1960 4000 replica

[winston]

Just a quick comment from my vantage point as one of the individuals who helps Peter manage the administration side of his forum.

Obviously we all have our likes and dislikes and many of us are very opinionated. The subject of this thread has caused quite a stir and as you may have surmised I received a few complaints that drew me here to take a look for myself. After a thorough read of the thread, I found myself wondering why those who do not find this an accurate enough replica, could not find a way to get their point across without bruising the feelings of both the proud owner of the instrument and the luthier who performed the work.

I suspect that a good number of our members share this sentiment and I hope the thread will serve two purposes. (1) to continue to demonstrate our passion of all things Rickenbacker and (2) to have us realise how easy it is to bruise feelings............. even if you feel your criticism is constructive.

If you are wondering if you may have inadvertently upset the two individuals who were responsible for this work, then I invite you to touch base with them and clear the air as Paul has done. It is important to us all that the harmony of this forum is maintained.

[RobRick]

Perhaps this 1960 4000 replica should be called a "tribute in the spirit of a 1960 4000 bass."

That such a cool project should upset some folks is very strange to me. Mainly, I PLAY these basses, I don't fret over this screw or that "fret" (pun intended!). Of course it's ok to have an opinion, ie "That's not my cup of tea" or "I would have done it differently" but to demand sources or examples is just, well, weird. IMO. I don't think anyone needs to justify to ANYONE what they have done to a bass they paid for. I know I wouldn't. If I want to put a gold pick guard and TRC on my 4001C64 and tell people I am playing my tribute to a 60s 4000 bass, I will do so with no apologies to anyone.

I enjoy all these projects and interpretations of Rick basses. Keep 'em coming!

[marc61]

I'm gonna call it "Jake's cool Ric bass that I wish I had". It definitely carries the spirit of the vintage instrument

Enjoy it Jake!

[Grey]

I don't think anyone needs to justify to ANYONE what they have done to a bass they paid for. I know I wouldn't. If I want to put a gold pick guard and TRC on my 4001C64 and tell people I am playing my tribute to a 60s 4000 bass, I will do so with no apologies to anyone.

That goes without saying, no one is required to do anything. But when you post things on a public forum, for everyone in the world to read, you do so with a certain expectation of things to come. Obviously everyone here loves Rickenbacker, and even the detractors (including myself) have made their arguements along with a certain amount of praise for what is an excellent build. We're not talking about posting state secrets, the arguement was made that this bass is accurate based on compiled photographs and i'd like to see them. I don't see how that's complicated and it certainly is not an unreasonable request.

[s4001]

I'm gonna call it "Jake's cool Ric bass that I wish I had". It definitely carries the spirit of the vintage instrument

Enjoy it Jake!

That works for me. And I wouldn't mind hearing clips, either.

[aceonbass]

Erik, I don't think we're gonna see those pics. One thing I'm pretty sure we'll see in the future are Ricks owned by non forum members getting flamed for mods such as after market pickups, active electronics, non-stock colors, extra tuners on the headstock, after market bridges (except those made by Hipshot), odd shaped pickguards, etc... The title of this thread is "1960 Replica". This implies that something was replicated, and like Erik, I'd like to know what that was. While some here will say it's cool (while PMing me on the side to say it's not) I'll bet no one here would spend what was spent on this knowing it was going to turn out like this.

[RobRick]

I don't think anyone needs to justify to ANYONE what they have done to a bass they paid for. I know I wouldn't. If I want to put a gold pick guard and TRC on my 4001C64 and tell people I am playing my tribute to a 60s 4000 bass, I will do so with no apologies to anyone.

That goes without saying, no one is required to do anything. But when you post things on a public forum, for everyone in the world to read, you do so with a certain expectation of things to come. Obviously everyone here loves Rickenbacker, and even the detractors (including myself) have made their arguements along with a certain amount of praise for what is an excellent build. We're not talking about posting state secrets, the arguement was made that this bass is accurate based on compiled photographs and i'd like to see them. I don't see how that's complicated and it certainly is not an unreasonable request.

I agree with your first sentence. And the individual has every right to refuse a request or ignore it. No one "owes" anyone anything here.

[Grey]

I agree with your first sentence. And the individual has every right to refuse a request or ignore it. No one "owes" anyone anything here.

Once again, you're spot on. Which only raises the question, why would you? According to what was said, it would only further verify his statements and serve to prove me wrong. Now you could argue that he dosen't care what I or anyone else thinks, and I suppose that would be fair enough. But showing your guitars to other people usually implies that you're interested in their opinions, as does posting on a public forum where all sorts of differing opinions come together.

Maybe he expected unanimous support from fellow Rickenbacker enthusiasts and perhaps that puts me in the wrong, but I still stand by what I said.

[RobRick]

I agree with your first sentence. And the individual has every right to refuse a request or ignore it. No one "owes" anyone anything here.

Once again, you're spot on. Which only raises the question, why would you? According to what was said, it would only further verify his statements and serve to prove me wrong. Now you could argue that he dosen't care what I or anyone else thinks, and I suppose that would be fair enough. But showing your guitars to other people usually implies that you're interested in their opinions, as does posting on a public forum where all sorts of differing opinions come together.

Maybe he expected unanimous support from fellow Rickenbacker enthusiasts and perhaps that puts me in the wrong, but I still stand by what I said.

My understanding from reading previous posts is that examples will not be posted or provided. That indicates that all of your insisting and arguing are a moot point. The project bass is shown and opinions have been given, so the purpose of this thread has been fulfilled. Providing evidence and examples was never promised. Move on.

[winston]

This thread is being locked because despite my previous post (which should have been read as a warning) some of you will not put the harmony of this forum ahead of your continued insistence that this project is not to your taste and/or not worth the investment. Enough is enough. I am sure both Jake and Larry did not expect to get attacked to this degree when this thread was created.

My apologies to those who stayed within the established rules and made tactful comments whether they were pro or con.

I trust that the negative comments posted in this thread do not deter Larry Davis (who is a very skilled luthier and valued contributor to our forum) or Jake from posting their future projects.