Old-Timer's Take on 4003 vs C64S

Vintage, Modern, V & C series, Fretless, Signature & Special Editions

Moderators: rickenbrother, ajish4

User avatar
rickinroma
RRF Consultant
Posts: 1109
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 11:27 pm
Contact:

Re: Old-Timer's Take on 4003 vs C64S

Post by rickinroma »

I had a fireglo 78 4001 (I sold it around 1995) and the pickguard was NOT transparent
I have a fireglo 97 4001V63 and the white pickguard is NOT transparent
I have a Blue Boy 2004 4003 and the white pickguard is NOT transparent

in none of them you can see the wiring cavity or anything else through the pickguard...only in the C64S and this seems to be common...if one compares the pictures in the link posted (mapleglo 4003/4001C64) the difference between the pickguards appears clear :)
rickaddict
Senior Member
Posts: 6163
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2004 7:46 am

Re: Old-Timer's Take on 4003 vs C64S

Post by rickaddict »

Starless wrote:
I think I owe it to the horseshoe to give it every chance - it is a major part of the vintage-ness and coolness of the bass.
I agree. But after giving mine a chance for what I though was long enough, I voted for full string access. I was able to "get used" to the horseshoe, but I will always be a better player with it off and that's what's most important to me.

And another cool thing about a C64S as opposed to the CS re-issue bass is that Macca didn't have the horseshoe all through the 70's. He had a hi-gain. So in my opinion the bass is authentic with or without the shoes, and actually had more playtime (in current paint-stripped form) with the shoes off.

8)
Last edited by rickaddict on Fri Jul 11, 2008 4:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.
rickaddict
Senior Member
Posts: 6163
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2004 7:46 am

Re: Old-Timer's Take on 4003 vs C64S

Post by rickaddict »

rickinroma wrote:I had a fireglo 78 4001 (I sold it around 1995) and the pickguard was NOT transparent
I have a fireglo 97 4001V63 and the white pickguard is NOT transparent
I have a Blue Boy 2004 4003 and the white pickguard is NOT transparent

in none of them you can see the wiring cavity or anything else through the pickguard...only in the C64S and this seems to be common...if one compares the pictures in the link posted (mapleglo 4003/4001C64) the difference between the pickguards appears clear :)
Hmmm....Your 2004 4003 isn't see-through but your 2003 C64S is? That's odd. I have a 2006 4003 and I'm pretty sure it has (had) a see-through pick guard, but the bass went to Dale Fortune 6 months ago to be turned into a V68 so I can't check.

Anybody else?

:?
User avatar
rickinroma
RRF Consultant
Posts: 1109
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 11:27 pm
Contact:

Re: Old-Timer's Take on 4003 vs C64S

Post by rickinroma »

rickaddict wrote: Hmmm....Your 2004 4003 isn't see-through but your 2003 C64S is? That's odd.
My 4001C64S is from August 2006

probably basses in Mapleglo enhance this detail
User avatar
johnallg
Rick-a-holic
Posts: 17688
Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2006 12:13 pm

Re: Old-Timer's Take on 4003 vs C64S

Post by johnallg »

Graeme, bass porn for a MapleGlo junkie like me! Thanks! I just noticed the C64S does not have the vintage-type bridge pickup surround.... huh.

As to pickguards - I have bought 2 C64 guards and both are see-through and both have the oversized neck pup hole. Not sure why. And my Nov. 2004 4003MG had a see-through guard before it was C64'd.
rickaddict
Senior Member
Posts: 6163
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2004 7:46 am

Re: Old-Timer's Take on 4003 vs C64S

Post by rickaddict »

johnallg wrote:Graeme, bass porn for a MapleGlo junkie like me! Thanks! I just noticed the C64S does not have the vintage-type bridge pickup surround.... huh.
I thought you noticed that on mine at RIO!

8)

These parts were exchanged for new (70's) parts when the bass went back to RIC: Tail piece (no gap), bridge, bridge pickup/surround (hi gain/70's surround) and a new pick guard was made (in the shape of the old one).

These were major improvements in the sound, playability, functionality, and appearance of the bass. :twisted:
User avatar
johnallg
Rick-a-holic
Posts: 17688
Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2006 12:13 pm

Re: Old-Timer's Take on 4003 vs C64S

Post by johnallg »

Okay, devil's advocate - if this is a Macca repro, why the HS and not a high gain??!! :lol: With the high gain type suirround, having a HG and not a HS would have made more sense.
User avatar
rickinroma
RRF Consultant
Posts: 1109
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 11:27 pm
Contact:

Re: Old-Timer's Take on 4003 vs C64S

Post by rickinroma »

I think it has the HS because they want to reproduce the bass as it is NOW....if I recall correctly they installed a new HS not long ago
User avatar
johnallg
Rick-a-holic
Posts: 17688
Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2006 12:13 pm

Re: Old-Timer's Take on 4003 vs C64S

Post by johnallg »

rickinroma wrote:I think it has the HS because they want to reproduce the bass as it is NOW....if I recall correctly they installed a new HS not long ago
Hard to tell, seeing he plays that OTHER bass now! :lol: :lol: :lol:
User avatar
Starless
New member
Posts: 40
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2008 3:51 am

Re: Old-Timer's Take on 4003 vs C64S

Post by Starless »

I didn't know Macca's original pick-up surround was different, but I did notice I had no gap-tooth tailpiece - so presume Macca had the suround and tailpiece changed out at some point. So I must have a 'Macca as it is today' kind of bass (should I get a Red Rose Speedway sticker to make it totally authentic, or is that now not on his bass? - when was the last time his Rick was seen/photographed in public?).

On that subject, I notice there are C64 (no 'S') models on the go, in satin maple. These must be modelled on Macca's tea-break version of his bass. i.e. he knocked off another track for 'McCartney' (probably Momma Miss America) then headed out to the barn brandishing his turbo nutter b*st*rd sander, shaved off the top to get rid of the psycho artwork, then stopped for tea (or maybe made his way upstairs and had a smoke) before returning to savage the horns.

A C64 in natural maple (with horns intact) must be modelled on that tea/smoke break version.
User avatar
kiramdear
RRF Moderator
Posts: 9045
Joined: Fri Jun 27, 2008 2:51 am
Contact:

Re: Old-Timer's Take on 4003 vs C64S

Post by kiramdear »

Wow, I loved the photos! Especially this one. I think they like each other :D The one on the right has a big smile :lol:
Attachments
2_09.jpg
All I wanna do is rock!
User avatar
kiramdear
RRF Moderator
Posts: 9045
Joined: Fri Jun 27, 2008 2:51 am
Contact:

Re: Old-Timer's Take on 4003 vs C64S

Post by kiramdear »

Starless wrote:These must be modelled on Macca's tea-break version of his bass. i.e. he knocked off another track for 'McCartney' (probably Momma Miss America) then headed out to the barn brandishing his turbo nutter b*st*rd sander, shaved off the top to get rid of the psycho artwork, then stopped for tea (or maybe made his way upstairs and had a smoke) before returning to savage the horns.
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Attachments
paul_mccartney_rickenbacker_4000s.jpg
Last edited by kiramdear on Fri Jul 11, 2008 6:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.
All I wanna do is rock!
User avatar
kiramdear
RRF Moderator
Posts: 9045
Joined: Fri Jun 27, 2008 2:51 am
Contact:

Re: Old-Timer's Take on 4003 vs C64S

Post by kiramdear »

The 4003 is even thinner and more transparent. I don't think it does the bass any favours - just looks like they used cheap (Mexican or Korean) plastic.
According to reliable sources (hi, Paul!) the only part of a Rickenbacker guitar or bass not made in the US is the Chinese sticker that says "Made in USA" :)
All I wanna do is rock!
User avatar
Starless
New member
Posts: 40
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2008 3:51 am

Re: Old-Timer's Take on 4003 vs C64S

Post by Starless »

But surely my C64S should bear the legend: "Made in America, Designed in Scotland"
User avatar
kiramdear
RRF Moderator
Posts: 9045
Joined: Fri Jun 27, 2008 2:51 am
Contact:

Re: Old-Timer's Take on 4003 vs C64S

Post by kiramdear »

Starless wrote:But surely my C64S should bear the legend: "Made in America, Designed in Scotland"
Here's your sticker:
Attachments
photoa15.jpg
All I wanna do is rock!
Post Reply

Return to “Rickenbacker Basses: by Joey Vasco & Tony Cabibe”