Dawning Realisation...

[rickaddict]

Mmmm....Heidi Klum...

What were you saying, Ted Kaczynski...errr, I mean Paul Wilczynski?

[teeder]

That's one health looking Mapleglo!

[Starless]

And just to bring this thread full-circle and back on-topic (sort of), the photos requested earlier of my non-Rickenbacker design classic are incorporated into the 4003/C64 comparison pics at the following URL:

http://www.eiderlife.com/Rickenbacker

Sorry, you will probably need to go full-screen to squeeze them all in.

And can I just add, that these Alembic things are seriously hideous. Pure (attempted-but-failed) style over substance (abuse).

[TheFountainHead]

Man those are some ultra cool comparative photos! All of your basses are gorgeous. That's the first natural/maple fretboard fretless p i've ever seen, and it looks great. They must be pretty rare..?

[Starless]

That's the first natural/maple fretboard fretless p i've ever seen, and it looks great. They must be pretty rare..?

It's a Japanese re-issue of a 70's bass, so presume Fender must have originally made them at some time (yes, I know, probably in the 70's). Rare or not, it was considerably, and I mean VERY considerably, less expensive than either of the Rics. Which brings me back to the original point of this thread in the first place.....

The rarest thing about it for me, is the fact that it's a Fender fretless without dummy lines on the fingerboard!

[TheFountainHead]

And just to throw this thread off-topic again (sort of ), i must say that i really enjoy how alembics look. I've never played one, but they have some distinct body/head stock designs that are pleasing to my eyes.

i.e.




Granted the explorer body isn't their design, but they do do a pleasent adaptation of it!

[TheFountainHead]

That's the first natural/maple fretboard fretless p i've ever seen, and it looks great. They must be pretty rare..?

It's a Japanese re-issue of a 70's bass, so presume Fender must have originally made them at some time (yes, I know, probably in the 70's). Rare or not, it was considerably, and I mean VERY considerably, less expensive than either of the Rics. Which brings me back to the original point of this thread in the first place.....

The rarest thing about it for me, is the fact that it's a Fender fretless without dummy lines on the fingerboard!

Cool, i haven't seen one on ishibishi before, but i'll take another look. Yea it's a very clean look without the dummy lines. A non-dummy must've reissued it.

[bassduke49]

I'll sure agree with Paul W. on Heidi Klum! I can't imagine a closer-to-perfect expression of the female of the species; beautiful, sexy, intelligent, funny.

As hooked as I am with the looks of the 4001/4003 bass, you gotta admit that beyond the overall outline, the appearance is a bit of result of design by committee. Here's why: The first one was a bit klunkier and used parts that were already laying around the factory, including the somewhat primitive horseshoe pickup with a gaping hole to match, and a bridge modified from a six-string instrument. When it evolved into a two-pickup instrument, it would have looked pretty awful to install a second horsey up there close to the neck. So they bored a smaller hole for the newer, smaller Toaster pickup and routed a wire path with a Forstner bit, then mounted the new pickup onto an oversize pickguard which covered the wire path. If you can force yourself to look at it as if you had never seen one before, you start thinking "why are the pickups so different looking and different operating?" It really is a result of piling one design upon another without changing the first. My guess is it made for easier manufacture of the single/double pickup option. But why they stayed with the immense horsey, and not gone with two surface-mounted Toasters (as they did the guitars) escapes me.

The design of the "modern" 4004 is much more appealing and, to me, makes much more sense: duplicate surface mounted pickups with wires going through undersurface bored paths to a control pocket accessed by a removable panel on the back.

I don't want to seem like a critic. I am not a "design professional," but I do have an eye for esthetics (ah, Heidi!), and I am certainly not any kind of engineer. I just think that when it comes to the 4001/4003 basses, that expedience won out over form. Oh, and don't get me started on the bridge/tailpiece . . . .

[sloop_john_b]

Does anyone else see the irony of a "fretless Precision bass"?

Not many of those maple fretboard fretless basses out there. Nice score.

[JakeK]

Hey Graeme.

It's pretty cool that you have such nice basses, but you really should play a song on your P first and see how it sounds. Then, try it on your Rics, and compare it. More questions you should think about as you play along: which bass plays better, and which one feels the most comfortable. Personally, I Rics and Fenders are my favorite kind of basses, I don't hate you! I also like some Gibsons (Thunderbirds, EB-3) and the Vox Wyman.

[jingle_jangle]

Again, at the risk of alienating my fellow Forumites, I'd have to re-emphasize that, even if we were to agree that all "eyes" are created equal (and it is my firm belief based upon experience that some people are born with a sensitivity that can be guided and refined by a good design education), they do not develop their capability in processing the subtleties of line, shape, mass, and color, without a good deal of training, and this training is what separates a design professional from the man on the street.

In most cases.

We can look at the exceptions, like the Leo Fender/Freddy Tavares partnership, which gave us at least a half-dozen timeless classics, or Frank Lloyd Wright, who designed hundreds of amazing buildings. All had their clinkers, too, of course, but on the whole, world culture benefited immensely from their existence and innate creativity. And you can look at somebody like Rossmeisl, who was trained as a craftsman in the old craft guild manner, whose genius was re-interpreting traditional forms and details, and who shot as many blanks as live rounds, all in all.

Yeah, you can say, "he's a design teacher, so he sees things from that viewpoint", but it's the only explanation that makes sense to me for the (general) rule that good design is a conscious product of focused intelligence and trained vision.

And, although we all have opinions on any number of topics, it's the trained and paid professionals whose opinions carry more weight, and whose contributions should make for more pleasing and functional products, in this case, guitars and basses. But, though we may have opinions, we can do very little about them, because the die has been cast and the industry is highly resistant to change. There are aways people who are untrained and because of more naivete and drive than talent, end up "designing" their own version of what they think a guitar or bass should look like, but the evidence indicates that these have limited appeal at best and are plain ugly at worst.

I do keep thinking, however, how interesting it would be to turn a few sympathetic, guitar-knowledgeable design visionaries loose on a blue-sky form project and see what they can do. We've done this with other stringed instruments here, but not with guitars and basses--yet.

Irony aside, that fretless P-bass is yummy.

[Starless]

Hey Graeme.

you really should play a song on your P first and see how it sounds. Then, try it on your Rics, and compare it.

Yes, very good point, and funnily enough it has been difficult to make purely objective comparisons so far. For example, The Lemon Song on the 4003 (factory roundwounds) is just plain daft. On the C64 (flatwounds) it is fairly passable, but on the Fender I become John Paul Jones completely. 'Let Me Roll It' on the other hand, is so-so on the 4003, not too out of place on the Fender, but on the C64S, (you guessed it) I AM Paul McCartney, Capitol Theatre, Aberdeen, Sept 75.
'Rain' is a piece of cake on the C64S, but can be prone to intonation problems up around the octave on the fretless (I'm just not good enough up there yet). 'What is and what Should Never Be' really belongs on a fretted instrument, but the swoops and mwahs that are possible on the fretless take the song somewhere else completely. Any other non-specific McCartney/Zeppelin tunes are pretty interchangeable between the C64 and the Fender, and are a joy to play on either.

[gshadoan]

The Lemon Song on the 4003 (factory roundwounds) is just plain daft.

Ah, not so grasshopper, It IS one of the best bass lines in the world, and I dare say, that I can play in just fine on a 4003.
I have played that song at least a hundred times over the years, and love it. Sounds just fine, on any bass i happen to have in my hands. Just my opinion. JPJ is certainly one of my favorite bass players, and was like Macca always underated.
A very nice soft spoken man as well. Met him once. I will always remember that day.

[sloop_john_b]

Ah, not so grasshopper, It IS one of the best bass lines in the world, and I dare say, that I can play in just fine on a 4003.

+1, I have no problem playing it on a 4003, and can nail the tone with flatwounds.

[Starless]

I have no problem playing it on a 4003, and can nail the tone with flatwounds.

Aye, there's the rub (quite literally). You need flats or a Fender for that one. It's playable on a 4003 with rounds, but it's not Zeppelin. For a bit of variety, I use a pick near the bridge and pretend Chris Squire joined Led Zep (shudder).