Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

STOKKIs wrote:Thank you for all your input. Ive ordered a pair of rotosound jazz bass 77 45-105, they are basicly the same string as the signature set, just lighter - just in case.

Cant wait for the bass to get here. Ive played several rics over the years, but never owned one - and i researched quite a bit before landing on the 4003S model. i dont want binding and inlays so the 4001c64 was the obvious one, but i also want the hi-gain pickups and modern appointments.

I had a .045-.105 set of Roto 77´s on my ´03 4003 in the past. Tail lift and S-shaped neck was the result. Then I added 2 screws on tailpiece and went to .040-.100 set of Roto 77´s and everything´s fine. But that´s not necessarily the thing with your bass. Let´s hope it will do OK with .105 set.

mikko wrote:

STOKKIs wrote:Thank you for all your input. Ive ordered a pair of rotosound jazz bass 77 45-105, they are basicly the same string as the signature set, just lighter - just in case.

Cant wait for the bass to get here. Ive played several rics over the years, but never owned one - and i researched quite a bit before landing on the 4003S model. i dont want binding and inlays so the 4001c64 was the obvious one, but i also want the hi-gain pickups and modern appointments.

I had a .045-.105 set of Roto 77´s on my ´03 4003 in the past. Tail lift and S-shaped neck was the result. Then I added 2 screws on tailpiece and went to .040-.100 set of Roto 77´s and everything´s fine. But that´s not necessarily the thing with your bass. Let´s hope it will do OK with .105 set.

I gotta say its strange that an instrument that has been around for so many years - and evolved - cant handle "normal" strings like any other bass would. At the price and quality level ric has posisioned themself their basses should be expected to hold up to working musician standards. Reading other topics in this and other forums it seems like the only way to handle a ric bass is like a baby, and that a riot will emerge if anyone says the word gig bag and rickenbacker in the same sentence. Not a lot o rock n roll imho.

STOKKIs wrote: I gotta say its strange that an instrument that has been around for so many years - and evolved - cant handle "normal" strings like any other bass would. At the price and quality level ric has posisioned themself their basses should be expected to hold up to working musician standards. Reading other topics in this and other forums it seems like the only way to handle a ric bass is like a baby, and that a riot will emerge if anyone says the word gig bag and rickenbacker in the same sentence. Not a lot o rock n roll imho.

Maybe that´s why many people are collecting, not playing them...seriously speaking, I was wondering exactly the same things you mentioned. "Made in America" doesn´t necessarily give you the same image here in Scandinavia than it probably gives you in the USA. Then I somehow got over it and now I can honestly say that my Rick is my favorite bass in every way. It´s full of weird features, but on the other hand and it has sound & looks like no other bass. You´ll love it after all, believe me. Don´t believe everything they say on web forums (in good and in bad.)

First off, LOTS of people play them. And LOTS of people use "heavy" strings such as RotoSound .045-.105. I've been using Roto RS66LD for years. Decades really, starting with my 1974 4001 which I first put Rotos on in 1978.

Currently I'm using the RS66LD .045-.105 set on both my '76 4001 and my '84 4003 with no problems. I've been using them on those basses for years too. I'm not sure how the tension might differ between the Swing Bass 66 roundwounds and the Jazz Bass 77 flatwounds, the 77 are probably a bit higher tension, but I wouldn't think they are a huge difference.

For flats, I used D'Addario Chromes ECB82 (.050,.070,.085,.105) on my 2008 4003FL with no problems. That's a fairly high tension set in that it's got larger gauges all the way across.

If you want to go for really big strings, I've also got D'Addario XL in .055, .075, .100, .135 on my 2008 4004Cii. It's tuned BEAD though, so it's probably not all that high of tension.

Now, it's possible that an instrument here or there just happens to not be able to handle the tension. They are, after all, made of wood, which will vary from tree to tree. And of course, if the truss rods and such are not set up correctly for the tension, there could be issues. But for the most part, most Rick basses since the 4001 with the "skunk stripe" can handle most "normal" strings...

STOKKIs wrote:

mikko wrote:

STOKKIs wrote:Thank you for all your input. Ive ordered a pair of rotosound jazz bass 77 45-105, they are basicly the same string as the signature set, just lighter - just in case.

Cant wait for the bass to get here. Ive played several rics over the years, but never owned one - and i researched quite a bit before landing on the 4003S model. i dont want binding and inlays so the 4001c64 was the obvious one, but i also want the hi-gain pickups and modern appointments.

I had a .045-.105 set of Roto 77´s on my ´03 4003 in the past. Tail lift and S-shaped neck was the result. Then I added 2 screws on tailpiece and went to .040-.100 set of Roto 77´s and everything´s fine. But that´s not necessarily the thing with your bass. Let´s hope it will do OK with .105 set.

I gotta say its strange that an instrument that has been around for so many years - and evolved - cant handle "normal" strings like any other bass would. At the price and quality level ric has posisioned themself their basses should be expected to hold up to working musician standards. Reading other topics in this and other forums it seems like the only way to handle a ric bass is like a baby, and that a riot will emerge if anyone says the word gig bag and rickenbacker in the same sentence. Not a lot o rock n roll imho.

Yikes! A gig bag, I'm rioting as I type this!! Gig bags scare the **** out of me. I've never use one, not even on my Fender p bass!! Any musical instrument is a precision piece of gear. A gig bag really offers very little protection from anything other than dust. Nothing says secure like a hard case in good shape.

Sepp

I ended up using GHS Boomers 50-70-95-115 on my '98 4003 when I was tuned CGCA for a long time. Tuned down the tension was about normal. Didn't have a truss rod tool for most of the time. Work fine when I tuned it up to DADG from time to time also. Now I have stringed it with piccolo strings, and it's the most fun instrument to play ever

I also used those heavy strings on my '78 4001 beater bass, mostly tuned one semi-tone down (D# - G# - C# - F#), but also tuned normal from time to time. No problem with the neck, I have a hipshot bridge on it so no tail lift problems.

Yikes!

That's some crazy tuning!

If only I could get my head around playing CGDA tuning proficiently, and in the style of an electric bass instead of a cello, it would be so much more efficient than EADG. You can cover way more sonic territory and big intervals are a lot easier to accomplish. But the small intervals that make up a lot of meat and potatoes in bass lines are a bit harder.

I recorded some CGDA playing before I abandoned the tuning. I don't know, maybe if I have a bunch of time on my hands some day I'll really learn it.

http://www.soundclick.com/bands/page_so ... D=10781508

+1

I've played a bit of mandolin in my musical journey. Ever since then, tuning in 5ths has intrigued me, but I've never really tried it on bass.

Oops, I meant CGCF. DropD tuned one whole note down. We didn't discuss musical theory that much in that band....

But I like the CGDA idea, I'll try it out if I ever/ next time I tune down again.

I could never get into those really low tunings. While I love Kings X I can never tell what the bass player is actually playing. It seems like a massive rumble.

Badanovski wrote:I could never get into those really low tunings. While I love Kings X I can never tell what the bass player is actually playing. It seems like a massive rumble.

If you want to hear how those really low notes can sound, check out this vid (not a Rick though). I think he tunes the lowest string to C#0 which is a mere 17.32Hz, generally considered below the range of human hearing. As for string gauge, I think it's something like a .210:

cassius987 wrote:If only I could get my head around playing CGDA tuning proficiently, and in the style of an electric bass instead of a cello, it would be so much more efficient than EADG. You can cover way more sonic territory and big intervals are a lot easier to accomplish. But the small intervals that make up a lot of meat and potatoes in bass lines are a bit harder.

I recorded some CGDA playing before I abandoned the tuning. I don't know, maybe if I have a bunch of time on my hands some day I'll really learn it.

http://www.soundclick.com/bands/page_so ... D=10781508

is that your bass in the pic in that link? cause that's just damn sexy looking. How do you find having a toaster in the bridge position? And what do you have to do to mount one there? any extra work involved?

HydrasBreath wrote:How do you find having a toaster in the bridge position? And what do you have to do to mount one there? any extra work involved?

Here is the inspiration for Joshua's bridge position toaster. This is my former 4003FL that another forumite owns, now. I did the mods in 2004. Putting the pickup there was quite easy, just a couple of screws, washers, nuts, and a bit of soldering. The holes are already in the mounting plate.

That Toaster now resides in this bass...