Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

A well written post, Bob. Many good points.

Well said Bob. In our world of ever-present G.A.S., I have always lived by the credo, 'Buy want you want, but buy CONDITION.'

I think alot of our wants and needs are media-driven, certainly a trait of the last half of the 20th century. Alot of the music-related aspects of our culture exist hand-in-hand with the knowledge and information that's out there for us to draw upon.

You're right in that we ARE riding a wave that's taking us in a new direction...where, who knows?

I believe that 4000 above was once owned by Mike Gutierrez then sold to another forum member who then resold it. Apparently those old 4000s don't play worth a damn. I have never had the pleasure but those who have say that gen 1 4000s have rather high action and are otherwise not very comfortible to play.

Bob, good post. Informative, and with relative insight.

Yes, if you are collecting, one always should be buying the best you can find and afford.

I think those old 50's 4000 basses look cool, but they don't really get it done for me personally.

However, if you were going to buy one, that one owner baby was the bass to have...

'63 4001 from the Rittor book...

The inlays look different from mine.



Mine are milky white. They look like a mixture of resin and white shellac or maybe white paint.

The headstock has developed a bit of a forward lean over the years. I suspect the extra hole in the TRC was for a string tree to keep the A string in the nut. The screws at the base of the TRC are fake as there are no screw holes in the wood to accept them.

Interesting how the TRC ends almost at the top of the headstock on the one in the Rittor book, kimd of like the later V63s.

Jeff ,thats because that headstock in the rittor book is shorter but fatter like a 50s its definitely an early one probably before 63 its got a 50s style neck and all too.

Now we have a pretty good idea what the first 4001's looked like.Thanks JWilli

Yes the neck shape and tuners are from the earlier design model 4000 days. The inlay material has more in common with 1961-62 production than it does with 1963 production. Although I can't explain why Ted's bass has only screw heads on the lower TRC rather than an entire screw, all of the basses I have observed from this period have the extra screw near the A-string, in that location. I've never seen a Rickenbacker bass(not even in trade show pics) with a string tree unless it was added after the fact, i.e. Squire's bass. This is a very early 4001 in the Rittor book for sure.

I've seen a couple of 63 TRC's with the extra screw too.

Up early this morning John!

Yeah, I can't rush around in the morning...I need my TIME! LOL I see it's gonna be 72F today down your way. It's 13F here. Cut the fans on and point them north, Andy!

A couple of other things: The bass in the Rittor book has no overspray at all in the cavity routs that we can see, and the control cavity was cut with a Forstner bit. It could be possible that the bass was routed after the fact to accomdate the 2nd pickup. Hmm...

Mine was cut with a forstner bit as well but has overspray. In fact, one of the pickguard screws has no wood under it because of the sloppiness of the forstner cutting. I am considering gluing a small block of maple inside the control cavity so the screw will have something to hold it in place.