4003S vs 4003

bob_atherton · Post by **bob_atherton** » Wed Feb 23, 2005 4:53 am

Wow.... Thanks Guys! You all seem to know a great deal about these basses. I know what you mean about the binding digging in. I just did a gig with 3 x 45 min sets and by the end it was really begining to hurt. I did bring my F***** Jazz as well but stuck with the Ric for the entire gig.....

As I was saying I've really bonded with the 4001.

I will try the 's' and see how it goes.

Thanks again, Bob

thx1955 · Post by **thx1955** » Wed Feb 23, 2005 5:05 am

Bob, try one of those toweling wrist bands. Works really well.

The S is easier on the forearm as the edge is rounded over.

incubus2432 · Post by **incubus2432** » Wed Feb 23, 2005 5:29 am

Bob....is it possible that you could lower the Ric some so you forearm isn't resting on the binding as much? I know it may be a little strange at first but may be worth a try. I don't even notice a difference switching between my bound/unbound Rics because my forearm doesn't rely on the edging as a resting point. Just a thought.....good luck !

atomic_punk · Post by **atomic_punk** » Wed Feb 23, 2005 5:43 am

I wear mine low as well, so this was never an issue for me. I like all of the toys! (Inlay, binding, bound neck, etc...)

wints · Post by **wints** » Wed Feb 23, 2005 5:55 am

I think a lot of the "S" appeal is still down to original influences such as Macca and Squire. RIC have been reissuing this model in V and now C form (and CS) for 20 years and selling every one.

The "S" is much easier to play imo, and without that squared off binding the arm sits real easy into the contour. I prefer the unbound neck too, but it's all a matter of personal taste.

The deluxe's simply look magnificent though, especially the pre 73's with all the old Ric mojo..

trick_knee · Post by **trick_knee** » Wed Feb 23, 2005 6:34 am

I had an AzureGlo "S" in the 80's...should never have traded it! I like the non-binding smooth body of my S/5.

rictified · Post by **rictified** » Wed Feb 23, 2005 7:40 am

I think I had a little problem with the binding when I bought my first one (in 77) I don't even notice it now. I do rest my forearm on it.

john_l · Post by **john_l** » Wed Feb 23, 2005 4:52 pm

I really like the look of the 4000 series with binding, but I sold all my basses with binding and now play a 4003s because the binding is just too uncomfortable.

jaybic · Post by **jaybic** » Wed Feb 23, 2005 4:57 pm

I seem to fall into the Jeff Rath camp. Maybe its the way I hold my bass, but I have never noticed the binding at all. Also on a different point - the only Rickenbacker bass I ever saw was a 4003 before I joined here. I didn't even know there were so many different models and varieties. Having said that, I still like the 4003 the best. Would love to get my hands on a 4004 for a comparison tho'

jwr2 · Post by **jwr2** » Wed Feb 23, 2005 5:13 pm

Here's a little trick ... take a small piece of sand paper and round the edge of the binding where your arm hits it ... this will make it more comfortable to play ...

The 4004 feels great ... it is so rounded and sleek and light ... but the 4003 sounds a little better overall ...

The 2000 series basses have a nice rounded body in the right places ...

rictified · Post by **rictified** » Wed Feb 23, 2005 5:23 pm

Here's a little trick ... take a small piece of sand paper and round the edge of the binding where your arm hits it ... this will make it more comfortable to play ...

It was also raise the value considerably.

dean712 · Post by **dean712** » Wed Feb 23, 2005 5:58 pm

I love the binding on both the body the neck of the 4003, and the sharktooth inlays as well.

I think all three features look beautiful. The body binding, in particular, helps set off the bass from your clothing and background, both in picturs and live. You might be playing a jetglo 4003 against a black shirt, but that white binding on the body is visible and looks great all the way to the back of the hall. Gives a difinitive 'this is a RIC bass!' look to all. The binding edge has never bothered me at all, probably because I like the bass hanging a bit lower, like Brian.

The shark inlays are beautiful to look at.

The neck binding I actually prefer for two reasons. First, it looks cool and helps outline the bass to some extent like the body binding. Second, while I don't usually look at the neck much while playing, it seems to me to be a little easier under dim/flashing stage lighting to catch that white strip of binding with black position dots just a little quicker and surer than an unbound neck. Just my opinion.... I'm talking about a fraction of a second difference (perhaps) while singing a line and shooting a glance at the neck. I also love the smooth feel of the neck/fret interface; if the binding on the 4003 helps this, that is another plus.

I'm glad RIC has offered both models. I prefer the deluxe 4003 with all the features (like Steve said), but the 4003S is pretty cool too.

henny · Post by **henny** » Wed Feb 23, 2005 11:20 pm

"The 4004 feels great ... it is so rounded and sleek and light ... but the 4003 sounds a little better overall ... "

Strongly disagree. You can't say one simply sounds better than the other.

As somebody said, they're completely different animals.

Ever plucked a Cii and listened to that amazing sustain with harmonic ring, caused by that Walnut sandwich? Amazing. Entirely unique to the 4004Cii.

teeder · Post by **teeder** » Thu Feb 24, 2005 2:05 am

I like the looks of both. That's why I'll add a 4001V68 to my small collection when it comes out! But that said, the unbound necks feel much better in my hands. The binding on the bodies doesn't seem to bother me with how I plant my hand and thumb. My arm does seem to touch the edge.

henry5 · Post by **henry5** » Thu Feb 24, 2005 7:54 am

I rest my arm on the body edge and the binding has never bothered me, but then my first bass was a 4001 so I never really knew anything else. The unbound models are marginally comfier, but I'm happy with either and probably prefer the look of the deluxe appointments (although it varies from bass to bass).