Example for the FireGlo resistant

jimk · Post by **jimk** » Mon Apr 13, 2009 12:04 am

Well I'm a true believer FG convert. That bass is absolutely gorgeous.

JimK

wints · Post by **wints** » Mon Apr 13, 2009 7:02 am

The new FG seems the best for a long time. It'll be a classic in the years to come. I'm not always a fan, as it does vary so much, but when you find a good year...

johnallg wrote:Very nice, Mike! That puppy is screaming out for CB....

Absolutely..

1965 · Post by **1965** » Mon Apr 13, 2009 7:06 am

I still don't understand why the pickguard doesn't follow the lines of the body, like that kink on its outer edge by the switch. To put a great looking finish on it and then slap that lumpy guard on top doesn't make sense to me.

teeder · Post by **teeder** » Mon Apr 13, 2009 8:41 am

Very nice, Mike!

Andy,

Which one is the first picture? I don't remember seeing that one before?

Fireglo + Checkerboard is a classic!

paul_yan · Post by **paul_yan** » Mon Apr 13, 2009 9:36 am

LOVELY!!!
Congratulations on a great score, Mike!

atomic_punk · Post by **atomic_punk** » Mon Apr 13, 2009 10:23 am

FG is usually not on my list of favorite finishes unless it is on a Les Paul, but....these new FG finishes are almost making me forget about Clownglo and making me come around!!
Beautiful basses, guys.

beatledust19 · Post by **beatledust19** » Mon Apr 13, 2009 6:29 pm

Congratualations on the sweet looking bass, Mike! The only question I have is about the neck. Is it thick or thin? I only ask, since I've read a bunch of different stories concerning the girth of the new necks. Anyhoo, enjoy that bass! It looks like a real winner.

jc-sz · Post by **jc-sz** » Mon Apr 13, 2009 6:36 pm

wints wrote:The new FG seems the best for a long time. It'll be a classic in the years to come. I'm not always a fan, as it does vary so much, but when you find a good year...
johnallg wrote:Very nice, Mike! That puppy is screaming out for CB....
Absolutely..

Just a question, did you mod the first on the left to bring the Toaster closer to the strings or is that something standard in older Ricks? If you changed it, did you have to drill holes in the pickguard for the other 4 screws?

+1 to the new fireglos... If only mine looked like that!! I can't complain though... I love it.

I've heard a lot about the change on the necks, how's that? is it thiner at the back or are the fretboards thiner, so that the strings are closer togehter? I would think the first since the second calls for many other changes, but just to be sure...

Thanks, I am pretty ignorant about the different changes and such... I just want to learn more about my Ricky...

Cheers!

Lost Coyotes · Post by **Lost Coyotes** » Mon Apr 13, 2009 9:14 pm

beatledust19 wrote:Congratualations on the sweet looking bass, Mike! The only question I have is about the neck. Is it thick or thin? I only ask, since I've read a bunch of different stories concerning the girth of the new necks.
(Joaquin: is it thiner at the back or are the fretboards thiner, so that the strings are closer togehter? I would think the first since the second calls for many other changes, but just to be sure...)

Thanks, Dustin.
You could check out the thread called measure your girth on this forum for some details on the thick/thin theory.
(Joaquin:You are correct on guessing the "first", they are not wider at the nut...they are rounder shaped and a little bigger around.)

As for mine, it's a bit fatter than my '73 4001. It is NOT uncomfortable or really even noticeable, and it's only a fraction of a centimeter different in any case, so for me, it's a no big deal.

The neck is very stiff and straight, I suppose due to the larger girth and "rounder" shape. It had been set up by Gary @ NCM before shipping, and I needed to relax the truss rods to accommodate the climate difference from Wisconsin to here. The way it sits now, the bass side rod is totally loose and the treble side is only 1/4 turn past finger tight...and it's holding a tuning and staying almost dead straight (microscopic relief!) after more than a week. It's an inspiring instrument.

johnallg · Post by **johnallg** » Tue Apr 14, 2009 12:21 am

jc-sz wrote:Just a question, did you mod the first on the left to bring the Toaster closer to the strings or is that something standard in older Ricks? If you changed it, did you have to drill holes in the pickguard for the other 4 screws?

Thanks, I am pretty ignorant about the different changes and such... I just want to learn more about my Ricky...

Cheers!

The neck pickups on 4001 basses were at the 1/2" placement from the start till mid 1975.

Read Ted's series Anatomy of a Rickenbacker Bass in this Bass forum for a very good and concise education in the finer points. Then read any nuts and bolts type thread here also and pretty soon you'll be teaching us!

jc-sz · Post by **jc-sz** » Tue Apr 14, 2009 1:28 am

johnallg wrote:The neck pickups on 4001 basses were at the 1/2" placement from the start till mid 1975.

Read Ted's series Anatomy of a Rickenbacker Bass in this Bass forum for a very good and concise education in the finer points. Then read any nuts and bolts type thread here also and pretty soon you'll be teaching us!

Thanks, but it seems I did not make myself clear

What I meant was if he took the pickup out and then placed it on top of the pickguard, leaving visible the part of the assembly that usually goes under the pickguard, thus taking the top of pickup closer in height to the strings, I didn't mean in relation to the neck, but merely the strings, sorry for that misunderstanding.

I have taken a look a some of the Anatomy series, but just superficially, since I should be working on one of my papers right now and shouldn't be here in the first place!

Thanks for the explanation Mike, now I get it... So the strings dont change in relation to one another, but shape of the neck and some extra wood on the borders do change the feeling... That's interesting... I haven't experimented with many basses, I must say, but I love the way the Ricky sounds!

After I do some more reading on different posts and adjust my rods a bit I might come up asking some questions since I am having some trouble with fret buzz, which I don't think the truss rods will solve. Hopefully, I am wrong.

Thanks!

jc

wints · Post by **wints** » Tue Apr 14, 2009 6:54 am

[quote="teeder"]

Andy,

Which one is the first picture? I don't remember seeing that one before?

Kev, it's the Feb 73 bass. Beautifully aged by seeing a lot of smoky clubs I suspect!

Joaquin, that toaster was just set on the outside of the guard for the photo. I was being lazy! It slotted straight into the original guard there...

teeder · Post by **teeder** » Tue Apr 14, 2009 8:12 am

As many times as I've seen that picture, I'd never noticed the pu sitting there like that!

"it's the Feb 73 bass. Beautifully aged by seeing a lot of smoky clubs I suspect!"

Do you still have that one? It's sweet!

jps · Post by **jps** » Tue Apr 14, 2009 8:43 am

I've never noticed that, too.

Very odd looking!

wints · Post by **wints** » Tue Apr 14, 2009 12:06 pm

Kev,

She's a keeper. Came really well set up, and is the best sounding early 70's bass I've had...

Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

Example for the FireGlo resistant

Re: Example for the FireGlo resistant

Re: Example for the FireGlo resistant

Re: Example for the FireGlo resistant

Re: Example for the FireGlo resistant

Re: Example for the FireGlo resistant

Re: Example for the FireGlo resistant

Re: Example for the FireGlo resistant

Re: Example for the FireGlo resistant

Re: Example for the FireGlo resistant

Re: Example for the FireGlo resistant

Re: Example for the FireGlo resistant

Re: Example for the FireGlo resistant

Re: Example for the FireGlo resistant

Re: Example for the FireGlo resistant

Re: Example for the FireGlo resistant