Rickenbacker El Dorado bass

[ricaddic]

I am checking out aRickenbacker El Dorado bass on ebay, the bass is white with goid hardware and looks to be in very good shape, the bidding is up to $750.00 the seller says he has a low reserve set, and also has a buy now price of $1,250.00, I dont know much about these models but is it worth the buy now price, how good were these, does anybody have one that could give more insight.. thanks...Happy Ricken................

[cassius987]

A few years ago this wouldn't have fetched $500. Now the market is a bit more rabid for anything labeled "Rickenbacker" (including fakes), and the price of these has gone up a lot. $800 is the most that sounds reasonable to me though. If the market for Rics goes back to the way it was before 2006-2007, stuff like this is going to lose a lot of interest.

[ricaddic]

A few years ago this wouldn't have fetched $500. Now the market is a bit more rabid for anything labeled "Rickenbacker" (including fakes), and the price of these has gone up a lot. $800 is the most that sounds reasonable to me though. If the market for Rics goes back to the way it was before 2006-2007, stuff like this is going to lose a lot of interest.

Thanks brother, was curious about the bass, its was very well kept looking, but I said really dont know anything about them, though I do know they were once part of the Ric line,was going to make a bid just alittle above the current bid but definitly dont want to pay the buy now price, for that much would rather get a new Larado or Cii, thanks again brother, appeciate your insight, take care and please stay safe always..

[blueflamerick]

It's a nice bass. I have one in Midnight Blue. I paid about $800 for it.

[rickaddict]

I like 'em.

It's nice to have something completely different in the stable that has the same scale and string spacing (when you adjust the strings inward at the bridge) as my other Ricks. I sorta wish the 4004 had retained the same string spacing as all of the other 4 string Rick basses. Anyhoo...The 2000 series are great basses, although they're sometimes a little heavier than a 4001/4003.

I'm partial to this one though: http://cgi.ebay.com/RARE-VINTAGE-RICKEN ... 335e706d90 No sharp body binding and...Ruby! (purring kitty sound) Maybe I'm biased, but IMO $1200 for a clean example wouldn't be so outrageous.

[bassduke49]

Perhaps Erik Kutzler will chime in. He's a 2000-family aficionado, and has several in his stable. He can tell more than I know.

[aceonbass]

I sorta wish the 4004 had retained the same string spacing as all of the other 4 string Rick basses.

Since the 4003 & 4004 now share nack blanks, they now have the same string spacing at the bridge.

[partime]

Hello, I remember gas being twenty two cents a gallon. Now I am paying three dollars twenty two cents a gallon. What does this mean? It means if you are stuck in time, you won't go anywhere. Forum members are smart and have a lot of experince buying instruments. Through out the threads of their writings, theres a alot of remembering, myself included, what we paid for basses years ago. I have never played one of these basses but it has I believe two single coil pickups,(I could be wrong) and is a solid built Rick. Its also an 1987, which means its becoming a vintage instrument, something that adds value. I play a 3000, which is similar and I love it. Depending on your financial status, I would not pass on something that could enhance your musical visions. This bass in my opinion is not that overpriced, walk into any Guitar Center if you want to see overpriced.

[aceonbass]

Just because it's old, doesn't meant it's valuable, at least not to me. I like the 2000 and 3000 series basses too, but not enough to pay $1250.00 for one. Now the bound models are a different story, but they are still poorly balanced basses that are heavy. When you can get a decent 4003, or even a 4004 for $1250.00 it just doesn't make sense to spend that on one of thse, except for "collectability's' sake. At that point, you're not really moving forward, you are truely moving backward.

[rickaddict]

Since the 4003 & 4004 now share nack blanks, they now have the same string spacing at the bridge.

Cool! Maybe RIC is actually listening to me!

Just because it's old, doesn't meant it's valuable, at least not to me. I like the 2000 and 3000 series basses too, but not enough to pay $1250.00 for one. Now the bound models are a different story, but they are still poorly balanced basses that are heavy. When you can get a decent 4003, or even a 4004 for $1250.00 it just doesn't make sense to spend that on one of thse, except for "collectability's' sake. At that point, you're not really moving forward, you are truely moving backward.

Although mine is a bit heavier than most of my 4001/4003's, it balances fine...In fact, I have played 4001s that balance worse, so I guess it depends on the instrument.

And what if you already have a 4001/4003 and a 4004 and want to try something different? I like my 2030GF more than I liked my 4004 Cheyenne or my 4004 Laredo. It just sounds better to me. What does moving forward vs. backward have to do with that?

[partime]

Interesting Ace, I agree with you on the just because its old thing (value), they are slightly more heavy, it does not bother me and its balanced fine. And yes one could get a 4003 for the same price, I am saving for one now. It is a different beast though, I know guys that have five Les Pauls and mutiple stratocasters. Because they have different characteristics and qualities. Angelo, Ace has got a lot of Rickenbacker knowledge and I love reading his posts. Jeff's post helps my point. I hope you can use this info and good luck.

[NFB-418]

I have never played one of these basses but it has I believe two single coil pickups...

I think they're humbuckers, but I could be wrong.

[jingle_jangle]

Since the 4003 & 4004 now share nack blanks, they now have the same string spacing at the bridge.

Cool! Maybe RIC is actually listening to me!

Just because it's old, doesn't meant it's valuable, at least not to me. I like the 2000 and 3000 series basses too, but not enough to pay $1250.00 for one. Now the bound models are a different story, but they are still poorly balanced basses that are heavy. When you can get a decent 4003, or even a 4004 for $1250.00 it just doesn't make sense to spend that on one of thse, except for "collectability's' sake. At that point, you're not really moving forward, you are truely moving backward.

Although mine is a bit heavier than most of my 4001/4003's, it balances fine...In fact, I have played 4001s that balance worse, so I guess it depends on the instrument.

And what if you already have a 4001/4003 and a 4004 and want to try something different? I like my 2030GF more than I liked my 4004 Cheyenne or my 4004 Laredo. It just sounds better to me. What does moving forward vs. backward have to do with that?

My own definition of "moving backward" is the nice EB-0 that sold on eBay last week for $3050.00. I hung on through $1400.00, but was shocked to see the price shoot through the roof in the last 30 seconds of the auction.

[aceonbass]

What does moving forward vs. backward have to do with that?

That statement was a reference to the beginning of Mr.Wood's statement before mine

[ken_j]

Since the 4003 & 4004 now share neck blanks, they now have the same string spacing at the bridge.

Does this mean that the 4003 has wider spacing or the 4004 has narrower spacing?