Pots is Pots...or are they?

[cjj]

And that additional cost is primarily due to the cost of testing. In general, electronics components are not made in batches of low tolerance and high tolerance. They just have a formula that will make then at some nominal tolerance that is fairly easy to hit with normal processes. These are all called 30% or whatever the lowest value happens to be. For higher tolerance parts, they take those nominal parts and test them each individually and select parts that meet the higher tolerance range. The tighter the tolerance spec., the more precision must be done in testing, and so, the cost goes up.

So, while it is certainly possible to get high tolerance parts when buying the cheap ones, it should not happen that you get low tolerance ones when you buy the better grade. But of course, things can go wrong, testers get out of calibration, someone puts the wrong label on, etc., etc.

[ken_j]

When buying (tone stack) caps to repair my amp I had to go through about a dozen of one of the values to get it within 10%.

[cassius987]

Remember that in a Rick (with two volume controls, as in a 4003) the volume pots are wired between the selector switch and the output. Both pots are always in the circuit regardless of the selector switch position.

Just an addendum: this is true in mono but not Ric-O-Sound output. The switchable mono jack is ultimately what joins the signals and allows the parallel resistances to load down according to Ohm's law.

[2ndHand72Rick]

I put a new rick harness on my sept 72 4001 wich had originally,250 volume and 500 tone.It sounded great!But it was a mixed match set with only two original pots.I switched over to the new 330k harness and it sounded great too.It tightened it up just a bit but no drastic tonal change.My march 71 has all 250k pots in it two are original to the bass and to are not but are same vintage.That bass is alive!Tight and throaty sounding.I know compared to newer ricks the pickups dont have near the output.Mine mic around 9-10 bridge 7-8 toaster(basically like an old fender).But for these two basses the lower value pots have work out swimmingly.I feel with the older 4001's that a total 250k pot change all the way around is the way to go.If you can find pots that really mic out at 250k.

[heinpete]

I don't mind too much the difference in kOhms of the CTS pots ( although you should get what you've paid for! Just think about your car having a 20% tolerance in specs ), as for me the main criteria is the sound. So, as long as the pots don't limit the PUs charakteristic drasticly, it's fine with me. I did not hear a very significant difference when switching to the new harness on a 1986 4003. In the end it is the "synphony" of all together, wood, PUs and electronic circuit and this has to be balanced for a sound you expect of the Rick bass. I guess within the 4001/4003 models of the different production periods there is considerable diversity to find an appealing sound for yourself.

[aceonbass]

Next up on the wiring block was my custom Rick double neck. I was never quite satisfied with the control layout or the original wiring (not done by me), which consisted of a pickup selector switch with master volume and tone for each neck and a 3-way neck selector switch with ROS jacks. I also had a fair amount of cross talk between the channels. Again, all the pots were between 170-195K. It's now wired VV(250K)T(500K)with an .047 cap for the bass neck with it's hi-gains, and VVT(500K) for the guitar neck with an .022 cap for the guitar neck with it's HB1's. I used the pots that were over spec 5-10% to brighten up the HB1's a bit. It's finished and everything works at it should after bench testing. This will go back into the guitar after the other HB1 gets here. I don't know why RIC's factory double necks ran the stock ROS setup which split rear pickups from front pickups instead of upper neck from lower neck, keeping you from running each neck to it's own effects and amp. The weird factory 2-way switch prohibited you from running both necks at the same time too.