Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

Prior to Monday July 8, 1996 when CNC went active at the RIC factory (JH), the body outlines were hand cut and routed from jigs. Look at the shape of the bodies and horns around the late 80s early 90s; the large horns are different and bigger. Just one example.

Is that what you mean? Because my bass' body looks just like this . . . only its jet glo. I also have no idea what CNC is.

CNC is a fantastic application for telling a computerized machine exactly how to shape some material, usually by cutting or dremmeling, etc. It proceeds very rapidly and precisely. I have seen it done on vintage reproduction furniture. It is so powerful that it is scary. Scarier than the Terminator.

But yeah I think it's fantastic, far better than hand made as long as the original design put into the computer came from good hands so to speak.

My personal opinion of 2009 4000-series Rics is that they are the best I have ever come across in terms of QC. While that doesn't mean I dislike my older instruments (they more than hold their own against my 2009), it does mean that I have noticed a serious increase in precision and QC that are really praiseworthy. People who were worried about getting a lemon before probably don't need to worry as much if it's a 2009 instrument. Now the only issues that should arise should come from personal preferences, which is great.

I brought my 2009 4003 to two of my auditions and everyone was just jaw-dropped. Not by the looks either! They all just kind of rolled their eyes that a Ricky player bothered to try out for a jazz combo or a hard metal band (I guess they expected me to join a RUSH tribute)... then I plugged the thing in and played and got no end of comments about the "piano tone" and what a great "monster" I had in my possession.

Miles, start here. viewtopic.php?t=387673

eh its not that important really. I dont have all that much time to burn through that entire thread. I've gone into a few times and such, but that would take me a week to get through in between recording and working.

As an experiment I decided to slap a set of rotosound roundwounds on my bass. I primarily use flats and the bridge pick up. I also play behind the cover with a pick, and tonally I'm generating the same warm tone as I was with the flats, but gaining a bit more attack. I'm more so also doing this as a comparison to the 2009 bass I played. However, my bridge pickup has more balls when the push/pull pot is in the down position.

Just read Ted's first two posts if you have time.

Here is my 2004 made with a machine router (CNC) process:


Here is my '91 made the old way:

As the fatter horns were pretty consistent through a long period of time my guess is that it was done to change the tone of the instrument, again this is only a guess.

well like i said before i was just curious to why there was a body re-shape. originally i thought it was to lighten the bass and save on materials

Nope, to go back to a more original shape.

with that in mind I'm going to go back and play that bass one more time. Everything's worth a second chance. Unless its a lobotomy . . . two of those would be an issue. . .

Among my '72, '86, and '98 4003's, I love the body shape of the '98 the best! Besides the obvious difference between the upper horns' widths, the body's back edge contours of the post-'96 basses are less angular, smoother and way sexier.

Miles, while you're at the store to re-check that '09, try caressing the back edges of the body and see if you like the wonders of the CNC machines.

Paul, I wouldn't know exactly what I'd be looking for as far as the back edges go, because the back of mine is pretty well rounded. Do you have a comparison picture so I can understand better?

Miles, I don't have a comparison pic, unfortunately. Will try to take some pics maybe in a couple of days.

Sorry for the wait, Miles. Finally got some time to take some pics of the '86 Shadow and the '98 Fireglo today. Notice how the transfer between the back and sides are more gradual and easier to the touch on the '98, making the body edges seem thinner, and than the '86. I have to say the look and feel of the post-'96 4003 bodies are my favorite!

Back of upper horn:



Near the jackplate:



Back of lower bout:



Back of upper bout:



Upper horns:


Lower horns:

oh wow thanks Paul! That is a pretty major difference there. I bet that its a little bit more comfortable if your bass sits at waist/chest level. Mine is a little lower than waist level. I do have to say though I like the horns of the 80s bass more. It just looks more fleshed out to me. What is the differences between both of your basses tonally?