Did they really make a short scale 4003?
Moderators: rickenbrother, ajish4
Re: Did they really make a short scale 4003?
The Schaller bridge from the 4004's won't work. They cannot be adjusted narrow enough for the 4003's fairly tight spacing. The best way to do a 32" scale 4003 is to plane off the fretboard, cut the headstock off on a scarf joint, remove 1 1/4" from the neck's length using the same angle cut as well as the same distance from the truss rods,, and re-attach the headstock. This would be followed by a new fretboard. To scale the entire instrument down by 10% would be kinda OCD.
Re: Did they really make a short scale 4003?
Points all well taken - thanks!
I was, however, thinking in terms of a freshly made instrument, not a modified one. My issue with simply shortening the neck, especially all the way down to 30" short scale, is that that the body and headstock end up looking oversized in relation to the smaller neck length. Obsessive-compulsive? Perhaps, but everyone has their own sense of aesthetics.
I have seen plenty examples of short scale basses that simply do not look right. The Gibson SG style basses come to mind. Those came in both short and full scales. The short scale ones IMO look dumpy. If I were to see an example of a Rick modified to 32" scale in the manner you described, I could better decide if it looks okay to me. Might there be one such instrument out there?
Although I suspect now that I know the answer, I nevertheless reiterate my original question: Did the short scale Rick's mentioned in this thread have smaller bodies?
I was, however, thinking in terms of a freshly made instrument, not a modified one. My issue with simply shortening the neck, especially all the way down to 30" short scale, is that that the body and headstock end up looking oversized in relation to the smaller neck length. Obsessive-compulsive? Perhaps, but everyone has their own sense of aesthetics.
I have seen plenty examples of short scale basses that simply do not look right. The Gibson SG style basses come to mind. Those came in both short and full scales. The short scale ones IMO look dumpy. If I were to see an example of a Rick modified to 32" scale in the manner you described, I could better decide if it looks okay to me. Might there be one such instrument out there?
Although I suspect now that I know the answer, I nevertheless reiterate my original question: Did the short scale Rick's mentioned in this thread have smaller bodies?
Re: Did they really make a short scale 4003?
The short scale 4003's had the same body wings , but shorter neck blanks. They also had the bridge moved up a bit, which I didn't care for. The short scale 3000's had shorter bodies than their 3001 counterparts and 21 fret necks. As far as freshly made instruments go, Alembic and Birdsong guitars make short scale instruments of quality.
Re: Did they really make a short scale 4003?
Yup, that relocated bridge does not look right. That is at the heart of my interest in a completely redesigned instrument, rather than an existing one modified in that manner. I am aware of both Alembic and Birdsong, but I doubt that either of those companies would build me a medium scale "Rick," which is what I am after, if only in my dreams. LOL!
P.S. FWIW my favorite bass, up until my recently acquired 4000, has been an original Fender Urge from the '90's which has a 32" scale (The current Urge II is 34" scale.). Love the feel and sound of it, but hey it ain't a Rick now is it? I'm getting used to the 33.25" scale, but can't help thinking how cool a medium scale Rick would be.
P.S. FWIW my favorite bass, up until my recently acquired 4000, has been an original Fender Urge from the '90's which has a 32" scale (The current Urge II is 34" scale.). Love the feel and sound of it, but hey it ain't a Rick now is it? I'm getting used to the 33.25" scale, but can't help thinking how cool a medium scale Rick would be.
Re: Did they really make a short scale 4003?
Isn't the Höfner 500/1 a short scale bass of quality?
Re: Did they really make a short scale 4003?
Yes.JakeK wrote:Isn't the Höfner 500/1 a short scale bass of quality?

Re: Did they really make a short scale 4003?
Depending on who you are and what you are into, the German Hofner "Beatle Bass" is either an overpriced item or a work of art worth every penny it costs. I happen to be a Beatlemaniac, so guess what? LOL!
My Hofner is the Contemporary (CT) 500/1. It is manufactured in China to Hofner's specifications. It is virtually identical to the German model, except that the CT has a solid center block in the body. It also is much more affordable - currently about $769 compared to around $1900 for the German model.
I owned a German Hofner for a while but got rid of it because it didn't lend itself to all the music our band played. The CT, however, largely because of the solid center block, lends itself to a greater range of styles. I highly recommend the CT if you want the Beatle vibe but need to play more than just Beatles/British Invasion music. I keep mine strung with roundwounds, .040 - .095 as per the factory specifications.
If Rickenbacker were to ever offer an affordable, good quality, foreign built alternative to their domestic line, this could be the place to include a medium or short scale version of the 4000 series bass.
My Hofner is the Contemporary (CT) 500/1. It is manufactured in China to Hofner's specifications. It is virtually identical to the German model, except that the CT has a solid center block in the body. It also is much more affordable - currently about $769 compared to around $1900 for the German model.
I owned a German Hofner for a while but got rid of it because it didn't lend itself to all the music our band played. The CT, however, largely because of the solid center block, lends itself to a greater range of styles. I highly recommend the CT if you want the Beatle vibe but need to play more than just Beatles/British Invasion music. I keep mine strung with roundwounds, .040 - .095 as per the factory specifications.
If Rickenbacker were to ever offer an affordable, good quality, foreign built alternative to their domestic line, this could be the place to include a medium or short scale version of the 4000 series bass.
- iamthebassman
- Veteran RRF member
- Posts: 2415
- Joined: Tue May 28, 2002 5:00 am
- Contact:
Re: Did they really make a short scale 4003?
High price does NOT equal high quality!JakeK wrote:Isn't the Höfner 500/1 a short scale bass of quality?
Re: Did they really make a short scale 4003?
Love both of mine! I've a Vintage '62 and a Vintage '63. The workmanship on both of these basses is first rate and the figure of the flamed maple on the '63 blows most Les Paul reissues out of the water. Both differ in terms of tone with the '62 having a bit more clarity than the '63 and sounds closer to McCartney's bass overall. I'll most likely put the '63 up on the market as it's not getting much play these days. Still looking for a nice early run 4001V63 as well. If RIC ever decided to start making a 4000 series in 30" scale as a regular product, I'd be all over that!JakeK wrote:Isn't the Höfner 500/1 a short scale bass of quality?
Wherever you go, there you are
Re: Did they really make a short scale 4003?
The 350-style body shape like I used on my modified 2030 would make a really nice short-scale bass. This is an instance where I actually remembered to plan ahead and measure the case before building the body, and to get it to fit in there, the bridge (Schaller) had to be moved way back to the end of the body. A couple inches farther forward and a slightly shorter neck would have looked about the same. The 4001/4003 shape strikes me as one that is too nice to mess with, but build a short-scale, 350-style, non-bolt-on, toaster-equipped model and you would have one hell of a nice, high-end bass. Even with the bolt-on neck and 2030 electronics, this one is a really nice instrument that both plays and sounds excellent. One of these days I'll stumble on a 3000 when I happen to have money to blow and I have a big slab of figured maple wide enough to do the body just waiting.
Re: Did they really make a short scale 4003?
DanJ wrote:I highly recommend the CT if you want the Beatle vibe but need to play more than just Beatles/British Invasion music.






Re: Did they really make a short scale 4003?
I have one too, and it's a lot more versatile than people give it credit for. It's able to sit nicely in the mix when recording and doesn't call a lot of attention to itself, tone-wise, but it provides a very solid foundation. It's also pretty good for bluegrass (especially British Invasion bluegrass
).

Re: Did they really make a short scale 4003?
I've got a 500/1V62 here - ska and dubby reggae sound great too!jps wrote:DanJ wrote:I highly recommend the CT if you want the Beatle vibe but need to play more than just Beatles/British Invasion music.![]()
![]()
I have a 500/1V63 and play The Who, Foreigner, 3 Doors Down, Anberlin, etc. on it!
![]()
![]()

Re: Did they really make a short scale 4003?
Any views here on the Gibson SG bass "re-issue"? I like the look of them, but haven't been able to get my hands on one.
Re: Did they really make a short scale 4003?
Worked well enough for Robbie Shakespear, didn't it?godber wrote:I've got a 500/1V62 here - ska and dubby reggae sound great too!jps wrote:DanJ wrote:I highly recommend the CT if you want the Beatle vibe but need to play more than just Beatles/British Invasion music.![]()
![]()
I have a 500/1V63 and play The Who, Foreigner, 3 Doors Down, Anberlin, etc. on it!
![]()
![]()
Wherever you go, there you are