Page 2 of 4

Re: 4005 EVER A ROMO ???

Posted: Sat Oct 29, 2011 5:18 am
by berth
I was not sure if I should have added them as 4005 with special "romo" or as 3261 as I did now.

Re: 4005 EVER A ROMO ???

Posted: Sat Oct 29, 2011 5:43 am
by paologregorio
wints wrote:For us old timers who know there's more to this site that just the forum, here's more on The Fad bass... :lol:

http://www.rickresource.com/rrp/4005fhole.html
I saws the Fad, and the bass, in action a few times back in the 80s. I still know some of the go go dancers. :)

Re: 4005 EVER A ROMO ???

Posted: Sat Oct 29, 2011 4:01 pm
by doctorwho
berth wrote:I was not sure if I should have added them as 4005 with special "romo" or as 3261 as I did now.
I had Peter/Gil add a 3261 designation being that these are distinct from the 'standard' 4005. :)

Re: 4005 EVER A ROMO ???

Posted: Sun Oct 30, 2011 1:20 am
by BAD RONBO, KiLLeR DWaRfS
did all 3261 basses have the f-hole ? who the H came up with these strange number designations ??? :? especially as the other designations are in sequential order !

Re: 4005 EVER A ROMO ???

Posted: Sun Oct 30, 2011 3:00 am
by collin
BAD RONBO, KiLLeR DWaRfS wrote:did all 3261 basses have the f-hole ? who the H came up with these strange number designations ??? :? especially as the other designations are in sequential order !

Rose Morris came up with the numbers.

They are, quite simply, catalog item numbers from their store. For example, you could have bought a Hofner bass and it would have had it's own 4-digit "Rose Morris" number (ie...1234 or whatever).

All the other RIC models were granted their Rose Morris catalog model in 1964, while the 3261 came years later (1967?) with a much higher number.

I doubt that the person who designated these numbers has any clue how they've become "the gospel," at least to Rickenbacker fans. They'd probably be amused that we even still care after all these years.

Re: 4005 EVER A ROMO ???

Posted: Sun Oct 30, 2011 11:01 am
by BAD RONBO, KiLLeR DWaRfS
and the f-hole question ?

Re: 4005 EVER A ROMO ???

Posted: Sun Oct 30, 2011 12:08 pm
by collin
BAD RONBO, KiLLeR DWaRfS wrote:and the f-hole question ?

I'm sure, yes.

I don't think we would have any other clue it's a 3261 if it didn't have the f-hole. It'd just be a 4005, eh?

Re: 4005 EVER A ROMO ???

Posted: Sun Oct 30, 2011 12:14 pm
by bassduke49
Likely, Rose-Morris ordered the 4005 with F holes, but that's no guarantee that slash-hole 4005 models never got to them. Likewise, no way to know if F-hole 4005s were ever sold here in the U.S. The only absolute is that there are no absolutes.

Re: 4005 EVER A ROMO ???

Posted: Sun Oct 30, 2011 10:04 pm
by BAD RONBO, KiLLeR DWaRfS
or...the only absolutes are those secret production and sales files,in the secret cabinet in the secret building that mr. hall has somewhere ! :wink:

Re: 4005 EVER A ROMO ???

Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2011 5:56 am
by T.A.R.
BAD RONBO, KiLLeR DWaRfS wrote:or...the only absolutes are those secret production and sales files,in the secret cabinet in the secret building that mr. hall has somewhere ! :wink:
:lol: :wink:

Re: 4005 EVER A ROMO ???

Posted: Tue Nov 01, 2011 3:56 pm
by opticnerve
Here's one that'll stir the pot a little. A slash soundhole '67 4005...with a Rose Morris style badged case...??? :o

Re: 4005 EVER A ROMO ???

Posted: Tue Nov 01, 2011 9:47 pm
by Ivan3000
I like the 360S someone has here, I can't recall his name though...

Re: 4005 EVER A ROMO ???

Posted: Wed Nov 02, 2011 1:16 am
by kiramdear
Cute little pooch in matching finish color. :lol:

Re: 4005 EVER A ROMO ???

Posted: Wed Nov 02, 2011 8:09 am
by Ivan3000
Archieglo Right?

Re: 4005 EVER A ROMO ???

Posted: Wed Nov 02, 2011 9:05 am
by opticnerve
Ha ha...that's right Ivan, Archieglo!

Oh, btw I own the 360 with the f hole...