Dear John hall part 2

Casiraghi22 · Post by **Casiraghi22** » Sun Aug 11, 2013 9:56 pm

Is there any plan to bring back the 4001v63? No more 4003 for now

johnhall · Post by **johnhall** » Mon Aug 12, 2013 11:05 am

I have no doubt that someday we'll do something with a bass but it won't be a 4001V63, that's for sure.

sloop_john_b · Post by **sloop_john_b** » Mon Aug 12, 2013 1:50 pm

Many, many used ones out there!

Casiraghi22 · Post by **Casiraghi22** » Mon Aug 12, 2013 3:35 pm

4003 is getting old already. It's a beautiful bass but rickenbacker needs to come up with something new

cjj · Post by **cjj** » Mon Aug 12, 2013 3:49 pm

There's always the 4004...

cassius987 · Post by **cassius987** » Mon Aug 12, 2013 3:50 pm

Casiraghi22 wrote: 4003 is getting old already. It's a beautiful bass but rickenbacker needs to come up with something new

cjj wrote:There's always the 4004...

/thread?

sloop_john_b · Post by **sloop_john_b** » Mon Aug 12, 2013 7:22 pm

Casiraghi22 wrote: 4003 is getting old already. It's a beautiful bass but rickenbacker needs to come up with something new

A model from 1964, reissued in 1984 = "new"?

Buy a used one?

deaconblues · Post by **deaconblues** » Mon Aug 12, 2013 8:07 pm

sloop_john_b wrote: A model from 1964, reissued in 1984 = "new"?

Yeah, what I was thinking too.

cassius987 · Post by **cassius987** » Mon Aug 12, 2013 9:12 pm

sloop_john_b wrote:A model from 1964, reissued in 1984 = "new"?

Thank you John, sometimes I feel like this can't be said often enough!

fluffy · Post by **fluffy** » Sat Aug 17, 2013 1:21 am

wellll... there's always the 4005 .......as I seem to have misplaced my $17,000.00 to buy a used one

krohawk1 · Post by **krohawk1** » Fri Aug 23, 2013 3:42 pm

How about a vintage 4003S? That was my first Rickenbacker bass and I really wish I had not sold it.

cassius987 · Post by **cassius987** » Fri Aug 23, 2013 4:18 pm

krohawk1 wrote:How about a vintage 4003S? That was my first Rickenbacker bass and I really wish I had not sold it.

I think offering an S version of the current 4003 would be cool for those who don't care for binding or big inlays (but don't want the other massive departures of the 4004). I'm not sure why people want another vintage reissue. Is it the desire to buy new with the combination of getting something that appears old and collectible?

I've kind of enjoyed seeing RIC do short runs and one-offs of exotic instruments instead of a revivification of the RM1999 year after year.

deaconblues · Post by **deaconblues** » Fri Aug 23, 2013 5:19 pm

cassius987 wrote:I'm not sure why people want another vintage reissue. Is it the desire to buy new with the combination of getting something that appears old and collectible?

Rickenbacker has a huge back catalog of beautiful instruments. Customers would like to be able to get their hands on them without paying through the nose for a vintage instrument.

The current line of Rickenbackers is very nice, but as a guitarist I find the non-reissue instruments to be lacking a certain aesthetic. I'm sure many bassists feel the same way.

I understand that management does what it wants when it wants, but there's no arguing that the market for vintage-styled Rickenbackers is very strong.

cassius987 · Post by **cassius987** » Fri Aug 23, 2013 8:25 pm

deaconblues wrote:
cassius987 wrote:I'm not sure why people want another vintage reissue. Is it the desire to buy new with the combination of getting something that appears old and collectible?
Rickenbacker has a huge back catalog of beautiful instruments. Customers would like to be able to get their hands on them without paying through the nose for a vintage instrument.

The current line of Rickenbackers is very nice, but as a guitarist I find the non-reissue instruments to be lacking a certain aesthetic. I'm sure many bassists feel the same way.

To me, the RM1999 reissues amount to a 4003S with a few different bits swapped out--and some bits forever altered like the materials used to make the machinery and how the truss rods work. I guess I just don't see the big wow factor in that. I don't claim to know anything about Ric guitars--I've never touched one, the extent of my knowledge is "330s look neato." As for price, the reissues are already quite a lot more than a regular model, and then people post complaints about how they aren't faithful enough (happens with the basses anyway) so why not just go get the real thing? Full disclosure, I have a selfish interest in seeing RIC go forward with its product line, not look back.

As for the vintage basses that were a true departure (in bass-ville that's stuff like the 4005, 4002, 3000 series, 2000 series), I think the possibility of them coming back has been repeatedly played down for lack of demand relative to cost to re-engineer... or something like that. I don't claim to know what's really going to happen.

deaconblues · Post by **deaconblues** » Fri Aug 23, 2013 10:24 pm

Well, at this point the vintage models are beginning to encroach on reissue price territory, so it's a tougher call. But it's not like I could buy a real solid-top '58 325 unless I sold a kidney -- and found one to buy in the first place. And even then, who'd want to gig it?

Frankly I don't see the current lineup as being all that modern, 650/4004 aside. Players gripe about tiny frets, rattling bridges, thick varnish on fretboards...those problems have existed since Rickenbacker guitars were introduced way back in the day and have gone largely unaddressed.

Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

Dear John hall part 2

Dear John hall part 2

Re: Dear John hall part 2

Re: Dear John hall part 2

Re: Dear John hall part 2

Re: Dear John hall part 2

Re: Dear John hall part 2

Re: Dear John hall part 2

Re: Dear John hall part 2

Re: Dear John hall part 2

Re: Dear John hall part 2

Re: Dear John hall part 2

Re: Dear John hall part 2

Re: Dear John hall part 2

Re: Dear John hall part 2

Re: Dear John hall part 2