Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

cjj wrote:I used to have a '74, it was fantastic (if I ever see it for sale, I'll buy it back). I've got a '76 with is also fantastic. As is my '84. My basses from 2008 are... well... fantastic. And so are the ones from 2009 & 2010.

I can't say anything about the '90s 'cause I've never owned one, but the rest of the decades all seem pretty darned good to me...

I quite liked my 4003 from 1990. It sounded quite non typical for a Rick, with a deeper low end. Armybass has it now.

My 1975 4001 is absolutely fantastic and all original- terrific mids and highs (its in the register, OJ 72xx white)

My 1997 FG 4003 is what I would call "average". It doesnt speak to me. Sounds good, but little character.

Remembering my eight years here on the RRF and reading over this thread, I'd say ALL the years of manufacture were controversial.

johnallg wrote:Remembering my eight years here on the RRF and reading over this thread, I'd say ALL the years of manufacture were controversial.

One could say the definition of controversial in itself is... uh... controversial.

What ever supposed 'controversy' we are talking about here is nothing compared to what I've seen relating to Gibsons. I have a 1973 Les Paul Custom guitar which I've always loved and will never part with (it looks and sounds fantastic!!), but it wasn't until I joined a few Gibson forums that I learned that it is from the dreaded Norlin years and is therefore suspect in the eyes of many Gibson connoisseurs. Something about a volute on the back of the headstock which offends. I hadn't even noticed it for 20 years until I read about it on a forum... I don't think Rickenbackers have whole eras that are seen as undesirable or suspect... I love the way my 1975 4001 sounds...

It mainly seems to be cosmetic things that vary between years that come up e.g. Skunk stripes, the size of the fretboard inlays and how the shade of a particular finish has varied (thinking of fireglo here) over the years. That and variances in neck sizes between different eras. These are mainly player preferences and all instances seem to have their fans. The only thing I can think of that has been controversial, was the MID finish issue that was mentioned earlier and I'm pretty sure it would not have bothered me if I had one of those instruments.

Watch out for those Gibson Les Paul's with "Made in the USA" stamped on the back of the headstock that are actually made in China and sell for $500! Criminal! I hate to think that some kid in the USA gets ripped-off and buys one used for $3000. Ouch!

I bought a legit 2010 Gibson Humminbird model that lists for $4000. I played a 2012 of the exact same model that also lists for $4000 a few weeks ago. It felt like a different guitar! So, I'm not sure WHAT is gong on? I give up!

DavyR wrote:Watch out for those Gibson Les Paul's with "Made in the USA" stamped on the back of the headstock that are actually made in China and sell for $500! Criminal! I hate to think that some kid in the USA gets ripped-off and buys one used for $3000. Ouch!

FYI - nearly all Gibson instruments made between 1971 and 1982 (including Les Pauls) have "Made in the USA" stamped on the back of the headstock. Just saying..

You could say the 4001's are -sort of- controversial because of the truss rod system.
This system isn't understood well, and could cause a perfect bass to tun into a lemon if not setup correctly.
Add to that the bass cut capacitor and you could get the feeling the bass is firewood.
Ricks are particulary sensitive to a good setup, the guitars included.

My 2cents, (eurocents)

wim wrote:You could say the 4001's are -sort of- controversial because of the truss rod system.
This system isn't understood well, and could cause a perfect bass to tun into a lemon if not setup correctly.
Add to that the bass cut capacitor and you could get the feeling the bass is firewood.
Ricks are particulary sensitive to a good setup, the guitars included.

My 2cents, (eurocents)

So, they're just misunderstood; it takes special people (us ) to know what we have and love.

has anybody mentioned the famous jetglo appeared a couple of years ago which is in fact a grey-glo...or it is to be considered as an added value in terms of originality, especially in 20 years when we will look at it like a sort of "rarity"?

jps wrote:

wim wrote:You could say the 4001's are -sort of- controversial because of the truss rod system.
This system isn't understood well, and could cause a perfect bass to tun into a lemon if not setup correctly.
Add to that the bass cut capacitor and you could get the feeling the bass is firewood.
Ricks are particulary sensitive to a good setup, the guitars included.

My 2cents, (eurocents)

So, they're just misunderstood; it takes special people (us ) to know what we have and love.

Rick fanatics ARE a special breed aren't they?

They are Like a v8 car with 4 carbs, set up correctly they roar, but if the local nut job has had a go with his Allen key, you have a lemon that needs tuning.

antipodean wrote:There was a brief period around '04 when a number of MID-finished basses and guitars suffered from finish bleed - the colour bled over the binding in places.

I have this problem with my 2011, special run TRANS YELLOW 4001C64, a small portion of the paint actually chipped off next to the tailpiece and my 2012 jetglo 4003 a portion of the paint is bubbling up next to the tailpiece...

I would say 1971 due to the black checkerboard binding bleeding into the wood,can't remember why that is. I thought of having it refinished but hate to do it to a near mint guitar.