Can anyone ID what kind of Ric this HS is off ?

thinneckrick · Post by **thinneckrick** » Tue Mar 13, 2007 5:36 am

The good doctor should be sued for malpractice.

jingle_jangle · Post by **jingle_jangle** » Tue Mar 13, 2007 5:57 am

"I sold Marc Seligman a set of horse shoes of a '68 a couple of years ago that needed degaussing."

Sorry, Ken, but don't you mean "remagnetizing"? If not, please educate me on this, seriously.

I do feel a bit sheepish playing language cop, believe me. I don't rub my hands together and chortle with joy, honest.

jingle_jangle · Post by **jingle_jangle** » Tue Mar 13, 2007 5:58 am

Er, honestly.

ken_j · Post by **ken_j** » Tue Mar 13, 2007 6:06 am

I meant re-gaussing (and even that may not be correct). Thanks for the correction

rickcrazy · Post by **rickcrazy** » Tue Mar 13, 2007 6:12 am

Hey Tony, it is a no-win situation then? (You know what I'm talking about.)

ajish4 · Post by **ajish4** » Tue Mar 13, 2007 6:24 am

Hey Sergio,

Well, 1 of 3 isn't bad!

...and that 1 will be used in a VERY SPECIAL application....

"I shall endeavour to persevere"!

rickcrazy · Post by **rickcrazy** » Tue Mar 13, 2007 6:28 am

Okay, now you got me curious. Feel like sharing?...

stevebasshead · Post by **stevebasshead** » Tue Mar 13, 2007 7:03 am

Ken, I'm puzzled. I thought with the HS's you only needed the HS's OR the pickup to be magnetized (see http://www.rickenbacker.com/forum_view_message.asp?forum=Just_Basses&message_id=24023&thread_id=2255&thread_name=4001c64s????&p=p#24023)

If as you say, Marc remagnetized them and installed the 4003 pickup complete with bar magnet wouldn't that produce a drastically different field for the strings to vibrate within, affecting (for better or worse) the pickup's tone ? Or have I misunderstood John's posting ?

ajish4 · Post by **ajish4** » Tue Mar 13, 2007 7:24 am

SSSSSsssssshhhhh!

Sergio, you forgot?

I did tell you, check your Email.

ken_j · Post by **ken_j** » Tue Mar 13, 2007 8:32 am

Stephen, Marc did not re-magnetize them. He used them for cosmetics only. AFAIK That is why I wrote: "Although this would get you the look but probably not the sound."

jnbass · Post by **jnbass** » Tue Mar 13, 2007 9:42 am

the look;

but not the sound...
(HS shown is actual RIC part-not fabrication)

rickcrazy · Post by **rickcrazy** » Tue Mar 13, 2007 10:38 am

Uh-oh! Sorree...

jps · Post by **jps** » Tue Mar 13, 2007 12:58 pm

"(courtesy JPS)"

I think the photo is courtesy Jeff Rath.

stevebasshead · Post by **stevebasshead** » Tue Mar 13, 2007 3:15 pm

Jared, the HS 'look' is so much better than the plastic cover which also feels insubstantial underneath the hand and IMHO doesn't belong on a quality instrument. Sorry Mr Hall, I mean no offence, perhaps there's a technical reason that I'm ignorant of as to why a metal cover would be a bad idea - would it interfere with the magnetic field generated by the pickup ?

By default the 'look' will be the first and easiest thing for me to achieve at the moment. I'm thinking I'll put my existing high gain in the HS first, listen to the difference and then go down the unwinding route as per John Allgaier's post previously, maybe even having it scatterwound from scratch.

jps · Post by **jps** » Tue Mar 13, 2007 3:43 pm

A while ago John asked here if anyone had one of the metal covers from the '70s but nobody seemed to have one. John wanted it as a model for recreating it.