Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

IvanMunoz wrote:

2112 wrote:I think the top horn was somewhat thinner, or smaller, on early 70's Rickenbacker 4001's.

The top horn is really thin on the new ones.

I'd like to just for the heck of it, try out some of the newer Rics but the two GC's in my area have NONE.
I detest Sam Ash but perhaps they might have one to try.

I'm gonna' guess if they did have one in stock it will be badly in need for a setup.
I cannot stand Rics with massive relief, high action and dead strings.
That's how the last Ric I tried at Sam Ash, years ago, was.

How does anyone expect to sell a bass that is pretty much un-playable??

I do like the look of the new Rics with those full width inlays.

Welcome to my world of the left handed bass player. All I ever get to play at music stores are Korean made Ibanez left handed bass's. My purchases are always from ebay eyeing what i think is a well maintained bass. I say all us Leftys march down to wall street and let our voices be heard!!! Better yet, Bring your bass's and 8x10 cabs and let them hear us that way!!!

2112 wrote:

IvanMunoz wrote:

2112 wrote:I think the top horn was somewhat thinner, or smaller, on early 70's Rickenbacker 4001's.

The top horn is really thin on the new ones.

I'd like to just for the heck of it, try out some of the newer Rics but the two GC's in my area have NONE.
I detest Sam Ash but perhaps they might have one to try.

I'm gonna' guess if they did have one in stock it will be badly in need for a setup.
I cannot stand Rics with massive relief, high action and dead strings.
That's how the last Ric I tried at Sam Ash, years ago, was.

How does anyone expect to sell a bass that is pretty much un-playable??

I do like the look of the new Rics with those full width inlays.

I was seriously impressed with my May 2011 JG4001. If you like Rickenbacker's I'd have no problem suggesting a new one. Fit and finish was great and the set up was not bad at all. I purchased it sight unseen from a mail order house after doing my pricing homework. The neck is very slender and I loved the upgrades that Rickenbacker had made since I owned on in the early 80"s. The slightly swept back headstock, the thin horns, and the full width inlays are all very attractive. I have no problem with the higain pups. As a matter of fact, I like that you can adjust the pole pieces. It's an all around great bass to play, and I own a few very nice Rickenbackers!!

Sepp

I have noticed this too. There seems to be ample evidence of hand sanding as the bouts and cresting wave of all three of my basses seem to differ. Either the templates are not the same, or during the sanding process more material has been removed. The 81' Walnut is the most stout of all. The body looks as if it has put on weight with the years, the neck is like a Louisville slugger, and the headstock is full with sharp lines. But alas, they all produce wonderful tones, with plenty of growl when called upon.

bassman7365 wrote:I have noticed this too. There seems to be ample evidence of hand sanding as the bouts and cresting wave of all three of my basses seem to differ. Either the templates are not the same, or during the sanding process more material has been removed. The 81' Walnut is the most stout of all. The body looks as if it has put on weight with the years, the neck is like a Louisville slugger, and the headstock is full with sharp lines. But alas, they all produce wonderful tones, with plenty of growl when called upon.

Back then, the body shapes were done by hand on a band saw and would vary. According to JH, CNC started the first Monday after July 4, 1996. The 330 was first and the others over the course of a year, as they were "digitized".

johnallg wrote:

bassman7365 wrote:I have noticed this too. There seems to be ample evidence of hand sanding as the bouts and cresting wave of all three of my basses seem to differ. Either the templates are not the same, or during the sanding process more material has been removed. The 81' Walnut is the most stout of all. The body looks as if it has put on weight with the years, the neck is like a Louisville slugger, and the headstock is full with sharp lines. But alas, they all produce wonderful tones, with plenty of growl when called upon.

Back then, the body shapes were done by hand on a band saw and would vary. According to JH, CNC started the first Monday after July 4, 1996. The 330 was first and the others over the course of a year, as they were "digitized".

Thats a pretty cool fact. I never knew that. I knew they used CNC, but not in that detail.

Personally, I like both body types. I may be in the minority, but I actually used to prefer the chunkier '90s style. It's not as elegant as the older shape - to me, it looks more metal (as in Heavy Metal - today being 11/11/11 - National Metal Day!).

Maybe it's an "S" thing as well - I like the way it works with the contours. Anyone have a picture of a regular larger-bodied 4003 for comparison?

OK, I took a quick foto of the line up, minus my Blackstar which is at Paul's getting a facelift. Here is a nice shot of the various body shapes.

Left to right, 1986 4003 Shadow, 2011 4003, 2000 v63, and a 1973 4001.

I know, I know, I need another hanger for my Blackstar, it's in the works!

Sepp

Hmm. That Snow White one looks familiar . . . .

Kopfjaeger wrote:OK, I took a quick foto of the line up, minus my Blackstar which is at Paul's getting a facelift. Here is a nice shot of the various body shapes.

Left to right, 1986 4003 Shadow, 2011 4003, 2000 v63, and a 1973 4001.

I know, I know, I need another hanger for my Blackstar, it's in the works!

Sepp

You're starting quite a collection.

bassduke49 wrote:Hmm. That Snow White one looks familiar . . . .

I need to arrange them a bit better. dark, light, dark, light, dark, or somethign like that.

Ivan, yeah, I think I'm done. A five string perhaps, for a nice even 6 Rickenbackers.

Sepp

Kopfjaeger wrote:Ivan, yeah, I think I'm done. A five string perhaps, for a nice even 6 Rickenbackers.

Sepp

Yeah, right! That's what they all say.

Kopfjaeger wrote:OK, I took a quick foto of the line up, minus my Blackstar which is at Paul's getting a facelift. Here is a nice shot of the various body shapes.

Left to right, 1986 4003 Shadow, 2011 4003, 2000 v63, and a 1973 4001.

I know, I know, I need another hanger for my Blackstar, it's in the works!

Sepp

...the headstock of the '73 4001 looks somewhat weird!

heinpete wrote:

Kopfjaeger wrote:OK, I took a quick foto of the line up, minus my Blackstar which is at Paul's getting a facelift. Here is a nice shot of the various body shapes.

Left to right, 1986 4003 Shadow, 2011 4003, 2000 v63, and a 1973 4001.

I know, I know, I need another hanger for my Blackstar, it's in the works!

Sepp

...the headstock of the '73 4001 looks somewhat weird!

Finish or shape wise? Here is an older foto when it still had a black nut.

Sepp

The cresting wave is very round! Also the axis of the A and D string are positioned high up on the headstock, which therefore looks a bit short!