Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

rickaddict wrote:IMO the larger surround of the C64 and V63 look strange w/o the shoes. Too much chrome to do nothing but surround a gaping hole and a black piece of plastic. But to each his own.

If you can't play it what good is it, even if it doesn't look the greatest? Also, I always thought that that was THE place to pick a RIC. Hey, we need a more historically accurate model, a REAL McCartney reissue 4001-C70, you know, one that actually does not have the horseshoe puckup. LOL!

DavyR wrote:

rickaddict wrote:IMO the larger surround of the C64 and V63 look strange w/o the shoes. Too much chrome to do nothing but surround a gaping hole and a black piece of plastic. But to each his own.

If you can't play it what good is it, even if it doesn't look the greatest? Also, I always thought that that was THE place to pick a RIC. Hey, we need a more historically accurate model, a REAL McCartney reissue 4001-C70, you know, one that actually does not have the horseshoe puckup. LOL!

Well, actually, I thought Paul's 4001 has a RIHS on it now.

rickaddict wrote:Here's what removing your shoes would look like on a C64S (slightly modified with a non-scooped 70's surround):

http://rickresource.com/register/user_i ... llsize.jpg

Oh the nakedness!!!

johnallg wrote:

rickaddict wrote:Here's what removing your shoes would look like on a C64S (slightly modified with a non-scooped 70's surround):

http://rickresource.com/register/user_i ... llsize.jpg

Oh the nakedness!!!

Ha ha! I like it, anyway! I think I'd like it even more with an old 70's/80's button-top in there, but for now the naked horseshoe stays 'cuz there's nothing "wrong" with it's tone. Maybe when I find the time I'll swap 'em out and see how I like it.

johnallg wrote: Well, actually, I thought Paul's 4001 has a RIHS on it now.

It does...But it didn't when he liked to play it!

DavyR wrote:

rickaddict wrote:IMO the larger surround of the C64 and V63 look strange w/o the shoes. Too much chrome to do nothing but surround a gaping hole and a black piece of plastic. But to each his own.

If you can't play it what good is it, even if it doesn't look the greatest? Also, I always thought that that was THE place to pick a RIC. Hey, we need a more historically accurate model, a REAL McCartney reissue 4001-C70, you know, one that actually does not have the horseshoe puckup. LOL!

I am so in agreement with you, Davy! I'm just sayin'...between the sharp edges of the scooped surround slicing up my fingers, the gaping hole, and the giant chrome ring that serves no purpose...I prefer this look (only without the scoop, if it's not needed):

http://rickresource.com/register/user_i ... llsize.jpg

rickaddict wrote:

DavyR wrote:

rickaddict wrote:IMO the larger surround of the C64 and V63 look strange w/o the shoes. Too much chrome to do nothing but surround a gaping hole and a black piece of plastic. But to each his own.

If you can't play it what good is it, even if it doesn't look the greatest? Also, I always thought that that was THE place to pick a RIC. Hey, we need a more historically accurate model, a REAL McCartney reissue 4001-C70, you know, one that actually does not have the horseshoe puckup. LOL!

I am so in agreement with you, Davy! I'm just sayin'...between the sharp edges of the scooped surround slicing up my fingers, the gaping hole, and the giant chrome ring that serves no purpose...I prefer this look (only without the scoop, if it's not needed):

http://rickresource.com/register/user_i ... llsize.jpg

See, I prefer the cover/'shoes precisely because they cover up that gaping hole and keep my fingers away from sharp edges, but I also need all the style points I can get on stage.

I find it very hard to play a horseshoe equipped bass or any other Ric bass with the bridge pickup cover on. For me, that area of strings is the "sweet spot" for my playing style - the string tension feels best there and I feel like get the best tone from that spot. This is why I also prefer finding and installing the bridge pickup mounting bracket without the scoop from the 70's on my 4003's - its much more comfortable when anchoring your thumb against the bridge pickup.

Enlighten me. So, the horseshoe pickup "C" piece(s) are not a functioning part of the reissue 4001 and are only for show and are really not magnetic. Therefore, they can be removed (as stated above) without really affecting the sound of the bridge pickup. Also, McCartney had the horseshoe pickup re-installed on his old 4001 after removing it circa 1970. Thanks.

DavyR wrote:Enlighten me. So, the horseshoe pickup "C" piece(s) are not a functioning part of the reissue 4001 and are only for show and are really not magnetic. Therefore, they can be removed (as stated above) without really affecting the sound of the bridge pickup. Also, McCartney had the horseshoe pickup re-installed on his old 4001 after removing it circa 1970. Thanks.

Right you are sir. And about Macca's bass...it didn't have the original HS re-installed, it had a new re-issue HS installed.

86kubicki wrote:I find it very hard to play a horseshoe equipped bass or any other Ric bass with the bridge pickup cover on. For me, that area of strings is the "sweet spot" for my playing style - the string tension feels best there and I feel like get the best tone from that spot. This is why I also prefer finding and installing the bridge pickup mounting bracket without the scoop from the 70's on my 4003's - its much more comfortable when anchoring your thumb against the bridge pickup.

Great minds think alike, Steve!!



http://rickresource.com/register/user_i ... llsize.jpg

http://rickresource.com/register/user_i ... llsize.jpg

http://rickresource.com/register/user_i ... llsize.jpg

http://rickresource.com/register/user_i ... llsize.jpg

All of these basses originally had a scooped surround!

if it's true mc cartney had the horsey put back in, i'm surprised he would still have it ...unless he had one made up or bought a vintage one thru sources. but why put in a re-issue horsey ? unless he had problems with the understring unit. i love the sound he had on "silly love songs" !

Not sure why he changed back to a RIHS, but I'm pretty sure he would have no inkling that there are differences between the old magnet shoe pickups and the new pole magnet horseshoe pickups.

johnallg wrote:Not sure why he changed back to a RIHS, but I'm pretty sure he would have no inkling that there are differences between the old magnet shoe pickups and the new pole magnet horseshoe pickups.

Yep, they're both shiny!

BAD RONBO, KiLLeR DWaRfS wrote:if it's true mc cartney had the horsey put back in, i'm surprised he would still have it ...unless he had one made up or bought a vintage one thru sources. but why put in a re-issue horsey ? unless he had problems with the understring unit. i love the sound he had on "silly love songs" !

There's a good photo of the latest version of the Macca bass floating around the forum somewhere. I used to have it here on my work computer before it had a meltdown and was replaced. It is definitely a RI. And I agree...why replace the hi gain pickup? I also thought he had great tone with the hi gain. I suggested once on this forum that Macca's tone with the hi gain was just as good as the earlier tone with the HS, and apparently I offended Mr. Gallo as he is a tremendous fan of the original HS pickup.