Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

Haven't seen you around here in a while, Bob!

Can you make it to MARF III? It would be great to finally get to meet you.

rickenbrother wrote:RIC now puts the side dots markers where the 3rd, 5th, 7th, 9th, 12th, etc frets would have been .

There's dots on the side?...

jps wrote:Haven't seen you around here in a while, Bob!

Can you make it to MARF III? It would be great to finally get to meet you.

Hey Jeffrey, what's up! yes, it's been a while. I was going to attend until I saw the rules, NO SVT's!!?? Come on now that's like cutting my right arm off! Actually though I could sneak one in in my cord case. No actually I would love to but have a gig on Nov 15th that I can't really get out of and damn this one is actually fairly close to me. I'll read the thread again and see how many days it is on, possibly I could drive up for one day Sunday if it's still on. Well I just did and saw that's it's a one day affair. I'll make it one of these days.

jnbass wrote:

rickenbrother wrote:RIC now puts the side dots markers where the 3rd, 5th, 7th, 9th, 12th, etc frets would have been .

There's dots on the side?...

I'll tell you what I could play the Blue boy better when I managed to ignore them.

I already have a Toaster in the neck position, and am trying to acquire one to add in the bridge position too. I know JPS has done this. Can anyone else comment that they have, to their enjoyment?

Hey Bob! Nice to see you again!

I concur with Bob's feeling about the side dot arrangement issue. I love the fact that my December '72 MG fretless, which is actually just a couple of serial numbers from Bob's JG fretless, has side dots on every fret position. They provide good visual aid for getting perfect intonation.

paul_yan wrote:Hey Bob! Nice to see you again!

I concur with Bob's feeling about the side dot arrangement issue. I love the fact that my December '72 MG fretless, which is actually just a couple of serial numbers from Bob's JG fretless, has side dots on every fret position. They provide good visual aid for getting perfect intonation.

Yes, great to see you back Paul, I actually like the Fender arrangement better 3rd, 5th, 7th etc. but ON the note not in between like they had been making them for several years. I was flabbergasted when my blue Boy arrived. I guess now they are using the Fender style. The old Ric way was great until you got close to the octave and up, it is easy to slide up one note too high and hit a perfectly intonated clam! I'm waiting to here confirmation from Mike Parks, may pick up a new 4003FL which really sound great if they have really fixed the dot situation. I'm down to two 4001's, I need another 4003.

They HAVE fixed the dot situation. Mine has the dots "on the note" as you say.

I wonder why RIC builds the fretless models use dots instead of triangles? Is it merely a cosmetic distinction, or does the presence of more wood on the fretboard due to the smaller dot markers enhance the classic fretless tone? Just curious, not trying to encourage a huge thread drift or anything.

Hmm, in order to speed production times and cut down on the backlog, why doesn't RIC produce only fretless models-cutting, installing, and dressing frets must take up a huge chunk of time...(-I'M JOKING, of course)

paologregorio wrote:I wonder why RIC builds the fretless models use dots instead of triangles? Is it merely a cosmetic distinction, or does the presence of more wood on the fretboard due to the smaller dot markers enhance the classic fretless tone?

Just speculating, but maybe with within time after depressing the strings right on the larger triangle position markers they could possibly loosen or wear easily?

The dots on the FL fingerboard are fine with me. If RIC went to no dots at all on the FL fngerboard, I that would look cool also.

Actually I think it's because the bigger inlays would hide the beauty of the unfretted wood. The bubinga is very figured and striking.

I would really approve of a no-inlay fingerboard.

cassius987 wrote:Actually I think it's because the bigger inlays would hide the beauty of the unfretted wood. The bubinga is very figured and striking.

True, Joshua. That's also cool about the 4004 and "S" basses.

Ah, interesting. Thanks for the 411. Good point. I'd love to have a fretless Rick...bass. I already have at least one "fretless wonder" of a Rick guitar-at least for the moment.

It's probably because the triangular inlays would shrink or expand over time. I think they started out using "S" necks and just kept it that way. Cheaper to use a neck they already had than to make a new bare wood neck which would be cool. The strings don't touch the dots anywhere and with triangular inlays they would and any change over the years would cause unevenness in the playing surface.

rictified wrote:It's probably because the triangular inlays would shrink or expand over time. I think they started out using "S" necks and just kept it that way. Cheaper to use a neck they already had than to make a new bare wood neck which would be cool. The strings don't touch the dots anywhere and with triangular inlays they would and any change over the years would cause unevenness in the playing surface.

+1. (I thought I read this somewhere before but didnt have the time to find where.) As an also fretless player I can say that very subtle height differences allready can cause mayor discomfort in playing.