001 have some difference in construction that effect the tone. I put 4003 high gain pickups in a 68 4001 and it still sounded like a 60s 4001 because of the 60s 4001 construction.
And for me the things that make a Ric bass sound distinctive are a little fret buzz and a little distortion and some treble.
A 60s 4001 had a horseshoe pickup wound to about 6-7k ohms and a toaster neck pickup wound to 7.4k ohms and a .0047 capacitor attached to the bridge pickup that cut the low frequency response from that pickup.
A 70s 4001 had 2 8k ohm high gain pickups and it also had the .0047 capacitor for the bridge pickup.
The 4003 has 2 11k ohm high gain pickups and has no .0047 capacitor (until the appearance of the vintage tone circuit)
The 4000, 4001, and 4003 basses all had 500k ohm tone pots until sometime in the mid 90s. A 500k ohm tone pot with give the bass more treble bite. The current 4003 has 250k ohm tone pots.
Also the 4003, the 70s 4001 and 60s 4001 have some difference in construction that effect the tone. I put 4003 high gain pickups in a 68 4001 and it still sounded like a 60s 4001 because of the 60s 4001 construction.
And for me the things that make a Ric bass sound distinctive are a little fret buzz and a little distortion and some treble.
-
4stringnosing
- New member
- Posts: 94
- Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2006 10:36 am
-
jwr2