Other Forum Surveys

[jack1953]

I was really surprised at how often Rickenbacker comes up in other forums surveys in a negative light. Just wanted to see what everyone thought.



Jack

[cassius987]

Some people just don't enjoy Rics because they can't get over some of the things that, by today's standards, look unconventional about these basses. Funny thing is, the Ric 4000-series bass is really only pre-dated by the Fender P Bass by a couple of years so it's design is technically just as classic.

The other issue is, a number of Rics seem to be very setup-sensitive, and in recent years I have heard tons of stories about Rics that weren't setup well at all. This is compounded by the fact that many people don't like to even let a luthier touch them.

There have also been highly negative reviews of some Rics that came straight from the factory, especially 4004s from the year 2008. I can't comment on that as I have no experience in it. I started play-testing 4004s right after those stories circulated and found them all to be very good basses.

The truth of the matter is, you can't please all of the people all the time, and also, tastes can change. I used to love Jazz Basses and think Precisions were neanderthalic. Now I think Precisions are probably my second favorite kind of bass (behind my 4000-series basses) and I find Jazz Basses annoyingly thin-sounding. Lastly, we shoud all be able to admit that lots of players can make any bass sound good! But TalkBass tends to be a breeding ground for unsubstantiated complaints that accentuate the negative about anything.

Also, your URL will probably have to go away--RRF doesn't like posting that sort of thing too much.

[rickenbrother]

Jack, I've had to remove the link and the name of other the other forum. We can discuss Rickenbacker coming up in other forums. No links or exact examples from other forums as the rules say. We''ll see if we can keep a discussion going despite the editing.

[cassius987]

Joey, this is probably a really hot topic, so I'll be curious whether this goes too far or just turns cold without the URL.

One thing about T B: there used to be way too many Ric threads there (positive or negative)! It drove me nuts.

[rickenbrother]

Joshua, you are right about this potentially being a very hot topic, so I guarantee you that it will be watched closely.

I rarely post on any other forum besides here and the RIC corporate forum. Because of my passion for Rick basses, I really avoid threads about Ricks on other forums, just not to deal with people who are not fond of Ricks.

[jack1953]

Some people just don't enjoy Rics because they can't get over some of the things that, by today's standards, look unconventional about these basses. Funny thing is, the Ric 4000-series bass is really only pre-dated by the Fender P Bass by a couple of years so it's design is technically just as classic.

The other issue is, a number of Rics seem to be very setup-sensitive, and in recent years I have heard tons of stories about Rics that weren't setup well at all. This is compounded by the fact that many people don't like to even let a luthier touch them.

There have also been highly negative reviews of some Rics that came straight from the factory, especially 4004s from the year 2008. I can't comment on that as I have no experience in it. I started play-testing 4004s right after those stories circulated and found them all to be very good basses.

The truth of the matter is, you can't please all of the people all the time, and also, tastes can change. I used to love Jazz Basses and think Precisions were neanderthalic. Now I think Precisions are probably my second favorite kind of bass (behind my 4000-series basses) and I find Jazz Basses annoyingly thin-sounding. Lastly, we shoud all be able to admit that lots of players can make any bass sound good! But TalkBass tends to be a breeding ground for unsubstantiated complaints that accentuate the negative about anything.

Also, your URL will probably have to go away--RRF doesn't like posting that sort of thing too much.

The post was edited accordingly. First let me say for those of you who don't know, I have a 2010 4003 and love it!

The negative adjective I heard, more than once, was 'clunky'??? Not sure if that was in reference to the trademark Rick 'growl' or what??

As a side bar, I've never played any of the so called 'boutique' basses and I was surprised to see many of those mentioned in a negative light as well!

[ram]

I guess that's why they go to the other forums and I come here... I have played other basses I like but still like the Ric better. No law against not liking a bass but I really see little to gain trashing someone else's golden choice. Different strokes for different folks. These days I feel you can get almost any sound you want from any bass - so to me it's is and pretty much has always been, how it feels in my hands. Some of our fave bass players play many different basses - but you can still tell who is doing the playing no matter what brand of bass. no need to trash anyone choice.

[cassius987]

The negative adjective I heard, more than once, was 'clunky'??? Not sure if that was in reference to the trademark Rick 'growl' or what?

That's the first time I've heard that. Rics are just like any other bass--they can do lots of different things, it's up to the player and the setup to determine the result. I said Jazz Basses sound thin, but really, they don't always. But that's my take on them, and I guess some people find Rics "clunky" sounding. Whatever...

Your boutique bass comment is interesting. I always thought the fatal flaw of the boutique bass was the poor resale value and the fact that if you change your mind later, you can't quickly swap out for something a bit more to your liking. I love Conklins, but they do horribly on eBay. And when I ABed one of my Rics against a Conklin at Bill's place, I decided the Ric sounded easily as good; the big draw with boutique basses seems to just be the fact that you can basically get whatever you want, down to the smallest detail.

[ajish4]

What I can't understand is the seemingly DESIRE to toss rocks at Rickenbacker. IF you don't like 'em, fine...move along and leave them to those that do!

I love 'em so I own a number of them. I don't like X or Y bass but I don't go OUT OF MY WAY to say bad things about them. I just don't buy them. For one reason or another, they just are not for me. SEEMS many of those posters wouldn't know a RIC if it bit them on the butt, or as mentioned, just didn't have it set up correctly.

I also have a LOVE for Alembic basses, and a strange attachment to USA Peavey basses. GO FIGURE! Live and let live.

IMHO, it seems like some of the other forums have an agenda to just stir up the pot or tick off the company in general.
What is that term they use? TROLLING I think?

Ric has had a few issues along the way. Ok, what company hasn't? ANYBODY not make any mistakes? My favorite boss once told me "if you are not making mistakes, you ain't doing poo p. ONLY people who actually get things DONE make mistakes, if you aren't making mistakes, you aren't doing a damn thing".

Bottom line. I have ENOUGH aggravation in my life to keep me very busy, thank you. I come here because I am comfortable here, have friends here, can find LIMITLESS amounts of knowledge, and we get to talk about my favorite bass....for the most part without the petty garbage.

[jack1953]

The negative adjective I heard, more than once, was 'clunky'??? Not sure if that was in reference to the trademark Rick 'growl' or what?

Your boutique bass comment is interesting. I always thought the fatal flaw of the boutique bass was the poor resale value and the fact that if you change your mind later, you can't quickly swap out for something a bit more to your liking. I love Conklins, but they do horribly on eBay. And when I ABed one of my Rics against a Conklin at Bill's place, I decided the Ric sounded easily as good; the big draw with boutique basses seems to just be the fact that you can basically get whatever you want, down to the smallest detail.

The 3 that were mentioned more than once were Sadowsky, Alembic, and Lakland.

[Tarrbot]

Now I'm using only conjecture on my part, but from what I can tell going from online discussions Rickenbacker has changed things over the years and it's quite confusing to folks at times. An example would be one of the most important aspects of many people's criteria and that's the neck. In the 70s, they were thin, then they thickened up, were reduced in thickness again, thickened up, went thin again and so on and so forth.

Because of this inconsistency, it's very difficult to determine in online discussions if someone who doesn't like a 400x bass had a thick or thin profiled neck. This could be what people refer to when saying they are clunky.

Additionally, many people don't like the binding since it beats up their arms. I can recall my 4003 doing this to me at times years ago, but I paid it no mind. Some people do not like this because it forces them to play differently than what they are used to. I can relate to that having to relearn my playing on a 4003S/5 with microscopic string spacing.

And I think the piece de resistance would be the bridge. Unfortunately, the comment was made years ago by Rickenbacker that they were redesigning the bridge/tailpiece and years later no movement has been seemingly made toward that goal.

Now, despite these "negatives" I feel my 4003S/5 is a great instrument. I had to accommodate my playing style to it. But... I had the patience to do this. Many people do not.

The "bad threads" on that other forum have died down due to the moderators taking action and removing the single most horrific offender there who purportedly was a fan but continuously missed his daily lithium dosage and was all over the map in his bipolar slamming/cheerleading of Rickenbackers. I assume this is what happened due to his sudden departure after having two threads locked within an hour of each other.

I lurk mainly as I do here. But I have found that particular forum to be violently pro and con Rickenbackers at times.

I think, ultimately, people work up this image of Rickenbackers in their mind for many years and when it comes time for them to actually pick one up, the instrument fails to live up to their hyper-inflated pre-concieved notions. This isn't the instruments fault but the player.

Also, as Josh pointed out, styles and tastes change over time. What was once an ideal can be seen as a huge negative later on.

[johnallg]

I think any player who cannot or will not try to work with an instrument are more prone to being opinionated about that instrument. No matter the brand. It may also have to do with their comfort with their own talent.

I echo the sentiment if you don't relate to a particular brand or model instrument, move on in your search. Trashing serves no purpose and may limit someone else's search.

[jack1953]

What I can't understand is the seemingly DESIRE to toss rocks at Rickenbacker. IF you don't like 'em, fine...move along and leave them to those that do!

I love 'em so I own a number of them. I don't like X or Y bass but I don't go OUT OF MY WAY to say bad things about them. I just don't buy them. For one reason or another, they just are not for me. SEEMS many of those posters wouldn't know a RIC if it bit them on the butt, or as mentioned, just didn't have it set up correctly.

I also have a LOVE for Alembic basses, and a strange attachment to USA Peavey basses. GO FIGURE! Live and let live.

IMHO, it seems like some of the other forums have an agenda to just stir up the pot or tick off the company in general.
What is that term they use? TROLLING I think?

Ric has had a few issues along the way. Ok, what company hasn't? ANYBODY not make any mistakes? My favorite boss once told me "if you are not making mistakes, you ain't doing poo p. ONLY people who actually get things DONE make mistakes, if you aren't making mistakes, you aren't doing a damn thing".

Bottom line. I have ENOUGH aggravation in my life to keep me very busy, thank you. I come here because I am comfortable here, have friends here, can find LIMITLESS amounts of knowledge, and we get to talk about my favorite bass....for the most part without the petty garbage.

I agree with the premise of what Tony is saying 100%. But, in defense of the tone, let me clarify what the theme of the post was. The post was entitled, "What Bass Was The Biggest DISAPPOINTMENT?" Most of the thread was responded by folks who had purchased these basses and were the most disappointed with them. Some weighed in with just sitting down and playing them. Like I said, it just surprised me that Rickenbacker, Sadowsky, Alembic, and Lakland came up as often as they did.

[jimk]

I come here because I am comfortable here, have friends here, can find LIMITLESS amounts of knowledge, and we get to talk about my favorite bass....for the most part without the petty garbage.

Well said, very well said. Substitute the word "guitar" for bass, and those are my sentiments exactly. Truth be told, one day I'd love to play a lick or two on a Rick bass just to have the experience. I'm no bass player, by any stretch of the imagination, but messin' around on 'em is fun.
JimK

[johnallg]

I come here because I am comfortable here, have friends here, can find LIMITLESS amounts of knowledge, and we get to talk about my favorite bass....for the most part without the petty garbage.

Well said, very well said. Substitute the word "guitar" for bass, and those are my sentiments exactly. Truth be told, one day I'd love to play a lick or two on a Rick bass just to have the experience. I'm no bass player, by any stretch of the imagination, but messin' around on 'em is fun.
JimK

Jim, if we ever organize a Midwest Confluence you can have a spin on any of mine.