NAMM NEWS!

[guitar-murph]

Everyone certainly has the right to voice their opinion, and I personally I would be thrilled to see a return of the model 4005. But my guess is that Rickenbacker has to weigh the cost of introducing something new against the issues they are already dealing with. They could satisfy all customer demand by outsourcing, expanding, etc., but does anyone really want to take a chance on what would happen if Rickenbacker were bought out or drastically expanded their production? Does Fender/CBS ring a bell? Or Gibson/Norlin? Count your blessings that this is a small company staffed by people dedicated to producing the finest instruments possible. As frustrating as it may be (and I am frustrated myself by orders which take over two years to fill!), I would rather accept this situation than to go off into the darkness.

[ajish4]

Aneglo,

We can voice our opinions all we like, just as RIC has the choice to ignore us as well. We are only a very small portion of the buyers of their products. They have to build what sells. They've survived all these years by doing something right!

JH once said it would cost like 5K if they reissued the 4005 in today's dollars. I don't know about you, but 5K for a bass puts me in custom made Alembic territory. How many people could afford or wish to spend that kind of coin? Well, obviously RIC feels not enough. The "S" would be great, but then I guess it would kill the C64/64S line (which is now history anyway) so who knows.
I'd love an "S" fretless, but we'll just have to wait and see what rolls out down the line....

[cjj]

A reissue of a 4000 or 4005 would have been nice, but we are only customers who spend our hard earned money on thier products, what right do we have to voice our opinions LOL.

I would guess that those of us on this forum are a tiny percentage of RIC's customers and probably tend to desire more variety/options/colors/etc. than the vast majority out there. RIC has to do what they can to satisfy the most customers possible, and reducing the number of models and colors to reduce the backlog will accomplish that goal.

[guitar-murph]

5K for a new model 4005? As much as I like them, I am afraid this would price me out too!

[Wurlitzer]

RIC is set up to make those 330s and 360s so why not make them 21 frets with thinner tops ?

$5000 for a 4005 bass ? more like $10,000.

[1a12]

Is any company out there really selling HB or SHB basses like hotcakes? Epi Rivoli's RI's as cool as they are/were? I don't think sold very well? JM Keynes comes to mind here. thanks to all you hawk eye Nammzerz for our eyes and ears and each individual precious filter!!

[guitar-murph]

[quote="Damon Davis"]RIC is set up to make those 330s and 360s so why not make them 21 frets with thinner tops ?

I expect that if Rickenbacker wanted to do this, then they certainly could. Currently the standard colors available for models 330 and 360 are JG, MG, MID and FG. Multiply 4 (number of colors) times 2 (the number of models), and then consider that some folks might like them just as they are, while others would want the thinner tops without 21 frets. Still others might want 21 frets without the thinner tops. This would quickly lead to having many different variations of these two models. This could best be handled by 'custom orders' which Rickenbacker is not currently positioned to deal with.

I share your enthusiasm.......but realistically, I don't think it will happen.

[beefandbones]

The Rickenbacker design is classic - semi-hollow and cresting wave. The mere fact that they can't keep up with all the orders they receive is an excellent indication that their business is doing just fine without introducing new designs to the lineup. My guess is that most of the great 'retro' details they've reintroduced (walnut wings, full width inlays, etc) in the last year or so has as much to do with satisfying their customers desires for more 'retro' detailing as it does with streamlining the production process. I'd guess that the models that they're doing away with (4001c64, 4001c64s, 325c58) all deviate from the standard production processes and use up a lot of extra time 'switching gears' on the production line. My guess is that any new models or design features will fit into the streamlined production process. Whatever comes next I'm guessing will be a variation on something that already exists, or else will a change of features made to the entire lineup. So... just thinking out loud... 4001v68? 360v65? 21 frets all around? Wider necks?

[grazioso]

rickenbacker corp *IS* listening to their customers. full width inlays, walnut wings 4003, bigger center strip in 330/360 necks, 12 saddle bridge, wider nut spacing on 12s, new neck profile on 4003, 7.4k pickups, coy, smaller headstocks, full routing through on standard 12s etc.. you people got to give them credit for all those things. they even try for different market segment with all those lagunas, atlantis, 4004s, acoustics. those design changes come in small steps but think about it. if we make list of them - it is lot of improvements so i have my fingers crossed for wider slim neck on 360/12 i don't care if 24 or 21 frets. it seems to me that it will be something like that rather than completely new guitar.

[Wurlitzer]

you're right; RIC did change the shape of the headstock and they did make full length inlays, they still need 21 frets and thinner tops

[jps]

...5K for a bass puts me in custom made Alembic territory.

Try getting a custom hollowbody bass for $5K from Alembic! Unless you are married to Mica, I can't see that ever happening.

[deaconblues]

As I've said before, I'm all for a switch back to 21-fret standard models. There are decades' worth of 24-fret Ricks out there for those who want the three extra frets (and compromised styling, IMO).

[ajish4]

...5K for a bass puts me in custom made Alembic territory.

Try getting a custom hollowbody bass for $5K from Alembic! Unless you are married to Mica, I can't see that ever happening.

Actually we did discuss one, I have a picture of it here somewhere....it was kinda odd looking and it was in the low 6k range...but that was many moons ago!

[grazioso]

As I've said before, I'm all for a switch back to 21-fret standard models. There are decades' worth of 24-fret Ricks out there for those who want the three extra frets (and compromised styling, IMO).

and there are decades worth of original and reissue of 21-fret rics for those who want that yes it makes sense to some of us to go to 21-fret from style point of view but aren't we asking bit too much ? you know they are considered more stable with 24 frets

i sure would rather see standard ric 360/370/330/12 to be 21 fret thin top - x braced 12 string - with wide slim neck - with short polepieces toasters in all positions -with neck tang going all the way through the body and 5 ply single piece back(since that is imho even better from stability point of view) and of course - with stainless frets OVER finished fingerboard and zero fret -with one piece r tailpiece (that is actually top loading instead of that time warps inducing device there now) -with 12 saddle bridge right away... but i don't see that coming any time soon. that's why there are all those guys around who do those mods and "special builds" for people like us.

i don't expect factory mass produced guitar to be exactly what i want any more..... even though it is 2k thing. it is as close to guitar i want as it gets. just look at all the contemporary mass produced houses or don't make me start on car designs - i can't even tell them - the cars - apart since like 1980. i don't know why they all have to have different names starting with the letter "e" like: explorer expedition equinox or those i expect soon: enema ejaculation erection eradication since there are only so many words that start with "e". imho they all should be just labeled - "a car" - from the maker who would rather stay incognito since it's ugly".

we got it so easy with ric most of those basic elements we want are already there... just imagine rebuilding ugly new disposable cardboard plastic house or one of those new semi plastic almost single use cars into something pretty or usable.

[tennis_nick]

you're right; RIC did change the shape of the headstock and they did make full length inlays, they still need 21 frets and thinner tops

It's kind of a shot in the foot though.

Do you remember when Gibson added a volute to headstocks to cut down on them breaking there? People were outraged that an old design was changed! When they swtiched to a stronger 3 piece neck, people were outraged and they went back to the one piece neck (which was done as a $$ saver back then)

If Rick were to go back to a thinner top, I'm sure feedback would become more of an issue.

sure YOU don't like having 24 frets, but surely, some do, I love playing up there personally, not very much, but enough to warrant having them up there!


I don't know why we hold RIC up to different standards than other companies, as far as International Corporations go, RIC has gone much further than most to give the customer what they want within reason.