Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

Dirtyclinic wrote:I have fairly small hands and the Jazz bass neck is a nice size for me

I really don't see the link between hand size and neck girth. My kid started bass at 9 years old, upright at 11 and moved to a full-size upright at 13 because the half-size (38" scale) was too small. His thick-neck Ric ('86 4003S, fattest Ric neck I ever played) feels like a toy to him now.

Get a 70s 4001. They play like butter. Be comfortable.

VRICKY63 wrote:Get a 70s 4001. They play like butter. Be comfortable.

This is true in my limited experience of 1970s Rics (half a dozen or so)... probably the smallest necks of all Rics I have played. I agree too that you really need to be comfortable, whatever anyone else says. You know best what works for your hands, no matter how crazy it might seem to anyone else. On the other side of the coin, don't give yourself a mental block like "I can't make a P Bass/Ric/etc. work for me because it doesn't fit my hands" because every bass has its own feel in my experience, and sometimes you'll be surprised. For every single brand I can think of basses I've played that I found nearly unplayable and other basses I played that felt great, often within the same model. My favorite example is probably Ernie Ball Music Man... those basses are so polarizing for me, I either love them or hate them and know as soon as I start playing.

I had a 68 P bass for the first 10 years of my playing life (15-25) I was never comfortable with it so I never learned to play so well...but thats another story. When I got my Ric in 2001 it was like nothig else I ever played. it just fit. even to this day, no P bass feels good to me. so I have to say...theres no comparison.

I have a Les Paul that is ok but the 620 I had was the nicest neck I have ever felt on a guitar. should have kept that instead of the LP.

the only Fender Bass I have ever touched that wow'ed me was a Jaco fretless

About the only similarity between a Ric neck and a P Bass neck is nut width. From there on up, it's a totally different feel. As mentioned, a Ric neck doesn't have anywhere near the taper of any Fender neck. I like Jazz Bass necks a lot, until you get up past the 12th fret. Then the width seems awkward. Go for a late 80s/early 90s if you like thin.

cassius987 wrote:This is true in my limited experience of 1970s Rics (half a dozen or so)... probably the smallest necks of all Rics I have played.

Try a '67 4005 neck.... scary thin.

johnallg wrote:

cassius987 wrote:This is true in my limited experience of 1970s Rics (half a dozen or so)... probably the smallest necks of all Rics I have played.

Try a '67 4005 neck.... scary thin.

I'd love to...

cjj wrote:

johnallg wrote:

cassius987 wrote:This is true in my limited experience of 1970s Rics (half a dozen or so)... probably the smallest necks of all Rics I have played.

Try a '67 4005 neck.... scary thin.

I'd love to...

Go to a SCARF where Jerry J brings his.

johnallg wrote:

cjj wrote:

johnallg wrote: Try a '67 4005 neck.... scary thin.

I'd love to...

Go to a SCARF where Jerry J brings his.

I'd love to...


Who knows, I'm heading out to BARC this year, I suppose SCARF could happen...

wim wrote:Neck Width at Nut 42.9 mm (1 11/16'') 4003
Nut Width: 1.625" (41.3 mm) PRECISION BASS

It's even wider.
Don't worry, a Rick is not comparable to a Fender.
If you like slim necks, go for a seventies 4001.
Somewhere on this forum there's a thread about girth which has lots of data on most production years.

Um, that would be for what has been called since 1962 the Fender "B" neck width. BUT...Fenders started out with what came to be known as the "C" width (not profile) neck of 1 3/4, but the narrower necks became the most ordered, so no body seems to remember the "C" width neck, which is the current spec for the '57 and '62 reissue American Precisions. Of course, everybody knows the "A" width 1 1/2 which was and is primarily on Jazz basses.

And I've played several through the years that ended up at 1 11/16 also, for some reason.

For a historical summary of Fender neck widths and profiles:
http://www.fender.com/news/index.php?di ... rticle=422

I think we should be very clear on what "thin" is. I believe "thin" on this forum means thickness of the neck front to back. "Wide" or "narrow" is the nut and last fret width.

VRICKY63 wrote:I think we should be very clear on what "thin" is. I believe "thin" on this forum means thickness of the neck front to back. "Wide" or "narrow" is the nut and last fret width.

That's pretty much how I see it. I use fat/thin to talk about the profile and wide/narrow to talk about the fingerboard if I can but I catch myself mixing these terms up occasionally.

i own quite a few rics , i have just purchased a new fireglo and the neck is really thick much thicker that a jetglo i purchased last year, i love it< i had an old 4001 1976 model and that neck was chunky , this new fireglo reminds me of that neck and strangely enough the new fireglo sounds like a ric should, i have a couple of rics that just don do it for me , i took a chance buying the new fireglo without seeing it, as they are pretty hard to buy in the uk, so as soon as i felt the neck i knew it would be a good one and it is !!!! this new one also has the caribbean rosewood fretboard, much darker than my other rics.

In the early 80's I had a Jetglo 4001 that was a great bass, it sounded like I thought it should. I can't really remember the neck on it though. A couple years ago I had a 4003 made in 98 and it had a nice chucky full neck that I really liked. I had to sell it unfortunatly. I now am looking for another and I am glad to hear the are still making full / fat necks on them.
+ 1 for fatties.