4005

atomic_punk · Post by **atomic_punk** » Tue Mar 06, 2007 3:49 am

There is one on Ebay now for $16,000. I think $4000 for a new one would be considered a good price. Although I know it won't be built, and I understand why.

jps · Post by **jps** » Tue Mar 06, 2007 4:09 am

jps · Post by **jps** » Tue Mar 06, 2007 4:15 am

For me, the 4005 was/is my first Rick I ever owned and played extensively. It's pickup configuration provides a great variety of tonal variation, and mine doesn't even have the fifth (element) knob. In it's place is Rick-O-Sound. The neck on mine is the thinnest of any bass I have played, and of course, the rarirty certainly plays some part in it's mystique. The body is larger than the other 4000 series shape but is much lighter, at least the WB is, being much lighter than the standard 4005 body.

charlyg · Post by **charlyg** » Tue Mar 06, 2007 4:37 am

I would characterize the tone as not as aggressive as the 4000-4003 hard bodies, but certainly had tons of variation, as Jeffrey said.

firstbassman · Post by **firstbassman** » Tue Mar 06, 2007 5:20 am

Try altering your playing style so that you are not dependent on anchoring your thumb anywhere

At my age, I rest and I'll anchor whenever I get the chance.
And besides, I was taught by the best. If it's good enough for JC it's good enough for me.

a new-build 4005 at around $4,000 to $6,000

Well, if that were to be the price then it's still out of my league. No instrument is worth that much (to me).
But I wonder if and why it would be that much. JH has always stated that price is equal to cost plus reasonable profit.

What is it about these basses

Seeing as how I've never heard a 4005, for me it's all about the "cool looks." It's the closest thing a bass gets to a 360.
Better yet, just slap four bass strings on a 360 body and now we got somethin'!

sloop_john_b · Post by **sloop_john_b** » Tue Mar 06, 2007 5:45 am

But I wonder if and why it would be that much. JH has always stated that price is equal to cost plus reasonable profit.

Cost = the huge amount of new tooling that would be required.

ajish4 · Post by **ajish4** » Tue Mar 06, 2007 6:04 am

Jeff,

For me, the ONLY pull to a 4005 (besides it being a RIC) is the hollow body appeal. You said it is LIGHTER than the standard 4005, but how does it compare a standard 4001/4003 in terms of weight?

Getting older has it's drawbacks, and a LIGHTER BASS is in my future for sure. I hardly play my Alembic anymore just because of its weight.

haw · Post by **haw** » Tue Mar 06, 2007 6:57 am

Didn't realise so many people kept starting threads about a re-issue 4005 (It's usually CS/4003 threads I'm most interested in!).

But if a C64 is going in my local music emporium for £2299GBP, its obvious that all the overheads required to make a born again 4005 would push the price up to mortgage territory, so for all parties concerned, it's just not worth it.

rickinroma · Post by **rickinroma** » Tue Mar 06, 2007 7:39 am

Tony, the 4005 is sensitively lighter than the 4001/4003...I mean you feel the difference after a while...

admin · Post by **admin** » Tue Mar 06, 2007 8:05 am

Hey Francesco, how about another Beatle video, with a smile of course!

johnallg · Post by **johnallg** » Tue Mar 06, 2007 8:15 am

Look here

jps · Post by **jps** » Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:06 pm

Tony, my 4005WB is at least a couple lbs. lighter than my 4001 and feels like a feather compared to my 4001V63. Your back, chiropractor and wife will love you all the more for getting one.

incubus2432 · Post by **incubus2432** » Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:20 pm

......and credit card company!

incubus2432 · Post by **incubus2432** » Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:21 pm

D'oh.....double post!

jps · Post by **jps** » Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:31 pm

Yeah, forgot about the CC company, that, too!