VOTE: What do you want in a bridge redesign?

whojamfan · Post by **whojamfan** » Sat Jan 03, 2009 5:53 am

I see so many posts on the bridge that it makes me wonder why this hasn't been rectified to some degree of acceptable compromise. I understand some people have a cow when they change something at RIC, and have read something about RIC having a damned if they do, damned if they don't dilemma going on, so here's my 2cs.

First of all, I'm not knocking the bridge any more than anybody elses. Old Fenders draw blood when you try to palm mute them, and some of these new basses have adjustments that take 13 fingers and 3 hands to adjust. The problem seems to be that you trade one problem for another when you switch(generally) and always get that "looks good, but it ain't a Rick" vibe going on inside. You dropped a wad on a high quality bass, you want it to be asthecially pleasing and correct(generally speaking.)Both Badass and Hipshot have their ups and downs, but ultimately, it appears that everyone wants one that RIC manufactures to address the issues that people have with them.

Why not just re engineer some components rather than the whole deal.A bridge that drops(or screws) in to the existing tailpiece could have a few small parts you could buy to fix only the issues you may have with it. Allen screws for the saddles and a template for adding additional tailpiece screws could be easily provided. All of this would require minimal retooling for the components, allow the player to only get the parts they need, and allow RIC to seamlessly continue making the standard bridge/tailpiece unit to please the purists. Ric could even outsource/liscense the manufacturing of these parts locally so they incur minimal or no cost to solve the problem in a way that would seem to suit most everyones needs.

And then again,maybe this new bridge addresses all of these issues, but with no guestimation of availability, folks will search elsewhere. None of us are getting any younger, and we need to give our best performances before we no longer can. I don't know what the outcome of all of this is going to be, but with the resurgance of Rickenbacker basses in the mainstream, it would suck to have all of these groups stop using them because they find issues with the way that they adjust.

thinneckrick · Post by **thinneckrick** » Sun Jan 04, 2009 2:50 pm

Thats what makes the hipshot so cool. It allows seperate saddle adjustments and also gets rid of the inferior bending bridge plate(tail lift) without changing the overall look and shape .

tmossman · Post by **tmossman** » Sun Jan 04, 2009 4:29 pm

I voted #10

My 4001/3's are in tune all along the neck (within in a few cents). If not I adjust the neck.
I use the mechanical mute.
I've never had taillift on any of them.

If I need any of the other items I pick up my 4004's.

cassius987 · Post by **cassius987** » Sun Jan 04, 2009 9:52 pm

Thanks for a good run on this poll. Interesting results. Seems people's biggest concern is ease of intonation. Also, a redesigned bridge would be best off if it was designed conservatively in terms of any new look it had going. Issues that I worry about, such as palm muting, aren't a big deal to others--also interesting. Five of us think nothing at all needs to be changed--a position those five have every right to maintain.

I think the current bridge design is mostly a success. If two more screws would add sustain, I say pull the trigger. For myself, I would like to remove the teeth and replace the hand-turned knobs with true screws to add to the ease of palm-muting, but those are things I could do on my own and not bug RIC with. I can also replace the saddle screws with allen screws myself, and shim the saddles underneath with wax paper so they don't rattle. After all that, the bridge-tailpiece is pretty dang close to what I'm shooting for. If I'm still not happy, there's always Hipshot. So I can't complain.

Cheers...

johnhall · Post by **johnhall** » Mon Jan 05, 2009 12:04 am

Hate to say it but this poll is a day late and a dollar short.

johnallg · Post by **johnallg** » Mon Jan 05, 2009 12:36 am

johnhall wrote:Hate to say it but this poll is a day late and a dollar short.

When is the new design surfacing?

thinneckrick · Post by **thinneckrick** » Mon Jan 05, 2009 4:02 am

HUH ???????????

cassius987 · Post by **cassius987** » Mon Jan 05, 2009 10:29 am

johnhall wrote:Hate to say it but this poll is a day late and a dollar short.

Oh yeah?? I'm glad to hear it!

cjj · Post by **cjj** » Mon Jan 05, 2009 10:47 am

johnhall wrote:Hate to say it but this poll is a day late and a dollar short.

Ya just gotta love that John Hall guy, sounds like a hint to me...

whojamfan · Post by **whojamfan** » Mon Jan 05, 2009 10:55 am

It'll make me play better, right?

rickaddict · Post by **rickaddict** » Mon Jan 05, 2009 11:20 am

johnhall wrote:Hate to say it but this poll is a day late and a dollar short.

Lookin' forward to it, John!

woodyng · Post by **woodyng** » Mon Jan 05, 2009 11:25 am

.....deja vu,anyone?

cassius987 · Post by **cassius987** » Mon Jan 05, 2009 11:25 am

woodyng wrote:.....deja vu,anyone?

Not for me, what are you deja vuing?

johnhall · Post by **johnhall** » Mon Jan 05, 2009 2:57 pm

thinneckrick wrote:Prove it . LOL

You know what, I don't have to prove anything to you or anyone else here for that matter.

When one of the various designs that have been here on my desk for some time are ready for prime time and the right thing to do, you'll know it.

admin · Post by **admin** » Mon Jan 05, 2009 4:03 pm

John: I appreciate your comments given the responses made here. Rickenbacker has had the highest standards for more than 75 years.

I apologize for the bad manners here. I deleted a number of rude posts earlier but it seems that the insensitivity has continued in spite of this.

Come on everyone. I am disappointed at the callous and sarcastic nature of the comments of the few that ruin this experience for the many.

Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

VOTE: What do you want in a bridge redesign?

Choose four (or fewer) things you want to see in a new 4003 bridge or a redesign.

Re: VOTE: What do you want in a bridge redesign?

Re: VOTE: What do you want in a bridge redesign?

Re: VOTE: What do you want in a bridge redesign?

Re: VOTE: What do you want in a bridge redesign?

Re: VOTE: What do you want in a bridge redesign?

Re: VOTE: What do you want in a bridge redesign?

Re: VOTE: What do you want in a bridge redesign?

Re: VOTE: What do you want in a bridge redesign?

Re: VOTE: What do you want in a bridge redesign?

Re: VOTE: What do you want in a bridge redesign?

Re: VOTE: What do you want in a bridge redesign?

Re: VOTE: What do you want in a bridge redesign?

Re: VOTE: What do you want in a bridge redesign?

Re: VOTE: What do you want in a bridge redesign?

Re: VOTE: What do you want in a bridge redesign?