Call me a heretic, but...

[atomic_punk]

I know the return of the full-width inlay was the last thing I had been hoping for in a standard RIC bass. Now that I see them, I lust for one again. If I can get that B string on there, I will NOT be able to resist any longer.

[antonius]

I just count myself extremely lucky to actually own a genuine Rickenbacker ('75 4001) - the instrument of my dreams, whatever the subtle differences may be with instruments made in different years. I actually like the shorter triangular inlay but that is because it is all I have known. I'd be equally happy (ecstatic in fact!) to own one of the new ones. Short, full, or dot inlay, it's still a Rickebacker!!

[cheyenne]

I think their a nice touch,, but I for one have never been a big fan of the original "full width sparkley inlays". I dont want to come off critical here, because RIC seem to be heading toward making the 4003 a modern/vintage model, and that appeals to a pretty large crowd.

For me, I can take or leave the full width inlays, but vintage pickups and checker binding as an option would blow the lid off of the 4003.

[henry5]

Well let's put it this way; up until the change if you wanted full-widths (without going the Paul/Dale route) then you'd have been forking out a lot of money; more than some could afford, seeing as they stopped in '73. There are a bazillion basses out there with the poured inlays, from '73 up until recently. Now you have the option of buying either either without breaking the bank (albeit s/h for the poured), with the added bonus of upping production. If that isn't a win win, I don't know what is.

Personally speaking, the only time I preferred the poured inlays was when I didn't know there was anything else! I well remember first seeing my '72 in the shop I bought it from and comparing it to my '76. It was like a veil had been lifted from my eyes...

[bob_atherton]

When I bought my pride and joy first Rickenbacker 4001 JG back in 1974 I was rather pleased to see the new, simple , masculine binding on the bass rather than the slightly girly checkerbinding on the old basses. I even thought the new 4 pole highgains looked better than the toasters. Oh well....

And my pride an joy now is a very girly '72 MG...!

[jps]

Let's get a grip, realize how da**ed lucky we are, and throw party or something!

We are. First weekend of August. Hope to see you there!

Um, we already had the party, this past weekend! Sorry, we missed you Joey, and all the others who couldn't make it.

[rickenbrother]

Um, we already had the party, this past weekend! Sorry, we missed you Joey, and all the others who couldn't make it.

Yeah, I wish I could have been there.
But we will have part 2 of the party in the RIC home area of SoCal.

[chefothefuture]

I think that John Hall should just tell all of us to go to He**!
For years every one whined and puled about full widths.
Rickenbacker finds a way to do this in their search to build
a product that is cool AND profitable. Now folks here are complaining and accusing.
WHAT'S WRONG HERE!?!?!?
Of course there is always a Fender active 5 like some whiners have gone to....
Well, screw it. Rick has a great product, has tried to respond to customer requests short
of opening a custom shop, and this is GRATITUDE that is shown?
I don't get it!
I am now going to a therapist for an FBSM to try to loose my hostility;
PERSONALLY I DON'T THINK IT CAN BE DONE!!!!!!

[rickboy88]

what's all the fuss? dot necks rule!

Yeah baby, Yeaaah! (in Austin Powers voice)

The images of the them do look good. Just one of my 4 Ric's have the "shark fin" inlays, hence the first line.

[whojamfan]

Chefothefuture,
Don't sugarcoat it man, how do you really feel?
Hope your therapy goes well.

As for the topic, plenty of basses out there now that have both, so everyone should be happy. I think it's a good thing that they have found a way to help catch up on their backlog, and it will be a much better thing when Rickenbacker guitars, at least the staples, are readily available versus the possibility of years of waiting for your instrument to arrive.

I don't think it makes you a heretic for not liking it, I'm personally not a fan of checkered binding, and consequently, don't own a Rick trimmed with it. For those who do, be happy there is one less Ric-o-holic out there looking for one.

Different strokes, but we still lovin' them Ricks!

I see win win.

[johnallg]

I am really glad RIC went to the FWI. I am really glad it is a much less time intensive process that will aid in reducing a very, to both them and the buying public, cumbersome backlog. I finally saw the new inlays this past weekend and they are alright. I will not run out and order or buy a bass with them thought. This is only my opinion, and we all know for how many individuals this is valid, but the material was less than I had hoped for. F W I W, Y M M V, W R G A S W I T.

[antipodean]

Hmm, if I got one of the new 4003s for Christmas, I wouldn't send it back just for the sake of the inlays....

[wints]

A guy I knew told me once, that anything after 73, wasn't up to it..."When they went cheap" were his words. Now, I don't agree with that statement, but there's no doubt that the early deluxe basses were more labor intensive, and well, looked much better for it. The majority of players/collectors seem to agree as well judged on the $$$ for a 72 compared to a 74....

This new inlays look so much better than the previous, and it's easier to make. What company wouldn't do that? It's always subjective, this appearance thing, but as most here, and the general buying public will confirm, this a big step back in a better direction.

Good call John Hall!

[markbass99]

I agree with Wints.......it also positions the 4003 for a deluxe reissue someday with a few minor tweeks.

[rickenbrother]

Of course there is always a Fender active 5 like some whiners have gone to....

John, just do what I've done about that. The forum looks much better to me that way.