Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

Isaac wrote:It's possible that, if I ever get the chance to try a 4002, I won't like it, but I don't think that's very likely. I like my 4004Cii well enough, but I think I prefer my 4001 and 4003 basses.

Oh, I'd be willing to bet that you'll like a 4002. I had a chance to try one or two back when they were originally made, and they were NICE!
But I'm sure you aren't hurtin' with a 4001, 4003, and a 4004Cii...

Isaac wrote:It's possible that, if I ever get the chance to try a 4002, I won't like it, but I don't think that's very likely. I like my 4004Cii well enough, but I think I prefer my 4001 and 4003 basses.

If you prefer flat edged bound bodies and bound necks,as well as the old bridge,then Yes,you would like the 4002.
And the pickup positions really make for some nice tonal variation from the 4001/3 flavor.

jps wrote:

Isaac wrote:

squirebass wrote:I want some of that health insurance that provides a 4005WB as part of "physical therapy"!

Personally, I'd rather a 4002.

I used to desire a 4002, nowadays I love the 4004L models.

Jeff, what is it you prefer about the Ls to the CIIs?

Only going by my own former 2004 Cii, the tone of the Laredo is brighter/more aggressive than the Cii which was smoother/darker sounding, to me. That is why I changed out the HB-1s in the Cii for scatterwound toasters. When I first played a Laredo (Ron O'Keefe's) into an amp in 2009 I immediately noticed this difference. Plus, I am not a fan of gold hardware. I swapped out all the gold on my Cii for chrome parts, something I don't have to do with a Laredo. As to the forearm bevel, it has been a long time since having a Cii in my hands but the bevel on my two Laredos seem like they would be very close to encroaching on the walnut "meat" of the body sandwich, but it doesn't appear that way in photos of Ciis so that bevel may not be as angled/deep on the Cii compared to the Laredo.

jps wrote:Only going by my own former 2004 Cii, the tone of the Laredo is brighter/more aggressive than the Cii which was smoother/darker sounding, to me. That is why I changed out the HB-1s in the Cii for scatterwound toasters. When I first played a Laredo (Ron O'Keefe's) into an amp in 2009 I immediately noticed this difference. Plus, I am not a fan of gold hardware. I swapped out all the gold on my Cii for chrome parts, something I don't have to do with a Laredo. As to the forearm bevel, it has been a long time since having a Cii in my hands but the bevel on my two Laredos seem like they would be very close to encroaching on the walnut "meat" of the body sandwich, but it doesn't appear that way in photos of Ciis so that bevel may not be as angled/deep on the Cii compared to the Laredo.

That's interesting Jeff. The last & only time I played a Laredo (an original one, Jetglo, maple board) was probably well over ten years ago and was through a horrible Peavey rig so I couldn't really tell what it sounded like. All I remember was it had the widest neck I'd played on a Ric at that point. I've played 4 Cheyenne IIs IIRC, one of which had the thickest neck I've ever played on a Ric. I played 2 others when I bought my old one; they were both great, but I preferred the one I bought. I played them side by side and they were very different; mine was light and very stringy-sounding, very open, but with growl. The other was heavier and sounded more "nosey", for want of a better word; more middley. The one I bought sounded tremendous; although it sounded darker than my '72 4001s, as a dedicated light touch pick player I appreciated the extra balls and growl. It sat very differently in the band mix though.

Ironically I prefer gold hardware. I'd love to see how the rear upper bout contouring compares though.

I wish I could play - or even hear - a Laredo and a Cheyenne II back to back. Does anyone who has had both have any recordings or footage?

I like the gold hardware just fine on any color except mapleglo.
(It just looks wrong to me,so i swapped the hardware on my '04 Laredo FG and '04 Cii MG).
Every one of my (4) 4004's have been modded in the electronics,and my two Laredos have had pickups completely moved and/or replaced. I don't think i have any really good recordings of any of them,mostly just a few cell phone snippets here and there. In addition to that,i have very different strings on each of them,so a/b comparisons are kind of pointless.
I think that replacing the pots and cap tend to equalize the sound of all different construction 4004's.
My Ci was positvely murky until i had a new wiring harness installed. The Cii was too,although not quite as much.
My Laredos came to me with the wiring already altered,so i was able to tell it wasn't the hb1 pickups (or the wood construction) that sounded "dark". I will say i think the all-maple Laredos have a bit more "crisp" in their sound. Then again,they also have the traditional laquered fretboards which the cheyennes don't.

squirebass wrote:

Isaac wrote:It's possible that, if I ever get the chance to try a 4002, I won't like it, but I don't think that's very likely. I like my 4004Cii well enough, but I think I prefer my 4001 and 4003 basses.

Oh, I'd be willing to bet that you'll like a 4002. I had a chance to try one or two back when they were originally made, and they were NICE!
But I'm sure you aren't hurtin' with a 4001, 4003, and a 4004Cii...

And a 3001!

woodyng wrote:

Isaac wrote:It's possible that, if I ever get the chance to try a 4002, I won't like it, but I don't think that's very likely. I like my 4004Cii well enough, but I think I prefer my 4001 and 4003 basses.

If you prefer flat edged bound bodies and bound necks,as well as the old bridge,then Yes,you would like the 4002.
And the pickup positions really make for some nice tonal variation from the 4001/3 flavor.

No, it's not the sharp bound edges that I like. My 4000 is probably the most comfortable for me to play. On the 4004Cii, I find the neck pickup almost useless on its own. Just doesn't give me a sound I like, which I think is likely the position. The other things I don't like are the fat neck and the lack of a good place to rest my thumb while playing. The 3001 also has a fat neck, but the 4000, 4001 and 4003 basses have none of those issues.

Isaac wrote:...On the 4004Cii, I find the neck pickup almost useless on its own. Just doesn't give me a sound I like, which I think is likely the position...

Here is a recording of the neck pickup in my Jetglo 4004L.

jps wrote:

Isaac wrote:...On the 4004Cii, I find the neck pickup almost useless on its own. Just doesn't give me a sound I like, which I think is likely the position...

Here is a recording of the neck pickup in my Jetglo 4004L.

1230.MP3

That sounds very much like the neck toaster on a vintage 4001 I once had the privilege to try out. Amazingly bright and transparent given the pickup placement, which my prejudiced mind normally associates with a more "muddy" vibe. Was the bass strung with TI roundwounds?

Very observant!

The pickup is a short magnet/flat bottom toaster with a DCR around 3.6K. The strings are stock RIC round wounds. Amazingly wonderful tone, IMO.

jps wrote:Very observant!

The pickup is a short magnet/flat bottom toaster with a DCR around 3.6K. The strings are stock RIC round wounds. Amazingly wonderful tone, IMO.

That is amazingly wonderful!
Is that the same thing as Ric's scatterwound toaster? Obviously,it's not their "hot" toaster at 3.6k.
Or is that something different to those 2 examples? My RIC SW toaster in the Laredo Dane customised reads around 7k,and sounds lovely.

It's what the 325C58 uses/used, IIRC.

aceonbass wrote:In a given year, Laredos and Cheyennes have the same body contouring. I don't see how the upper rear contour could be harder on your forearm than the same area on a 4003, or even 4003S, as it's more contoured and rounded over more than either 4003 model.

I've experienced a similar thing as the OP. Lots of "contoured" basses bug me more than bound ones.

It seems akin to bike seats. For many, a hard leather saddle is counterintuitively more comfortable than a soft padded saddle. The reason is that your sit bones will gradually smoosh out on the padded saddle, but in the leather saddle, the contact points form more of a suspended hammock. In other words, there is less overall contact and the contact is more stable.

I feel the same with a bound bass, or a 4003S with a sharp radiused edge. There's limited contact so my arm never gets too cozy with the bass. On a sloping contour it feels like my arm is dragging across a large surface area.

My '08 4004 has so wide neck, I must have it much higher to be able to play it. I had to alter my playstyle quite a bit, but a bonus was that my arm don't rest as much on the top of the bass as before.