Colonel Sanders wrote:I wonder to which point we must say "Thanks Guitar Center". Their limited run of 4001S may have allowed RIC to program their CNC to now manufacture the 4003S.
If THAT'S true, then lets hope THIS time that the pickups, bridge, strap button, neck, and pickguard are all centered and lined up properly by adjusting those CNC machines correctly.
Hopefully this model won't have any visible gaps under the pickguard or cracked pickguards from over-tightened pickup screws either.
Colonel Sanders wrote:I wonder to which point we must say "Thanks Guitar Center". Their limited run of 4001S may have allowed RIC to program their CNC to now manufacture the 4003S.
If THAT'S true, then lets hope THIS time that the pickups, bridge, strap button, neck, and pickguard are all centered and lined up properly by adjusting those CNC machines correctly.
Hopefully this model won't have any visible gaps under the pickguard or cracked pickguards from over-tightened pickup screws either.
If the pictures are from you, no compliment to your photographer skills. You may read the manual that covers "focus".
Are you a reincarnation of the guy that whined forever and a day after getting a lemon? If so, we got your story and the world is moving on. If not, no need to go there again. Way back then I got a lemon from 1978. Over the 20 odd 4001/4003 I have owned, that was the only one.
I've never understood why the 4004 with less content cost more than the 4003. If RIC would offer HB1's, and the Cheyanne's trans finishes and nicer maple as an option on the 4003, I wouldn't miss the 4004.
I have to think they waited to announce this till I was broke for the foreseeable future!!! I've got some fenders & a G&L I never play anymore I could sell but in this economic climate I wonder if I could even get enough to pay for one of these. Do to limited orders they'll probably be at least as expensive as a 4004.
This is great news IMO. Maybe I'll scrounge up the cash for one, but I've been in my post-GAS phase for a little over a year. Still, very tempting.
Next I'd like to see them bring back the 4003FL, but use the S as its base platform instead of the bound 4003. Makes more sense to me, not that I dislike the way my 2008 4003FL looks.
Overall I'm happy to see RIC mixing it up a bit with the lineup in ways that are not drastic, but bring some new choices to the table noneltheless. (4003S-W is pretty sweet eh??) Over the years lots of people have told me body binding is what turned them off about the 4003 so maybe this will bring in some new "I just want a good Ric bass" customers, as well. The C64/RM1999/4001S/etc. is too expensive to get most people's business, methinks, whereas a 4003 is competitive with MIA Fender/EBMM pricing at around $1450 (last I checked).
aceonbass wrote:I've never understood why the 4004 with less content cost more than the 4003.
Less is more, or so it goes. Reminds me of the Nikon D800/D800E. The cameras are identical except for one detail, the removal of sensor filter in the "E" that results in slightly sharper photographs. So to have them remove something from the camera you'll have to pay an extra 200$ for the "E" version. Anyway, I always liked the "S". The body contour is comfortable.
Grey wrote:Less is more, or so it goes. Reminds me of the Nikon D800/D800E. The cameras are identical except for one detail, the removal of sensor filter in the "E" that results in slightly sharper photographs. So to have them remove something from the camera you'll have to pay an extra 200$ for the "E" version..
You getting more sharpness!
When I wanted more sharpness, in the mid '80s, I went from a Canon F1 to a Wista 45DX. Lots of people equate view cameras with complexity, Ha! Take a look at most of todays cameras. Rise/Fall/Shift/Tilt/Swing is a lot simpler IMO.
