Horseshoe / Hi Gain

sloop_john_b · Post by **sloop_john_b** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 4:06 pm

Coulda fooled me!

johnallg · Post by **johnallg** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 5:31 pm

Sergio's "The Man" on Rick pups!

sloop_john_b · Post by **sloop_john_b** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 5:39 pm

So what does that make you?

johnallg · Post by **johnallg** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 6:43 pm

"The Apprentice"?? A Wanna Be?? Interested????

vincent_gallo · Post by **vincent_gallo** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 10:25 pm

With all due respect Jeff, part of the reason we are all here is because we grew up listening to great bassist who played Rickenbacker basses. Most of the basses we grew up listening to had those wimpy horseshoes as you call em and those early wimpy toasters. To me they sounded incredible. They were good enough for Paul McCartney, Chris Squire, Mike Rutherford and several others and they are certainly good enough for me. I own your old 68 and she sounds just fine with original 60’s pickups put back in.

Maybe it is just a question of taste and not one pickup being worthless and whimpy and another being the Holy Grail. Maybe you need to hear a set working to original spec and not faded.

heinpete · Post by **heinpete** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 11:02 pm

I can follow Jeff's point of view very well. The first Rickenbacker bass players I listened to had highly modified early '7Oies 4001 skunkers, no horse shoes at all: Roger Glover (Deep Purple), Pete Agnew (Nazareth) and Derek Mo Moore (Nektar).
When trying out a HS 4001 one day I realized, that this does not guarantee the Rick-sound and growl. However the later 4001 and the 4003 can give that sound very well!
For Sir Pauls sound, I actually never liked it and was surprised when I saw it was a Ric (I alway thought the bad sound was due to his archaic Höfner violin bass). Geddy is a great bass player, but also his sound is not for me (too much fuzz and distortion). The sound of CS might be the best of that hero selection, but he uses also a lot of electronics to contribute to it.
My criteria would rather be: Plug the bass plain into a SVT stack or a Marshall/Hiwatt stack, all controls 12'o'clock and then let the lady sing naturally!!!

jwr2 · Post by **jwr2** » Thu Sep 27, 2007 3:06 am

yes it is a matter of taste ... but for my taste the 68 was weak and thin ... my 73 was better but my 86 and later basses kick butt ...

When I started playing modern rock I needed the full sound and low B string ... the old basses simply didn't get the job done ...

ram · Post by **ram** » Thu Sep 27, 2007 4:08 am

I don’t know a whole lot about the nuances with pickups and am loving these kinds of threads. I find them to be a great learning tool. I think this falls into the category of personal preference - along with flats or rounds, fingers or picks etc. I still think the Rickenbacker brand provides some of the widest ranges of tonal and sound capabilities. Almost the same bass gave us the McCartney and Squire sounds. Pretty darn diverse I'd say. As amplification technology changes so too must the pickups adapt - all of this to meet the demands of the ebbs and flows of the music buying public. To me, the fact that these timeless looking basses are able to provide such a verity of sounds, which we debate, is a testament to the genius behind their design.

jwr2 · Post by **jwr2** » Thu Sep 27, 2007 5:28 am

yes that search for the perfect sound is an interesting journey ... and the technology behind what makes a bass sound a certain way is interesting ... the wood, the capacitors, the pots, the pickups, the location of the pickups, the wiring of the pickups, the amps the effects, the style of playing, etc ...

I have become a real fan of mid growl and low mid growl ... my old 68 had a wonderful tone but the toaster neck pickup is scatterwound which reduces some mids and the horseshoe had the .0047 capacitor which cut out lows and some mids from the bridge pickup ... this made it hard to produce some of the frequencies that I longed for ...

zoomduck · Post by **zoomduck** » Thu Sep 27, 2007 6:00 am

" Scatterwound " sounds like I feel in the morning . My EQ curve is smiley face so I find the horseshoe a little thick . If I were still a hard rocker I think the horseshoe would be perfect for moving air and destroying bowels . Toasters and high gains just seem to hit where I like bass to hit ....right in the chest .

gearhed289 · Post by **gearhed289** » Thu Sep 27, 2007 7:56 am

I've found my favorite combo to be a pre-2000 "hot" toaster re-issue and a modern high gain treble pup. I can get crunch and boom, together or separately! I've got this setup on both my '93 4003S/8 (stock) and my '89 4003S (pickups replaced). Run through a '74 Ampeg V-4B, it's pure Ric heaven. Think "Exit Stage Left". My stock '92 4001CS with the "hot" toaster and horseshoe sounds equally bad ***, but with a little more crunch than boom.

zoomduck · Post by **zoomduck** » Thu Sep 27, 2007 9:45 am

Yeah Tom . I think thats where I'll end up . The stock V63 toaster with a high gain bridge pup .

heinpete · Post by **heinpete** » Thu Sep 27, 2007 10:01 am

Tom, what is the "hot" toaster in terms of Ohms?

johnallg · Post by **johnallg** » Thu Sep 27, 2007 11:40 am

Okay you guys, to relieve your angst, I will accept all horseshoe pickups and give them a clean, fresh pasture to roam in. Just send them to me, guys.

When you look at the last day's posts and who likes what tone and who is their idol/example, you see the age/decade relationship of what they prefer. Very telling.

Lastly, even though Macca and Squire were playing very similar basses, one used Rick flats (really thumpy) with the tone controls most all to bass and very heavy compression, and the other used Roto roundwounds (very piano-y), a bass and a guitar amp in stereo with treble acentuated, and effects for chorus, distortion, and fuzz. Different goals for tone, and the same Rick model bass delivered.

thx1955 · Post by **thx1955** » Thu Sep 27, 2007 11:59 am

I'd take them as well !!!