Simple cure for bridge lift?

[Gilmourisgod]

Well, so much for polite discourse. I for one will continue to express my opinion in polite and reasonable terms until the moderator decides to boot me for offending tender sensibilities. It's our forum, after all, not John Hall's.

[FabGearHead]

John, you are a very wise man!

Think about it guys, how many instruments are out there that have had "issue specific" aftermarket parts designed and made for them? I don't mean Ricks!
I've seen this kind of thing for years in the instrument market and sometimes, the factory decides to accept the modification and incorporate it into the build process.
Of course, this is not something RIC is interested in doing in this case and it is their prerogative.

Jim

[Gilmourisgod]

He may well be wise, but apparently has some politeness issues. How about this for wisdom:
Make small modifications to an obsolete, albeit visually appealing component, thus undercutting a competitor making better designed after market components for your flagship product, resulting in higher profits and more satisfied customer base for your company. Dang, I must be a business genius! All this cringing deference to John Hall on what is apparently a sorepoint is creeping me out. He may be the CEO of Rickenbacker, but if this a truly democratic forum interested in a variety of opinions, suggestions, etc, and not a John Hall fanboy forum, then he's just another forum member in my book. I'll say what I please within the limits of decorum and forum rules. If somebody is sick of a particular discussion, they can excercise their right not to read it by not clicking on the offending new post.

[Gilmourisgod]

Another brainstorm of pure business genius!.........
Instead of wasting time and enriching lawyers by suing Hipshot for making a vaguely similar looking but technically superior bridge, Rickenbacker has it's own aftermarket "Improved Vintage" model bridge cast in indonesia or china out of a solid chunk of chromed aluminum or brass (like the Hipshot) for short money with an inset Rick logo similar to the headstock following the curve along the rear of the back of the bridge. It has individually adjustable bridge saddles and easily accessible intonation screws, but otherwise looks identical to the current design, minus the whole tail lift issue. You put this up for sale for $200 each, which is outrageous considering the actual production cost is about $5.00 each, but knowing that the Hipshot is $150, and that certain collectors are willing to pay $400 for a beat up old 4001 bridge on e -bay, you sit back and watch the cash roll in as everyone who actually PLAYS a Rick bass practically sprains their wrists wrenching open their wallets to buy one. Once it gets really popular, you artificially limit production and raise the price! Genius! The American Way!

Well if this burst of disrespectful heresy directly upon the worshipful altar of Rickenbacker doesn't get me excommunicated, nothing will.

[rickenbrother]

I was literally obsessed with my 79' 4001, and deeply regret selling it, but it had it's drawbacks, as anyone who owns one knows. The bridge looks great, but it's a PITA to adjust, and the pickups are prone to hum. The frets were too soft for roundwounds, which nearly everyone (at least everyone who wanted to sound like Lee or Squire) put on immediately after purchase.

Really? Wow, I must have an invincible '79 4001 which turns 35 years old this month and still has none of these problems. It's had the @#$% played out of it with roundwound strings since it was made. It was a big bit at the last So Cal jam with original tailpiece (with negligible lift), pickups, frets, roundwound strings and all. It still kicks butt and probably will for a long time to come.

[cjj]

Yeah, I've always wondered about all of these "problems" everyone has. I got my first Rick bass in 1978 (a '74 4001) and used Rotosound RS66LD Stainless Roundwounds on it exclusively. Never had any issues. I still use Rotos on some of my Rick basses (though I've started using D'Addario XL's since I got a killer deal on about 50 sets), still haven't had any problems. Not with excessive fret wear or tail lift.

I'm pretty sure that if tail lift were really a big issue, RIC would fix.

I guess I'm just lucky. Or maybe I'm just a "fan boy." Or maybe being a "fan boy" makes you lucky...

[cassius987]

I'm unconvinced this is an issue that needs addressing for 4003s, I just can't say I adore the current tailpiece/bridge either. As for the odd 3-screw C64 tailpiece or 5-screw powder coated tailpiece... fair enough. There be lift. I've seen it (the C64) firsthand.

Griping about it on this forum doesn't really accomplish anything though. Neither does inflating the problem into something bigger and more pervasive than it really is. I'll say it again, vote with your wallet if you really think it's that big a deal. Talk is cheap.

[Gilmourisgod]

I had my 79' 4001 for a total of four years, and believe me, I babied it. I had rotosounds on it, and they really chewed up the frets. I wouldnt say they were toast, but well on the way. I've read that using roundwounds would void the warranty, don't know if that was a fish story. I remember I had a luthier look at it, and he said given how low the frets were, I probably couldn't get more than a couple fret dressings out of it before a refret, and that it would be expensive because the binding forms up onto the fret ends. A buddy had a mapleglo that he thumb slapped the hell out of, and developed big dents in the frets. I've had my G&L for 30 years with very little fret wear after years of thumb slapping, so it must have much harder fretwire. Does the 4003 still use the same fret material? I don't remember any bridge lift on my bass, guess I didn't own it long enough to know one way or the other. All that said, I still want another one, which may say more about my nostalgic yearnings than common sense, but there it is.

[Colonel Sanders]

I had my 79' 4001 for a total of four years, and believe me, I babied it. I had rotosounds on it, and they really chewed up the frets. I wouldnt say they were toast, but well on the way. I've read that using roundwounds would void the warranty, don't know if that was a fish story. I remember I had a luthier look at it, and he said given how low the frets were, I probably couldn't get more than a couple fret dressings out of it before a refret, and that it would be expensive because the binding forms up onto the fret ends. A buddy had a mapleglo that he thumb slapped the hell out of, and developed big dents in the frets. I've had my G&L for 30 years with very little fret wear after years of thumb slapping, so it must have much harder fretwire. Does the 4003 still use the same fret material? I don't remember any bridge lift on my bass, guess I didn't own it long enough to know one way or the other. All that said, I still want another one, which may say more about my nostalgic yearnings than common sense, but there it is.

My 73 4001 has barely visible dents in the frets. My 72 needed a refret after 41 years. My first RIck (from 77) was refretted after 23 years.

YMMV I guess?

For every horror story, there are some counterparts.

[rickenbrother]

I had my 79' 4001 for a total of four years, and believe me, I babied it. I had rotosounds on it, and they really chewed up the frets..

Rotosounds will chew up the frets of any bass guitar! It also depends on how your grip is on your fretting hand. There are plenty of other roundwound strings available such as D'Addario XL's that are kinder to frets than Rotosounds and sound better in my opinion. I've been using D'Addario XL strings for the past 33 years.

[Gilmourisgod]

Odd how the rotosounds never chewed up the frets on my G&L 2000 bass after 30 years, vs. four years on the Rick, hence the logical assumption that the G&L fretwire is harder than it was on the Rick. Anybody know what they are using for fretwire now? That's all I was asking.

[jps]

Odd how the rotosounds never chewed up the frets on my G&L 2000 bass after 30 years, vs. four years on the Rick, hence the logical assumption that the G&L fretwire is harder than it was on the Rick

Differently shaped necks will make us hold/handle them differently, whether we are conscious of that or not. Perhaps that could, at least, partly explain your experience.

[cassius987]

Odd how the rotosounds never chewed up the frets on my G&L 2000 bass after 30 years, vs. four years on the Rick, hence the logical assumption that the G&L fretwire is harder than it was on the Rick. Anybody know what they are using for fretwire now? That's all I was asking.

I have never gotten along with G&Ls because of their frets, actually. I think they are indeed a taller profile than Rics and vintage Fenders if not also a different type of metal.

I played a 60s Ric the other day and the frets were tiny and a bit dull in appearance like they had tarnished. (They looked to be in fine shape for playing though.) Vintage frets were probably sourced from different metals than are used today, or maybe after that many years all frets will dull. I dunno. Just a thought.

OT, but the 60s neck profile reminded me of some of the more recent 4003s I had played. Moreso than my '76 anyway.

[pag]

I must say that the "hidden" three screw design of the tailpiece is the main reason for my liking
of the "original" 60s aluminium tail.
I think it looks great and I wish there was some way of keeping that design whilst eliminating any
possibilty of it lifting in normal use by some kind of rethink of the casting design.

I tried a C64 three screw tail on my CS when the original five screw CS tail began to lift
(it started to lift after about five years use) but it too started to lift so I now have a five screw V63 tail I swapped from a bass
I was selling on and thats been on the CS for over three years now.

There is nothing wrong as far as I can see with a discussion about a snag thats affected several players on the forum.

[pag]

I also use RS66LD strings by the way and its just a fact of life that a moving roundwound stainless steel string
will wear your frets out.
Thats why guitar repairers have a job.

Going back to the start of the thread is the question of what do you do to cure tail lift?

I think its a valid question and although its been discussed many times so have lots of other
aspects of the 4000 series design.

Lets have some more ideas please.