Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

On my 4004Cii, the main section on the necks are one piece, but in the body area it is three pieces matching the body's three laminations, that is, it is Maple, Maple, Maple, from front to back. Of course, the headstock is a three piece Maple laminate with the wings.

A 3-piece neck means that the strips that run the full lenth of the neck are 3 separate pieces. The center strip has the grain turned 90 degrees to provide extra strength against the bowing effects of string tension. My Euro Spector is made this way, with extra graphite reinforcements as well. The extra wings on the headstock do not count, and neither do extra layers in the body area that increase the thickness there. A single piece neck is much more likely to warp in use. The extra rigidity of the Spector is very obvious when trying to bow the neck. Even a $600 Schecter Stiletto Elite has a true multi-piece maple/walnut sandwich neck-thru design, but no graphite. My OLP Chinese basses have single piece necks, and so did my old P-bass (which eventually s-curved), but I don't expect to see it on a premium priced bass when even a $500 Spector Professional Series bolt-on bass has a true 3-piece neck. I'll take a multi-piece neck over dual truss rods any day!

And yet Sadowsky and Tobias have apparently returned to making one piece flatsawn necks. Go figure.

Dave, I have read too many reviews lately where players rated their "status brands" like Sadowsky, Tobias, Lakland, et al, as "nothing special". Mike Tobias no longer owns Tobias, he owns MTD. The Tobias brand is obviously being milked based on past glories. Flatsawn necks are much cheaper, so some USA manufacturers are cutting back on quality to compete against Korean, Chinese, and eastern European labor. The rep at Spector told me that if they get a flatsawn Asian neck with any figure whatsoever in the wood, they reject it automatically. He said any figure whatsoever in the wood was a warranty problem waiting to happen as the wood cured out. Multi-piece necks have lower warranty claims, but much higher production costs. I would say that flatsawn necks have a different sonic signature, based on their easier flexing nature. They might be better for light strings or a particular tone. Some players talk of the "sterility" of graphite reinforced necks, but I prefer to think of them as "tight and balanced" across the spectrum.

The bottom line for flatsawn is mainly cost reduction and profits. Spector only uses it in their cheapest Chinese basses (and there are pros like Collin Raye that actually pick this series over the others! Go figure.). In truth, most flatsawn necks from good wood will do OK if they are not abused. Many a vintage P-bass is still going strong with a flatsawn neck. Buy a multi-piece reinforced neck if you plan on being abusive, or you like tight and balanced tone over "lots of character". To each his own. My 4004L is now for sale for anybody preferring the flatsawn tone. I owned 4 flatsawn necked basses in a row until the ReBop showed up, and it sure do get a lot of Bop from something. It has Bopped before and it will Bop again and again, so it must really be a ReBop. The previous owner was not so impressed, so I got a terrific deal. There's no accounting for taste.

Philip, sorry for the confusion, I was referring to Mike Tobias and MTD, not the Gibson-owned Tobias brand. Roger Sadowsky and other small-production high-end makers are choosing one-piece flatsawn necks for their tonal and structural qualities, not for lower cost -- and it certainly isn't necessarily lower in cost, that depends on the quality of the wood selected. There are certainly many cheap multi-laminate musical instruments, it's often an excuse to use lower quality woods.

My point was that there are respected instrument makers who disagree with Stuart Spector and his philosophy. Likewise I know of custom builders who would never use carbon graphite rods and others who always use them. There is no universal answer.

FWIW, if you turn flatsawn wood on end and laminate it, it's still flatsawn.

All this hyper interest in high end basses, Ricks vs. Whatever, just makes us miss the big issues all the more.

WAKE UP, BASSISTS!!! The real news is in amplification, not basses. Phil Jones has designed a rear loaded horn cabinet that combines the best features of direct radiator and horn speaker design. It's a direct radiator at high frequencies, and acoustically crosses over to the folded horn cab at lower frequencies. No electrical crossover is involved, and there is no separate tweeter for the highs since all those little 5" drivers are full range. It is far more efficient than an SVT cab. Horn bass is the truest and most percussive of all speaker technologies. The Tannoy Westminster Royal speakers proved that, and eliminated all the negatives that multi-driver units like Klipschorns had that were responsible for giving a bad name to horn speakers. You can always add dirt, but you can't take it out. The great basses being produced now demand "hi-fi" cabs if you want the true tone. No use deciding if you like a high end bass if you never heard IT in all its glory, instead of your dirty cab.

Once you get a bass YOU are comfortable with, your amp becomes the most important component in your sound. If you want the bass to be faithfully reproduced, then something different than what most bassists are now using is in order. Those who like the sound of dirt can disregard my entire little rant here. I just happened to discover that the sound of a clean bass amp was a revelation of sorts. I prefer to add dirt as needed, instead of always having it present in huge amounts. The bass is like a rifle, and the amp is like ammunition. Every hunter knows that you pick the right ammo round for your intended game, but the brand of rifle they shoot it through makes almost no difference in the effectiveness of the ammo round, although they have PERSONAL PREFERENCE as to which rifle they are more comfortable with. Many bassists could stand to pay more attention to their "ammo" than their "rifle".