THE bass to get?

[Keef]

RM1999 is a bit of a misnomer, Rose-Morris was the importer of the bass and gave it their own catalog number of 1999, hence, we call it a RM1999. It is the same as a 4001S.

I just spent about an hour looking through the "Model of the Week three: 4001S and RM1999" thread.... people really seem to covet the RM1999 bass as something really special unto itself. It may be too many late nights staring at the screen, trying to figure out the differences between models/years, but I think my head is starting to swim. But I did come up with that my v63 must be late 90's because of the short headstock... the TRC almost reaches the end of it.
Sigh.. will I ever learn it all and find that perfect bass ... that I don't even know what it is yet?!?

I'm going to end up like my cat Digory, passed out on the computer if I don't give it a rest...

Thanks again everyone... I love this place..

Digory passed out looking at Rickenbackers

[Keef]

You got it, brother!

Checkerboard was phased out July/August of 73, crushed inlays were basically February though a few March 73s have 'em. The inlays stayed full-width, but made of a pearlescent resin (by the by, these are beautiful inlays and a very short-lived style) until May/June, when they then started cutting that material to form non-full-width inlays. Shortly thereafter (August 73 maybe?) the poured inlays appeared, which remained until 2008 when they went back to full-width, cut material again.

This, along with reintroducing walnut headstock wings and lengthening the 'stock, means new 4001s are looking more and more like the old ones!

Thanks... I didn't see you answered my inlay question before I asked it. Thanks

[badeggs]

It may be too many late nights staring at the screen, trying to figure out the differences between models/years, but I think my head is starting to swim.

Now imagine also being into Gibsons, Gretches, Fenders...it's insane the sheer amount of documented and undocumented products, one-offs, and other things these companies and more have all manufactured over the last century or so. You can easily spend a lifetime just studying this stuff...

But I did come up with that my v63 must be late 90's because of the short headstock... the TRC almost reaches the end of it.

Go here and punch in the serial number, you'll get the month/year of manufacture.

[jps]

But I did come up with that my v63 must be late 90's because of the short headstock... the TRC almost reaches the end of it.

Go here and punch in the serial number, you'll get the month/year of manufacture.

There should also be a sticker in the control cavity with the date of manufacture (or completion). My 4001V63 has a date of 04/15/98.

As to the TRC length, there is a solution, buy a vintage one.

4001V63-800_9093.jpg

You will note that many (not that there are that many, anyway) of the '50s 4000 bass have TRCs that extend almost to the end of the headstock, too, so there is precedent for this.

4000 '62 FG Lucy 05a.jpg

[Keef]

ok, my Ric's birthday is the 9th week of 1999
Thanks!

I LOVE the look of the 50's Ric headstock. The Fireglo is nice and orange-ish and the gold TRC looks really great with it.
Ok, I feel a bit better about my short headstock

[jingle_jangle]

The so-called "short" headstock is actuallu no shorter than the early '70s headstock, at least in total length from the nut. However, the bottom of each wing is lower down with relation to the nut, making the available tuner area larger.


The '50s and early '60s 4000 headstocks are fatter all around. I'm getting a '59 in tomorrow and I'm itching to trace and measure the headstock...

[chefothefuture]

The so-called "short" headstock is actuallu no shorter than the early '70s headstock, at least in total length from the nut. However, the bottom of each wing is lower down with relation to the nut, making the available tuner area larger.


The '50s and early '60s 4000 headstocks are fatter all around. I'm getting a '59 in tomorrow and I'm itching to trace and measure the headstock...

That would be interesting to compare to the '61 that I used as a template for the one I made years ago....

[Keef]

That's a handsome headstock. Of the three posted examples, they all seem to have nice, skinny necks.
Future Chef, am I understanding right that you made a Ric-ish bass?

[chefothefuture]

That's a handsome headstock. Of the three posted examples, they all seem to have nice, skinny necks.
Future Chef, am I understanding right that you made a Ric-ish bass?

It's from a replica of a '60 4000 I made many years ago.

[Keef]

That is BEAUTIFUL!!
Is the body design on that one from the era where the upper horn was still shorter, or is the the full length?

[opticnerve]

That is BEAUTIFUL!!
Is the body design on that one from the era where the upper horn was still shorter, or is the the full length?

It looks shorter to me.

[woodyng]

Omg,....its full of stars!

That bass really is glowing! Simply gorgeous.

[opticnerve]

I think the pole-pieces are radioactive!

[chefothefuture]

That is BEAUTIFUL!!
Is the body design on that one from the era where the upper horn was still shorter, or is the the full length?

It looks shorter to me.

The templates were made from a '61 IIRC...

Funny story behind it-
I first saw the '61 in early '87. It was sold to a buddy of mine(the deal was if he didn't want it I was next in line....)
Well, he then sold it to a forumite(who's identity should remain anonymous...), who then sold it to Mike Lull.
I saw it in Mike's shop when I was buying that TRC....
So I asked if I could make some templates from it.....
He offered it to me for $4500 (in 1998). Didn't have the dough... sigh.....

And so it goes....

[chefothefuture]

Omg,....its full of stars!

That bass really is glowing! Simply gorgeous.

The early 4000's are quite monolithic