Scale ?

Vintage, Modern, V & C series, Fretless, Signature & Special Editions

Moderators: rickenbrother, ajish4

westtexasrickenbacker
Member
Posts: 217
Joined: Fri Jun 16, 2006 8:46 am

Post by westtexasrickenbacker »

Hey Boys,

Good lesson on neck scale. I didn't know all that stuff. Thanks!
rickfan60
Senior Member
Posts: 5395
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2004 5:00 am

Post by rickfan60 »

Yes, that is considered to be the most accurate measure of scale.
User avatar
hieronymous
Intermediate Member
Posts: 837
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2005 10:46 pm
Contact:

Post by hieronymous »

Just in case, I have to throw this in: the space between where the ball end of the string fits and the saddles is significant on the 4000 series. I remember someone posting within the past year who tried medium-scale strings on his 4003. Even if the 4000 series isn't quite 34", long-scale strings are the proper ones.

However, I believe that this is off-topic from the original post.
rictified
Senior Member
Posts: 8040
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2003 5:00 am

Post by rictified »

Some Ric advertising called it 33 1/2" other calls it 33 1/4". I measured most of my basses scales and they are closer to 33 1/2"
rickfan60
Senior Member
Posts: 5395
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2004 5:00 am

Post by rickfan60 »

Both measurements have been used in product specs but 33.25 is pretty accurate if you measure from the fingerboard side of the nut to the center of the 12th fret and double the result.
User avatar
soundmasterg
RRF Consultant
Posts: 1923
Joined: Tue Oct 01, 2002 1:06 pm

Post by soundmasterg »

I've always thought it was 33 1/2 myself, and given that a lot of vintage RICS don't intonate correctly with the stock bridge location, I'd guess that either the bridge was just put in the wrong spot, or that it really is 33 1/2.
Post Reply

Return to “Rickenbacker Basses: by Joey Vasco & Tony Cabibe”