New 4003 bridge pickup surround

[cheyenne]

Ok, looking at the new 4003 bridge pickup surround, still hasnt really grown on me yet, but does anyone know if the large pickup route is still there? Just wondering in case someone wants to swap in a horseshoe.

I've got an extra one in my parts box and have been kicking around the idea.

[Colonel Sanders]

Yeah… Can’t say I have much love for these. The huge gap around the bridge pickup is one of these Rick idiosyncracies I enjoy as is.

[henry5]

Good grief, it looks hideous to me. I didn’t realise they’d changed it (perfectly happy with my 2 x ‘72s and my CS).

[Isaac]

I have a feeling that 4003s made from the time they went to the thinner neck profile until they introduced this new pickup surround will be very desirable over the coming years.

[Colonel Sanders]

I have a feeling that 4003s made from the time they went to the thinner neck profile until they introduced this new pickup surround will be very desirable over the coming years.

I have mine… The slim neck is nice. The new bridge is also nice but sadly, limits on how low you can lower the action on the E and G strings. The extra adjustments to locate the strings over the poles and the additional room to adjust the saddle for intonation are a worthy trade off.

This being said, I kind of prefer the chunkier neck on my 2017 4003S.

[henry5]

I have a feeling that 4003s made from the time they went to the thinner neck profile until they introduced this new pickup surround will be very desirable over the coming years.

I have mine… The slim neck is nice. The new bridge is also nice but sadly, limits on how low you can lower the action on the E and G strings. The extra adjustments to locate the strings over the poles and the additional room to adjust the saddle for intonation are a worthy trade off.

This being said, I kind of prefer the chunkier neck on my 2017 4003S.

How on earth, in this day and age, can you design a bridge that doesn’t go low enough? Particularly as a replacement for a bridge that so many struggled with anyway.

[Colonel Sanders]

Dunno…

A Ric wouldn’t a Ric without these little quirks?

[henry5]

Dunno…

A Ric wouldn’t a Ric without these little quirks?

That’s one way of looking at it I suppose.

Speaking as someone who has super low action, having a bridge that doesn’t go low enough would stop me buying an instrument.Or would see it immediately returned if I didn’t already know about it.

It’s unforgivable in this day and age, just bad design.

[Colonel Sanders]

Dunno…

A Ric wouldn’t a Ric without these little quirks?

That’s one way of looking at it I suppose.

Speaking as someone who has super low action, having a bridge that doesn’t go low enough would stop me buying an instrument.Or would see it immediately returned if I didn’t already know about it.

It’s unforgivable in this day and age, just bad design.

In my opinion, pretty much everything in a 4001 and a 4003 is a bad design (on a functionality point of view).

I play these because they look so good AND they have a unique sound.

[henry5]

Dunno…

A Ric wouldn’t a Ric without these little quirks?

I play these because they look so good AND they have a unique sound.

So do I, but if the action doesn’t go low enough it’s no good to me. And seeing as I CAN get the action low enough on most older ones (my action is about 1mm or just under 12th fret G), then I wouldn’t be buying a new one. This doesn’t just come under “quirky” like a lot of the other spec, especially given they’ve recently redesigned the bridge to supposedly improve on the one that people have been complaining about for decades. Nobody’s telling me that they couldn’t have guaranteed available super low action with 5 seconds more thought.

[Colonel Sanders]

So do I, but if the action doesn’t go low enough it’s no good to me. And seeing as I CAN get the action low enough on most older ones (my action is about 1mm or just under 12th fret G), then I wouldn’t be buying a new one. This doesn’t just come under “quirky” like a lot of the other spec, especially given they’ve recently redesigned the bridge to supposedly improve on the one that people have been complaining about for decades. Nobody’s telling me that they couldn’t have guaranteed available super low action with 5 seconds more thought.

That got me curious. I measured the action on my new 4003. The E string is about 1.3 mm. The G string is about 1.1 mm.

That is with a flat neck (well, VERY little relief) and the E and G string saddles bottomed out.

[Korladis]

Dunno…

A Ric wouldn’t a Ric without these little quirks?

That’s one way of looking at it I suppose.

Speaking as someone who has super low action, having a bridge that doesn’t go low enough would stop me buying an instrument.Or would see it immediately returned if I didn’t already know about it.

It’s unforgivable in this day and age, just bad design.

In my opinion, pretty much everything in a 4001 and a 4003 is a bad design (on a functionality point of view).

I play these because they look so good AND they have a unique sound.

I love the sound of Rickenbackers but the main feature has always been the shape of the almost taper-less neck. Seems perfectly suited to my left hand. Compared to other basses it's so easy it almost feels like cheating. I can get the tones I want pretty close with my Explorer, and my modded Peavey and T-bird, but the neck just isn't the same on any other basses I've ever played.