Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

cjj wrote:True, and being the grain freak that I am, it makes for quite a quandary...

So I take it that you won't be putting a pickguard on your 4004Cii any time soon!

rickenbrother wrote:

cjj wrote:True, and being the grain freak that I am, it makes for quite a quandary...

So I take it that you won't be putting a pickguard on your 4004Cii any time soon!

Perish the thought!!!

I would love a 4004 with a teardrop pickguard, like I believe I have seen Dane or Joey brandishing.

cassius987 wrote:I would love a 4004 with a teardrop pickguard, like I believe I have seen Dane or Joey brandishing.

The one I have with a pickguard is a solid color (Jetglo).

One could argue that RIC is getting closer to what you're talking about, Joshua, with the new two-piece slimmer neck on the 4004. It has dot position markers, slim horns, contoured body, modern Schaller bridge, no binding, etc. All that's missing is either a four-control harness, or a V/V/T, or a stacked knob job, and a vestigal pickguard. You could opt for a pair of Toasters instead of Humbuckers, too.

I've often dreamt about revamping the bass line (as if I were in charge - and it's a GOOD thing that I am not) and coming up with another one. I'd keep the full deluxe model but call it simply the 4001. If I were to have a stripped down version of it, I'd make it the 4001S. The similarity of the old-style 4001 and the still-old-style 4003 has got to be confusing to outsiders, not to mention complicating matters with the recent 4001V63 and 4001C64 vintage model designators.

If you never saw a 4001 before, you might wonder why the pickups look so different? Of course we know why now; it started as a one pickup (horseshoe) and there was no way they could have mounted a second horseshoe without it being an ugly and impracticable instrument. So they added a guitar Toaster for the second pickup. I keep thinking it should have had two Toasters in semi-depressed cavities, with wire routes and control cavity covered by a simple teardrop pickguard/cover. I would have named this one the 4003. Then the 4004 would be much as it is now, but only one model with optional chrome or gold hardware. And if the "recording" 4002 and hollow-body 4005 were in demand, that would fill out the line.

Of course, all of these thoughts concern the look of the instruments, and nothing to do with actual engineering, electronic, or sonic considerations, of which I know absolutely nothing. Just pipe dreams.

cassius987 wrote:

superdick2112 wrote:Unfortunately there are only three chances of this ever happening - Slim, Fat and None.

What's the deal with slim and fat chances being equally unlikely? Is this some kind of egalitarian way of acknowledging the worthiness our plus-sized brethren through snark?

Or, it could be acknowledging the worthiness of our skinny brethren - works both ways you know...

And a little snark every now & then is a good thing - it keeps us from taking ourselves too seriously.

bassduke49 wrote:I've often dreamt about revamping the bass line... Then the 4004 would be much as it is now, but only one model with optional chrome or gold hardware.

I would hope that one model would would have the figured maple rather than the plain maple. One of my favorite features of the 4004Cii (along with awesome tone, comfort & playability) is the stunning maple Ric uses for the bodies.

superdick2112 wrote:

bassduke49 wrote:I've often dreamt about revamping the bass line... Then the 4004 would be much as it is now, but only one model with optional chrome or gold hardware.

I would hope that one model would would have the figured maple rather than the plain maple. One of my favorite features of the 4004Cii (along with awesome tone, comfort & playability) is the stunning maple Ric uses for the bodies.

And (In my opinion) it looks even better on a 4003 with the binding, etc.

cjj wrote:

superdick2112 wrote:

bassduke49 wrote:I've often dreamt about revamping the bass line... Then the 4004 would be much as it is now, but only one model with optional chrome or gold hardware.

I would hope that one model would would have the figured maple rather than the plain maple. One of my favorite features of the 4004Cii (along with awesome tone, comfort & playability) is the stunning maple Ric uses for the bodies.

And (In my opinion) it looks even better on a 4003 with the binding, etc.

B.jpg

Agreed. As much as I love my Cii (and I do love my Cii),



your one-off 4003 is a stunner, and one of the nicest Rickenbackers I've ever seen.

superdick2112 wrote:Or, it could be acknowledging the worthiness of our skinny brethren - works both ways you know...

And a little snark every now & then is a good thing - it keeps us from taking ourselves too seriously.

Hehe, qft on both counts.

cjj wrote:

superdick2112 wrote:

bassduke49 wrote:I've often dreamt about revamping the bass line... Then the 4004 would be much as it is now, but only one model with optional chrome or gold hardware.

I would hope that one model would would have the figured maple rather than the plain maple. One of my favorite features of the 4004Cii (along with awesome tone, comfort & playability) is the stunning maple Ric uses for the bodies.

And (In my opinion) it looks even better on a 4003 with the binding, etc.

B.jpg

I agree better with binding, That is beautiful

cjj wrote: And (In my opinion) it looks even better on a 4003 with the binding, etc.

I also do love the look of the black binding wrapped around the figured maple, but I think about your one-off 4003 without a pickguard, having been routed for the controls in the back, not blocking up the rest of the nice wood on the face of the guitar. Would look more sort of like a non-carved, maple 4004LK.

rickenbrother wrote:

cjj wrote: And (In my opinion) it looks even better on a 4003 with the binding, etc.

I also do love the look of the black binding wrapped around the figured maple, but I think about your one-off 4003 without a pickguard, having been routed for the controls in the back, not blocking up the rest of the nice wood on the face of the guitar. Would look more sort of like a non-carved, maple 4004LK.

Yeah, that would have been even better than it is...

Comments like those above just go to show once more that there's no way to please everyone all the time. As if we didn't already know!

I don't want this thread to be an implicit statement that I think RIC is doing something wrong, or that I know better how they should run their business... I believe they're still raking in the cash which is the final say on that. The main reason for posting this, and thinking about it off and on, is because I would love to see a 4003S with these updates. I love my 4003s, but I'd be lying if I said I thought they were absolutely perfect. They're about as close as I can get to perfect for less than $2,000, but I'd still make some changes. And those changes would not be the 4004, although it's a cool beast for sure.

There are other, weirder things I'd also like to see on a 4003S like lightweight tuners, RWRP, the horseshoe rout dropped in favor of a standard pickup footprint, etc. but I know those things are unlikely to happen any time soon. On the other hand I think the ideas in the original post are pretty "safe", the most radical being the bridge change but if memory serves RIC has expressed interest in trying something new in the past, anyway. I'd be fine with the basic bridge design used on the 4004. Splitting the 4003 into a stripped-down modern form and retaining the classic form would be a way to do this safely, and the free market would probably determine the worthiness of the idea fairly quick. Personally, I'd love it, for although I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with the original tailpiece design, it does have some intrinsic properties you just can't get around without lots of extra work and even though it's rock solid once you get it set up, it's still probably the biggest source of contention with new and potential buyers.

Anyway, I don't feel I should have to explain that this thread is not meant to be a slam on RIC at all, but sometimes I get the feeling people perceive these fantasy threads as more than what they are, so there's my tuppence on it. Maybe when RIC stops making money they can play around with the formula but I think right now they are doing just fine, which is the ultimate vindication of their methods.

i like the stripped down 4001s type and love the big clunky hardware. if you strip it down too much and have small hardware, i find it too bare.