1984 V63 Magnetic Horseshoe Pickup Question

[songdog]

I'd be interested in seeing answers to this question, just out of curiosity. Chances are slim I'll ever own an RM1999 or other 60s 4000-series bass.

It might be a good idea to start a new thread with a title something like "RM1999 weigh-in", it would get more attention there than in a thread about pickups.

Just as a point of comparison: my '72 4001 with reissue horseshoe weighs 9.8 pounds on the postal scale at work. The same scale says my '72 Fender Jazz (with added Gibson Mudbucker pickup) weighs 10.0 lbs. Somehow the Rick feels lighter by much more than the 2% difference would suggest.

[chefothefuture]

The magnetic HS in the '85 I had had significantly lower output than the later ones. It was also characteristically unbalanced at the G string.
It took a bit of adjusting to even out the individual string volumes. Tonally it was close to a mid 60's lipped bobbin HS but had a little less "crunch" or grit.
It also seemed weak compared to the "hot" toaster.
The later HS pickups are hotter and brighter.

Many thanks for your answer,John.
I don't know how the older horseshoes sounds.
But if your description is correct then I think I wouldn't really like the older shoe.

So I have another question.

I own a '91 4001 CS and a V63 that's also from '91.
Both have the 12k toaster and the 12k horseshoe.
And it was so,that the horseshoe sounds darker and fatter then the toaster.
I thought by myself that how it could be that the horseshoe is more fatter and darker as the toaster ???
On both I installed the 3rd cap.
The horseshoes now sounds more balanced.And they also do have now more ' crunch ' .

I would like to know,is it the right thing I was doing ?
I realized that a V63 or that CS have no 3rd cap... Why ???.
Does a real RM 1999 haven't that cap,too ?

Sorry for asking,but I'd like to have my CS and my V63 as close as possible to the original Sound

Well what you did is what Rickenbacker eventually did when they re-introduced the cap after so many years. When the cap was ditched in the '80s, it was because people were removing them. Then, people wanted them again so back they came. People wanted hotter treble pickups for a while and now they don't... (some don't... I still like them without the cap...)

[pag]

I think a new “weigh-in” thread is coming...

[henry5]

I'd be interested in seeing answers to this question, just out of curiosity. Chances are slim I'll ever own an RM1999 or other 60s 4000-series bass.

It might be a good idea to start a new thread with a title something like "RM1999 weigh-in", it would get more attention there than in a thread about pickups.

Just as a point of comparison: my '72 4001 with reissue horseshoe weighs 9.8 pounds on the postal scale at work. The same scale says my '72 Fender Jazz (with added Gibson Mudbucker pickup) weighs 10.0 lbs. Somehow the Rick feels lighter by much more than the 2% difference would suggest.

Wow, that pickup must add some weight. Both my ‘72s come in under 9lbs, although Neil Brewer’s (Druid) ‘72 was noticeably heavier than mine.

[henry5]

[quote= Buy a Sans Amp and choose whatever tone floats your boat but acoustically shows everything the bass the capable of being from a pure standpoint.

Agreed. My first Ric (74 4001) was never even plugged in at the store. I knew what they sounded like, having played three or four in the months before purchase. I was in the basement of Chuck Levins and went thru a stack of six or eight of them. How it resonated and felt, the 'tone' I could hear in the nice quiet basement, I just knew which one was right. When I had made the selection the sales guy said "lets go up and amp it up". I said "no, just wrap it up, i know what it sounds like already."

You cannot beat an acoustic evaluation![/quote]

Big +1 to this.

[henry5]

The wood is key to the 60s basses sound quality. RMs were lighter than their modern counterparts. My 1990 CS (now stereo) is very close to sounding like a 60s Rick but the timber is slightly heavier than the RM it is emulating. When I had Maurice Gibbs RM it was the liveliest bass both plugged and unplugged. Having owned three RMs I can say that the combination of light timber quality of construction and (lets not forget how much store guitarists put in the materials of their vintage bridges) the aluminium bridge/tailpiece anchoring the strings to that resonant wood make the bass sound like it does. Chris Squire (mistakenly in my opinion) thought his RM was “shaved down” during refinishing but he was probably more aware of the lightweight of the RM after using the 21 fret 4001 whilst it was being refinished. I would like some current RM owners (with all original basses) to do a weigh-in so we can see what the difference actually is. Any offers guys?

That all makes sense Pete, except that the only RM I’ve played, a ‘64 (played late last year) felt heavier to me than either of my ‘72s - not by much, and I didn’t have them to a/b, but it wasn’t the floaty-light thing that I was expecting. I’d love to see some figures.

[jps]

Shaun, do your basses have hi-gains in the bridge position? Horseshoe pickups add a lot of weight.

[henry5]

Shaun, do your basses have hi-gains in the bridge position? Horseshoe pickups add a lot of weight.

Yes, they do. I know the reissue shoes are pretty heavy, relatively speaking. The originals, I’m not so sure, although I did once own what I believe was an original set of shoes (no pickup) and they were very heavy indeed.

However I was as much referencing Pete’s comments about Chris’s basses; the 21 fretter I owned was no heavier than my ‘72s, so if Chris’s RM was lighter than his 21 fretter that suggests it was also lighter than the RM I played.

[Michael4bass]

I know a local bass player that played on Squire's RM back in July 2013, he said the it was very light with a very high action.

Bassically, Michael

[henry5]

I know a local bass player that played on Squire's RM back in July 2013, he said the it was very light with a very high action.

Bassically, Michael

I remember Paul W saying the action was extremely high, and the neck incredibly thin.

Thing is, as Pete said, maybe most of the RMs were very light, but I would assume that just like any other basses, every example was slightly different. The one I played (which still wasn’t a heavy bass by any stretch) may have just been towards the heavier end. Obviously Pete has way more experience of them than me so I bow to his knowledge.

FWIW the 2 x CSs I owned were different weights; although the necks were similar dimensions the ‘91 was lighter than the ‘96. I’d say my ‘91 and Pete’s CS (which I’ve played) were similar weights. The ‘98 (?) V63 I owned had a much bigger neck than either of my CSs (and much bigger than my ‘72s) but the wood must have been very light because even with the big neck and the reissue horseshoe it was noticeably lighter than either CS, about the same as my ‘72s. I imagine with a high gain and a shaved neck it would have been featherlight. Knowing what I now know about pickups and harnesses I wish I’d kept that bass, as with some tweaks I think it could’ve been killer.

I’m always fascinated by the differences between examples of the same model. When I bought my 4004 I was lucky enough to play a couple and the bass I bought (now gone to another forumite) was the lighter of the two and sounded more open and resonant, which is what I would usually expect.

[thisismusicinc]

I wonder, are the original RM1999 lighter because of the wood is lighter, or are they constructed with less wood than the ones that came later?

[gregson62]

I routed the neck pocket to move the Toaster to the 1/2" position from the end of the neck and installed a Lollar Horseshoe pickup into the original pickup surround in my '18 4003 and it did increase the weight. There's a sticker on the outside of the case that indicates the original weight of the bass was 9.22 lbs and when weighed in after modifications had increased to 9.79 lbs.

[thx1955]

The magnetic HS in the '85 I had had significantly lower output than the later ones. It was also characteristically unbalanced at the G string.
It took a bit of adjusting to even out the individual string volumes. Tonally it was close to a mid 60's lipped bobbin HS but had a little less "crunch" or grit.
It also seemed weak compared to the "hot" toaster.
The later HS pickups are hotter and brighter.

Hi John,
Great information and observations.
I've an 85 Horseshoe on my v63, I've also two other v63's and a Chris Squire that all have the "dummy" Horseshoes, personally I've not noticed the low volume issues with the real one.

I'll take an Ohmmeter to them all and see how hot they are.

[jps]

IIRC (probably, not) the RI HS PUs I have had were around 11.5K Ω, while the magnetic HS PU was around 8.4K Ω. I did not consider the latter to be weak in any regard.

[aceonbass]

I routed the neck pocket to move the Toaster to the 1/2" position from the end of the neck and installed a Lollar Horseshoe pickup into the original pickup surround in my '18 4003 and it did increase the weight. There's a sticker on the outside of the case that indicates the original weight of the bass was 9.22 lbs and when weighed in after modifications had increased to 9.79 lbs.

IMG_1554a.jpg

Once this routing has been done, there are two areas on either side of the neck in the pocket that are only 1/8" thick due to changes in the geometry between the neck and body wings. This procedure likely weakened the area where the neck transistions to the body. Experience shows that it may take a while for a negative neck angle to develop as a result.