Real 4001 Horseshoe vs V63 re-issue PU

Vintage, Modern, V & C series, Fretless, Signature & Special Editions

Moderators: rickenbrother, ajish4

Post Reply
User avatar
coolhandjjl
Intermediate Member
Posts: 621
Joined: Wed Dec 30, 2009 5:42 pm

Real 4001 Horseshoe vs V63 re-issue PU

Post by coolhandjjl »

Regarding the horseshoes on the V series basses, are the 'shoes' just cosmetic, just a fake cover over a hi-gain type of pu? I've seen horseshoes from 1987 that RIC sold individually as a 'V/63 Reissue Pick Up', all metal, but wondered if only the original horseshoes are a true horseshoe type of pu.

I've seen both the V63 and C64 styles, both have a larger surround than the original horseshoe, with a trapezoidal shape towards the bridge, (with the "C's" having a smaller less noticeable surround). But again, I'm assuming both C's and V's are mock horseshoes.
'09 4003 | '93 4003s
John Luke aka Coolhand
User avatar
beatlefreak
Senior Member
Posts: 6160
Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2006 5:45 am
Contact:

Re: Real 4001 Horseshoe vs V63 re-issue PU

Post by beatlefreak »

The V and C series use unmagnetized horseshow surrounds abd nagnetized pole pieces. Original horseshoes were magnetized.
Ka is a wheel.
User avatar
coolhandjjl
Intermediate Member
Posts: 621
Joined: Wed Dec 30, 2009 5:42 pm

Re: Real 4001 Horseshoe vs V63 re-issue PU

Post by coolhandjjl »

Thanks!
'09 4003 | '93 4003s
John Luke aka Coolhand
bluewhale
Member
Posts: 362
Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2009 9:05 pm

Re: Real 4001 Horseshoe vs V63 re-issue PU

Post by bluewhale »

Not addressing your question, but I infer from RIC CEO John Hall's post in the thread

viewtopic.php?f=9&t=21869


that the C64 horseshoe is not the same as the V63 horseshoe. The difference in sound is usually explained by the presence of the cap in the C64, but there seems to be more to it than that.
User avatar
antipodean
Senior Member
Posts: 3182
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 1:27 am

Re: Real 4001 Horseshoe vs V63 re-issue PU

Post by antipodean »

I had always thought the C64 horsies were underwound relative to the V63s....
"I don't want to sound incredulous but I can't believe it" Rex Mossop
User avatar
libratune
Veteran RRF member
Posts: 4255
Joined: Mon Jul 29, 2002 9:06 am
Contact:

Re: Real 4001 Horseshoe vs V63 re-issue PU

Post by libratune »

Back to John's question, are the "shoes" just cosmetic or are they designed to contribute to the sound?

Here's what John Hall had to say in 2003 after the C64 model was introduced (found this on the thread linked above):
johnhall wrote:The special alloy of tungsten steel (not cobalt) hasn't been available for many years, at least not without some special order custom alloying. Beyond that, it was notorious for losing its magnetic charge over time. Anyone with an original horseshoe that has not had it recharged is not hearing the original tone or level of output.

Based upon these facts, for the reissue, we really had no choice but to use embedded Alnico magnets in conjunction with the horseshoes. The slug magnets provide essentially a permanent and standardized magnetic field while the wrap around horseshoes act as poles to properly redirect it like the originals. They will work without the horseshoes but then they do not have the same tone, as the pickup is reduced to single dimensional sensing rather than 3D as the horsehoe does. (Remember that a vibrating string has a waveform shaped like a helix, not just back and forth.) And yes, they do provide shielding as well.

Much tweaking was done as part of the C Series design to capture the original sound of a fully charged horseshoe. We actually had to invent our own special probe using a Hall effect device (no pun intended!) to understand where the fields exist and their strength.
Post Reply

Return to “Rickenbacker Basses: by Joey Vasco & Tony Cabibe”