Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

Something else that struck me is that the 5-string set is not being phased out; to me this means RIC is continuing to support the last batch of 4003S/5s, and/or there could be plans for another 5er.

johnhall wrote:

coolingitdown wrote:

No flats for the moment, but the balanced strings are hex core and are especially accurate with regard to equal tension across all strings. Quite frankly, this set is being offered more for non-Rickenbacker basses and is an entry into the "mainstream" string market.

That sounds great - looking forward to trying a set. Are they still appropriate for Ric basses or would you still recommend the 95511s over the new 95512s? Can you provide the guages for the new balanced strings?

Thanks!

cassius987 wrote:Something else that struck me is that the 5-string set is not being phased out; to me this means RIC is continuing to support the last batch of 4003S/5s, and/or there could be plans for another 5er.

Oops. Corrected!

SMR 78 wrote:That sounds great - looking forward to trying a set. Are they still appropriate for Ric basses or would you still recommend the 95511s over the new 95512s? Can you provide the guages for the new balanced strings?

Thanks!

I'll let you know how they work after I've had a chance to try them personally. Frankly, it was the Japanese that requested this exact set, so haven't had a chance to try 'em yet.

Gauges are 45-65-80-100. The website is supposed to be showing this but there's a problem where the description is being shortened as coming from the SQL server; we're working on that right now.

johnhall wrote:Gauges are 45-65-80-100.

I'll be trying these. Those are the gauges I'm used to from playing D'Addario XL-170 sets for about 30 years.

johnhall wrote:

cassius987 wrote:Something else that struck me is that the 5-string set is not being phased out; to me this means RIC is continuing to support the last batch of 4003S/5s, and/or there could be plans for another 5er.

Oops. Corrected!

That answers that question.

45-65-80-100 doesn't sound very balanced to me but it could just as likely be that these strings have been constructed a little more progressively, getting around the conventional 4/3 gauging rule that works for most standard strings. For instance if these are the kind of strings where only 1-2 wraps are used even on the largest strings then the core would make up more of the mass and tighten up the E and A strings where normally a .100'' E won't balance perfectly with a .045'' G.

I've just been informed the "balanced" bit is referring to volume, rather than tension. It's only the second mistake I've made this year!

Would these sets be advisable for a vintage (1971) bass, being that they were designed for flats only.

glking14 wrote:Would these sets be advisable for a vintage (1971) bass, being that they were designed for flats only.

Really the distinction ought to be the tension they were designed to handle. In 1971 the choice was basically low tension flats versus high tension Rotosounds. Nowadays rounds can be as low tension as vintage flats or lower and many flats are high tension. The wrap is not what matters in keeping a vintage 4001 neck happy, it's the tension of the overall string.

The 4 String Balanced Standard 096 set by Circle K averages 34 lbs tension per string which is quite low. Just an example of low tension rounds.

glking14 wrote:Would these sets be advisable for a vintage (1971) bass, being that they were designed for flats only.

Every time I see/hear this statement made by people whether on forums or in person, it really makes me cringe. The 4001s were designed for a particular set of low tension flat wound strings. Roundwounds are not necessarily higher in tension than flatwounds, in fact it usually just the opposite. Flatwounds usually have more tension than round wound strings of the same gauge. The old Rick bass set made by Maxima was an exception, as is the ThomastikInfeld JF-344 set as they are both low tension. The overall construction will make up how much tension a string has, not whether it is flatwound or roundwound.
So if you're thinking about putting just about any ol' set of flatwound strings on your 4001, besides the TI-344 set, you'll have much more chance of having a problem with the neck than the sets that RIC is selling.

johnhall wrote:I've just been informed the "balanced" bit is referring to volume, rather than tension. It's only the second mistake I've made this year!

Hey, the year is still young! Opportunity abounds!

Sorry Joey if I made you cringe,I was always told to use flats,I was not aware they had to be a particular brand. So I will put it another way,would any of the four bass strings sets offered on the ric website be advisable to use. Please don't cringe this time. Ha ha

glking14 wrote:Sorry Joey if I made you cringe,I was always told to use flats,I was not aware they had to be a particular brand. So I will put it another way,would any of the four bass strings sets offered on the ric website be advisable to use. Please don't cringe this time. Ha ha

Graham, it's funny, because it was I was having dinner with a few forumite friends this past Sunday night and one of them (he's a guitarist) says to me, "So I hear you can't put roundwounds on a 4001". AAUUUGGGHHHH!!!

What kind/brand of strings are currently on your 4001. That info might help us be able to tell you if the neck on your 4001 can handle the RIC sets.