Low Action Trick ?

[mc2NY]

OK....What are my options to lower the action on a late 60s 4001 ?

The neck is pretty much adjusted/dialed in as straight/flat as possible. just about a piece of paper's worth of relief.

I put light gauge strings on it to let it pull itself backward a bit.

The bridge is dropped all the way down on the treble side...and the saddles are notched pretty deep.

......but it would be better if I can drop it down just a hair more.

Any tricks?

All I can think of is filing the saddles a hair and re-notching them...or maybe using some strings that are core over saddle instead of wrap over saddle.

[antipodean]

I read somewhere here that '60s Rickenbacker basses often have the bridge bottomed out and the saddles notches filed way down. I think this reflects the fact that high action was more the norm for bass players back in the day when these basses were initially designed.

Trying core-over saddle strings may be the best bet to get the action as low as you need. My fear is that intonation may be an issue, given the limited travel of the saddles on the old aluminium gap-tooth bridge/tailpiece. At least you can reverse the process if it doesn't work - filing the saddles is irreversible and replacements are really difficult to find....

[mc2NY]

Does anyone know the lowest tension core over saddle strings?

I normally use Dean Markley SR strings light gauge on my other basses, which are core over saddle type....but they are stainless steel round wounds.

[mc2NY]

So.....if this is common on 60s Ric Basses...is it due to how some were actually built, such as an inconsistent neck angle?

Or is it due to a flaw that has developed over time, such as the neck maybe pulling forward from use of high tension strings on a bass for years?

I have a couple 60s 4001s and one does not have this problem. It still has a fair amount of bridge adjustment left, plus the saddles are not notched.

The other one has the bridge dropped all the way down and deep saddle notches...and the strings are still a hair higher than on my other bass. Core over saddle strings might get it close to the first bass.

Admittedly, I like my action very low. most guys prefer higher action to mine. But I still think ANY bass should be able to be adjusted down to the level I like mine set at.

Should I be concerned about the second bass and consider the neck "bad?" Do Ric guys consider this something that affects value of vintage Rics, or is this just an accepted "Ric thing?"

[cheyenne]

If the necks straight and your bridge is bottomed out,your only other option would be removing some material from the nut slots. Every Rick I've had has had the nut cut pretty high to allow for personal adjustment.

+1 on the taper core strings also.

[Kopfjaeger]

So.....if this is common on 60s Ric Basses...is it due to how some were actually built, such as an inconsistent neck angle?

Or is it due to a flaw that has developed over time, such as the neck maybe pulling forward from use of high tension strings on a bass for years?

I have a couple 60s 4001s and one does not have this problem. It still has a fair amount of bridge adjustment left, plus the saddles are not notched.

The other one has the bridge dropped all the way down and deep saddle notches...and the strings are still a hair higher than on my other bass. Core over saddle strings might get it close to the first bass.

Admittedly, I like my action very low. most guys prefer higher action to mine. But I still think ANY bass should be able to be adjusted down to the level I like mine set at.

Should I be concerned about the second bass and consider the neck "bad?" Do Ric guys consider this something that affects value of vintage Rics, or is this just an accepted "Ric thing?"

Jon,

If the neck is relief is minimal and the truss rods are set to give you a straight (flat) neck and your bridge is set in the weeds, (low), you may have a negative neck angle that is preventing you from getting your action as low as you want/need it.

How do you check to see if this is the case? Theoretically, both the neck and the face of the bass should be level and parallel to one another. The neck should be in a slightly higher plane than the face of the instrument. Attaching the body to a level surface or jig and then leveling the body, you can then see where your neck is. A laser level that contractors use to find the high point of a room for installing cabinets can be used or a jig that sits on the neck with no interference from the strings or frets can be used with a level. I highly doubt many neck and bodies are perfectly level and parallel to one another, but if your action is high it will give you an indication if your neck angle is to blame.

How does an instrument acquire a bad neck angle? It could either be mechanical/structural or just come out of the factory that way. Some say that the deep neck routs weaken the neck and over time the neck angle changes. Most of the angle issues I've seen show no cracking of the finish where the neck meets the body. i would think that if the neck was moving because of a deep neck pup route, the finish would be cracked in this area.

On 60's and very early 70's basses, I've seen the bottoms of the aluminum bridges machined to allow them to drop deeper into the tail piece well. I've also seen the tail piece wells machined a little deeper as well in order to pick up a little more adjustment.

I know Mark Walker has worked on a few basses suffering from negative neck angles. he has used steam pressing while on a jig as well as lining the deep neck routs with epoxy. I've also seen the neck routs completely filled with a maple plug while the instrument was strapped to a jig with the neck pulled back so as to fit the plug as tight as possible. The neck rout is then re cut but only minimal material is removed.

Here is the neck rout on my 1965 4001. Some idiot cut the shoulder nearest the neck and made the route deeper in order to cram a Gibson mudbucker into it!! I did nothing to repair it and it it one of the more stable and level necks in my collection!! She is the one that needs to have at least a set of .102 strings on her or the truss rods don't see enough tension. The instrument has been gigged hard and shows honest playing wear. She is no case queen and has really been played, a lot! She's not been babied and still she is as strong as the day she left the factory! She has great structure!!

Personally, I think negative neck angles are genetic. If the wood is predisposed to causing it, it's going to happen. if not, it's not going to happen at all.,

Sepp

[sloop_john_b]

Some idiot cut the shoulder nearest the neck and made the route deeper in order to cram a Gibson mudbucker into it!!

[Kopfjaeger]

Damit! John, you are right, Cliff was no idiot!!

Sepp

[sloop_john_b]

Damit! John, you are right, Cliff was no idiot!!

Sepp

He did say that his Rick "needed work" in one of his last interviews - perhaps it had to do with the effects of a huge honking route!

[mc2NY]

Thanks for all the feedback and ideas.

As I suspected, there were a number of factory direct neck problems, as well as ones caused by things done to the basses by players. So I don't feel as bad after hearing this is a common problem on late 60s ones.

Most of you would probably think my bass plays great, if you like a decent medium action. I just happen to like very low action on my basses, which is what is causing my problem.

At least I have a few more ideas on now to fix the problem. I'll probably still try the core over saddle strings first...then maybe try working on the saddle...grinding down the bottom of the bridge a bit sound like a more drastic solution. Routing the bridge to drop,the bridge lower is a deal breaker for me.

I'll get it right because it is otherwise a great bass.

[heinpete]

Damit! John, you are right, Cliff was no idiot!!

Sepp

...no, somebody else did it to his Rick!

[ilan]

I'm sure there's a way to make the neck pickup shorter, and its rout shallower.

Like this Lace bass humbucking pickup - 5/16th tall, no routing needed - it's just a hair taller than the thickness of the perspex pickguard.

http://www.lacemusic.com/USAB.php

This could be a way to correct negative neck angle. Flex the neck backwards a bit, press a maple block into the neck pickup rout, then install this pickup without routing.

[chromium]

I don't know anything about the 60s Rics... do they use "conventional" rods? or are they the 70s hairpin style rods?

Is there any benefit to loosening the rod, clamping the neck into a backbow, and then snugging it up again?

That of course is how I setup my 70s Rics with the hairpin rods, but that same approach has also helped me at times with muscling basses with conventional rods into shape. I had to do that with both of my 4-digit Hamers (8 and 12 string) to get the action low - as their single truss rods are working overtime.

Just a thought- not sure whether it will help here

[mc2NY]

Yeah, the 60s ones have the hairpin truss rods. Both my '66 and my '68 are adjusted almost flat at pitch and I have the same light gauge strings on each. But the bridge adjustment on each differed quite a bit.

.....which is what made me ask how much difference from bass to bass was there during that period? I figured it was either a case of how much neck angle had been built into each, or maybe one had some forward neck pull over 50 years?

Again, one is a fantastic player and the other just really good. The really good one has notched saddles and the treble side is dropped all the way down. If I could drop the G string down just another hair, it would be perfect and become a fantastic player.

So, it's not like it has a bum neck with strings sitting a half inch above the fretboard.

Regarding wrestling 8- and 12-string bass necks back into playable condition...I hear ya! I've saved a few in my time..most recently a 10-string that no one had ever touched the truss rod on in 8 years, since new. But I've also had a couple that former owners over-adjusted and the truss rods blew out the back of the necks!

[chromium]

Yeah, the 60s ones have the hairpin truss rods. Both my '66 and my '68 are adjusted almost flat at pitch and I have the same light gauge strings on each. But the bridge adjustment on each differed quite a bit.

.....which is what made me ask how much difference from bass to bass was there during that period? I figured it was either a case of how much neck angle had been built into each, or maybe one had some forward neck pull over 50 years?

Ah ok - I didn't catch that from your OP. Long day.

Just thinking out loud again... but would it be feasible to grab a modern replacement bridge and grind down the underside to get it to sit lower in the tailpiece? Between that and cutting the saddles, you might clear enough to make some difference. Kind of a hack, but at least its nothing permanent...

..most recently a 10-string

Wait.. what?!?

This I have to see...