Hello everyone ! 4004 questions......

zoomduck · Post by **zoomduck** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 9:08 am

I've owned three 4001s and have to say I hate the binding . The 4004Cii is a much more comfortable instrument to me . But.......I prefer the single coil tone of the 4001 so......I installed concentric pots and toaster pickups....had Jeff Rath convert the bass to a 5 string to effectivly narrow the reach to the E string.....and now have the Perfect Bass for me !...... I really Love my 4004Cii !

woodyng · Post by **woodyng** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 9:17 am

my interest in the 4004 is- a. its a rick!,and b.it is a somewhat different animal to its predecessors. i personally think i would like the sound of the hb's,and one my most-played other basses is a 68 tele (baseball bat-neck),so the neck thing is not TOO scary-although i love a slender neck-(jazz/tbird).....

johnallg · Post by **johnallg** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 10:21 am

Woody, I have a 4004Ci (like the walnut w/maple neck in Brian's pic of 4). I really like the neck on it - it is thinner (front to back) than my 2004 4003 but a tad wider. Not a problem for me, I have large hands. Tonally you know it is a Rick as it carries the family tone and growl, but it has more low end solidity to the sound in a very nice way. As was stated, it is a modern interpretation on the Rickenbacker formula. I would say try before you buy but if you are like me it was not feasable. I bought on others evaluations and was not negatively surprised nor disappointed. I was surprised by the weight (less), beauty, feel, and tone.

rickenbrother · Post by **rickenbrother** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 10:35 am

The 4004's are the best kept secret in the world of bass guitars.

markbass99 · Post by **markbass99** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 12:29 pm

The other best kept secret is how great the four stringer is as a five. I went into it as an experiment to see if I could tame that wide neck(I have medium size hands) and Jeff Rath had already done a few so I knew it was do-able.

The thing that makes it such a great five is the way that it improves the "four stringer" that resides under the "B". Nice and compact(fast) and the resonance of the neck is also improved making the "E" and "A" strings sound stronger. I wonder if RIC ever made any five string prototypes out of one of their four strings? The hb1's pups have great coverage for the string spacing I use (2 7/16").

johnallg · Post by **johnallg** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 12:35 pm

Mark, could some of the improved E and A be from a more optimum covering of the pickups?

jwr2 · Post by **jwr2** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 12:47 pm

yep the 4004 makes a really good 5 string bass ... I have 2 of my own and I have converted quite a few for others ... also wiring it volume, volume, tone like a jazz bass improves the tone ...

the 4004 is thinner than the 4003 ... it has 15k ohm series humbucker pickups ... most humbuckers are parallel which gives the bass a mellower tone ... the series humbuckers make it sound like a ****** off p-bass ...

you can put single coil pickups in a 4004 ... most Ric pickups have the same exact footprint ... but if you add single coils then use 250k ohm pots ...

here are my 2 4004 basses ...

http://www.3dentourage.com/425/93-4004L-5.htm
http://www.3dentourage.com/425/98-4004ci5.htm

and here are some that I worked on ...

http://www.3dentourage.com/425/05-4004cii5.htm
http://www.3dentourage.com/425/2002%204004cii5.htm
http://www.3dentourage.com/425/4004-goth.htm

johnallg · Post by **johnallg** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 1:35 pm

"the series humbuckers make it sound like a ****** off p-bass ..."

I've noticed that too, Jeff. Crank the tone controls just right and bingo.

edski · Post by **edski** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 2:10 pm

I love my Laredo. I'm torn if I should ditch my 75 4001, but I lean towards keeping it pretty much out of sentiment.

As for EQ'ing it sound best, treble boost, relative to your other EQ settings is a good idea. That allows the Rick clank to come through. You have gobs of mid and bass out of this beast, so you can cut a little of either for some very varied tones.

Lots of folks have altered the wiring to either concentric vol/tones on each PU, or a V-V-T configuration. I'm one of the rare (it seems) people who are happy with the stock electronics.

Since I figured out how to EQ it right, I've never been happier with my bass sound.

(got to get some better pix now that I have my own camera!)

johnallg · Post by **johnallg** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 4:09 pm

Ehh, keep the 4001 for a little variety AND for sentimental reasons. I'd think you would come to regret letting it go.

sloop_john_b · Post by **sloop_john_b** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 5:02 pm

Ed, I prefer the switch/V/T configuration over V/V/T as well. Concentrics would be great though, since on my 4003 and 4005, I like to set my tone knobs for each pickup. So far, it's the only limitation i've come across on my 4004's - one that's easily remedied, albeit.

woodyng · Post by **woodyng** » Fri Feb 02, 2007 10:31 am

ed---nice looking fg there.and getting back to one of my original questions-since you have the rearward pickups-notice any difference on the tone(s) esp, on the rear pickup? the back pickup on the 4002 was right in front of the bridge assembly,and the tone on that pickup solo'd was HEAVEN...very j*zz bass/jaco-esque....

rickenbrother · Post by **rickenbrother** » Fri Feb 02, 2007 10:48 am

My 4004Cii and mapleglo 4004Cii/5 have the pickups further from the neck and produce a very nice J-bass like growl with the bridge pickup soloed. To me, it sounds better than a J-bass. My trans red 4004Cii/5 has the pickups closer to the neck. It doesn't do the J-bass growl, but it packs quite a punch, closer to the 4003 sound.

kcole4001 · Post by **kcole4001** » Fri Feb 02, 2007 12:18 pm

From what (almost) everyone reports about the 4004 line I gather that the only reason they're any kind of a secret is their rarity, otherwise there would be many more converts, or at least those who own both the 4001/4003 & 4004 basses.

edski · Post by **edski** » Fri Feb 02, 2007 2:39 pm

I find very different tones in all three switch positions. I've just done a little measurement with my 4004 and J Bass, measuring where the PU placement is in terms of "fret position" from the bridge. That is the same distance as the "fret" as that fret (or approximation) is from the nut.

Got that?

Any way, here's my measures:

4004 - neck pu at 5th "fret", bridge at about the 2nd

J Bass - neck at about 3.5, and bridge about 1.5

That is the J Bass pu's sounded (based on the harmonics) to be between frets. Lots of nodes as you get inside the 4th fret.

My theory is the 5th fret is an ideal spot to have the pu to get a meaty response - the harmonic that occurs there is pretty strong. If there is a powerful harmonic, that'll affect the tone.

A few months ago I commented on hearing an over tone on my 4004's low E unamped - that was the harmonic I heard measuring the pu distance. The 1 1/2 fret harmonic on the J bass bridge pu was not as strong, so probably would not overtly add much to the sound, but being a little closer to the bridge, it would explain a little more treble grunge that the J's are noted for.