Page 2 of 5
Posted: Tue Oct 11, 2005 10:48 am
by loendmaestro
I didn't say I didn't see it....
It just seems kinda minor to me, sorry.
I've never been known for my harmonics though.
Have a drink boys, lighten up!
Posted: Tue Oct 11, 2005 11:00 am
by ilan
I don't like the hump either. If I buy a new Ric (thinking about the Blueboy at POTR... don't tell my wife), first thing I'll do is change the pickguard.
Posted: Tue Oct 11, 2005 11:38 am
by jwr2
get a 4004 ... they don't have a pickguard ...
Posted: Tue Oct 11, 2005 11:54 am
by aceonbass
As Igor said to Dr.frankenstein.."What hump"?
Posted: Tue Oct 11, 2005 3:59 pm
by jaybic
I'm still having trouble seeing the difference. I guess I'm just A.B. Normal
Posted: Tue Oct 11, 2005 5:19 pm
by throw_this_away
looks terrible to me... blah! The more I look the more it bothers me.
Such a perfect design otherwise. When did that pickguard design stop? It is no longer on current models.
Posted: Tue Oct 11, 2005 7:10 pm
by johnashfield
I have had an issue with the pickguard on the basses since they changed the design in the early 70's.
It just looks weird to me that the pickguard stops an inch or so before the treble pickup surround. The v and c series look more balanced to me because the design makes more sense. Stopping short of the surround just looks wrong somehow.
The newer 4003 was a huge improvment to my eyes because of the return to a larger headstock, though it's still stubbier than the ones on the early v63's or the c's...
In any event, it's easy to get a new pickguard that looks better.
Posted: Tue Oct 11, 2005 7:41 pm
by ken_swearingen
Here I said something about the lettering on the trc of the c64 which is clearly funky and I was thought of as picky JEEZ
Now see what the did?thats why it looks cheesy.
Posted: Tue Oct 11, 2005 7:48 pm
by jwr2
I always thought the big pickguards from the 60s looked funny ... I like the 4003 pickguard with the 1" spacing ... and I never liked the fatter body wings and I never liked the 70's and 80's short headstocks ... and I really dislike grover tuners ... but I love the walnut stripe ... and I love walnut headwings ... and I love triangle inlays ... but I don't like the early 80s 2 piece pickguards ... and I love checkered binding ...
Posted: Tue Oct 11, 2005 9:36 pm
by aceonbass
I always thought the upside down headstock was cool but that the upside down TRC looked wierd. I can see whay they do the upside down TRC on a C64(because of Paul's bass) but why they did it that way in the first place evades me.
Posted: Tue Oct 11, 2005 9:51 pm
by ken_swearingen
What they did is just mirrored a left hand trc,but on a righty the[lettering] curve is on the wrong end of the trc,it looks goofy.See how the c64 trc[lettering] curves at the bottom,but on Paul's its normal it curves along with the trc.
The factory should have paid more attention to detail here.
They could easily correct it.
Posted: Tue Oct 11, 2005 10:02 pm
by bobcat
Wait, I still don't see this "hump" you're talking about. Can someone send a larger picture with it circled maybe?
Posted: Tue Oct 11, 2005 10:32 pm
by ken_swearingen
I do see what you guys are talking about with the hump.
Heres a new way of looking at this,I would rather have the backward writing at least its straight
Posted: Tue Oct 11, 2005 11:00 pm
by bob_atherton
This should show the humps
Posted: Wed Oct 12, 2005 1:23 am
by lucky
I wonder why these changes happened,since looking at this thread i have been checking my '92 4003 does anyone know when these changes started.