Posted: Wed Jun 22, 2005 2:14 am
If Chris gets shot, I get the 4005s!
Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum
Rickenbacker Forum, Amplifier, Bass and Guitar Register
https://www.rickresource.com/forum/
4005 embarrassment
Page 2 of 3
Posted: Wed Jun 22, 2005 2:16 am
Jeffrey,I think there is a 12 step program that may help you with your 4005 addiction!
Posted: Wed Jun 22, 2005 2:22 am
Drool on this!
Posted: Wed Jun 22, 2005 2:31 am
That's just wrong! On so many levels!
Posted: Wed Jun 22, 2005 2:49 am
One man's wrong is another man's right. Or is it left? 
Very nice 4005 collections...
Very nice 4005 collections...
Posted: Wed Jun 22, 2005 3:07 am
Actually, I took my '66 into the local music store and just tried a whole bunch of different strings. I found 2 different sets that fit into the e slot fairly easily. One was a set of Rotosounds and unfortunately I forget what the other one was. Since strings are all wound in different ways with different diameters Ill bet you can find a set that fits without making the slot wider.
Posted: Wed Jun 22, 2005 3:26 am
Chris: Which Model 4005 do you prefer to play and why?
Posted: Wed Jun 22, 2005 9:11 am
Chris;
Is the binding missing from your WB's sound hole? Is that the way it came?
Is the binding missing from your WB's sound hole? Is that the way it came?
Posted: Wed Jun 22, 2005 10:54 am
Yes, that is the way they were/are. It seems the standard 4005 with the checker binding on the back gets the soundhole binding and the double bound ones do not. Perhaps there is a quota on how much binding can go on one! 
Posted: Wed Jun 22, 2005 3:40 pm
Peter -
I REALLY like playing the standard one, with the setup that Jeff Scott put on it....it plays just awesome...nice low action with NO buzzing....
I have Pyramid flats on it , 45-105's
The WB has Fender rounds on it...I like 'em both, but the WB needs a few more little adjustments to be a NICE player like the standard....
Love the sound of both....
Yep, Dave...It took me a while to realize about the sound hole....while looking at Jeff's, I originally thought something was wrong with it, not being bound....lol
I REALLY like playing the standard one, with the setup that Jeff Scott put on it....it plays just awesome...nice low action with NO buzzing....
I have Pyramid flats on it , 45-105's
The WB has Fender rounds on it...I like 'em both, but the WB needs a few more little adjustments to be a NICE player like the standard....
Love the sound of both....
Yep, Dave...It took me a while to realize about the sound hole....while looking at Jeff's, I originally thought something was wrong with it, not being bound....lol
Posted: Thu Jun 23, 2005 11:11 am
Here's the 4005
Posted: Thu Jun 23, 2005 3:02 pm
Sweeeet!!
Have any other pics of it to share?
Have any other pics of it to share?
Posted: Thu Jun 23, 2005 9:39 pm
Dave let me guess the line up[67,4005][68,69,4001][72,4001][86,shadow][80s 4003].The 68,69 throws me off cause it has large headstock but looks like grover tuners thats why i said 69.the 72 could also be an early 73.
Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2005 5:54 am
VERY close Ken
67 4005FG 68 4001JG 72 4001JG
86 SD bass 74 4001BG (grovers)
67 4005FG 68 4001JG 72 4001JG
86 SD bass 74 4001BG (grovers)
Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2005 7:00 am
Classics, all. So of the 50 or 60 Shadows ever made, we have, what, 200 or so in this group?
;^)
;^)