Be prepared to flip out!!!

[jps]

I will say, however, that the two 4001s I have with the strip have extremely stable necks.

[rickfan60]

While not absolute insurance against warps and twists, laminations do tend to stabilize wood. Of course they add to the cost of production but can reduce the number of warranty claims on the back end. The quest for stronger necks, greater sustain, and the elimination of dead sports lead Alembic and others to develop different versions of the so called "hippie sandwich" in the 70's. I suspect that was the motivation for the 4001 necks produced between '72 and '80.

[aceonbass]

All that glue between the laminations can add weight to a bass though too. Not many Alembics weigh less than 10 pounds. According to my luthier, each lamination adds about 10% more strength to the neck. However this can go to far as he had well known bass in his shop(can't remember the name) who's neck had a slight back bow AND a twist that was unadjustable. It was a bolt on and he had to build a new neck simplifying the laminations somewhat. He even removed the front lamination on the headstock with the logo and added it to the new headstock.

[rickfan60]

Older Alembics are heavy because they use heavy woods and lots of them. There really is not a whole lot of glue holding the lams together. I'll bet the finish outweighs the glue by a factor of 50. As with anything else, there are diminishing marginal returns. Too many lams cat complicate things and could even be detrimental to the strength of the piece.

[Lost Coyotes]

I will say, however, that the two 4001s I have with the strip have extremely stable necks.

Why, yes. Yes, they do indeed, Jeffrey!
But either way, I think that idea of the separate 4001 line of basses makes sense as well...and yeah, I'd probably fall for one.

[aceonbass]

People see my basses, even the modded 4004's, and think they're 4001's. I think they should drop the 4003 model in favor of 4001.

[s4001]

I'll be the heretic and say 'no way.' 4003's are an improvement.

[gareth]

I'll be the heretic and say 'no way.' 4003's are an improvement.

It's the one model that I sold. It was OK, but I just couldn't get "that" sound out of it. I'm one of those that like the capped sound. I also didn't like the neck profile as much as the 4001's. There was nothing wrong with it, but it needed to go to someone who would play it. It was just gather ing dust next to my 4001s. Back when I sold it, they weren't offering the vintage tone mod, so that might have made a difference.

Having said that, I can't see that reintroducing the 4001 would make a lot of sense. RIC would essentially be competing with the private market for 4001 sales at almost the same prices. I'd like to see something totally new.

[cassius987]

I don't understand what is meant by reintroducing the 4001. The 4003 IS the 4001, just about, and anything that isn't like the old 4001 from the 60s right now (new 2009 models) is something that would never be reintroduced anyways such as the old truss rod mechanism.

If ANYTHING gets raised from the dead I hope it's the 4002--otherwise, something that looks forward rather than backward would be my preference.

[s4001]

If ANYTHING gets raised from the dead I hope it's the 4002--otherwise, something that looks forward rather than backward would be my preference.

+1

[beefandbones]

Yeah, for all intents and purposes the 4001 became the 4003 over time, but the 4001 remains the classic Rickenbacker bass model number. There was never a clear delineation between the two models, was there? They're so similar in construction and design that most people couldn't tell the difference between them by looking.

In my idea, re-introducing the 4001 to the regular lineup would allow Rickenbacker to offer the vintage features that many people desire on what is essentially a modern chassis. It would not be a true 'historic reissue' - it would be a modern bass with classic vintage features (toaster at the neck, horseshoe, 1/2" spacing"). In other words, the 4003 and 'new 4001' would exist simultaneously in the catalog, and would have the same basic body but with different appointments. I think that would satisfy most people who want 'that sound'. Compared to switching gears for the production of a vintage reissue (4001c64, v63, v68, v57 etc), this would save RIC time and money, would help streamline production and minimize the backlog, all while returning their most famous bass model number to regular duty.

I just made it up, though. Makes sense to me, but I could be way off.

[1965]

... something that looks forward rather than backward would be my preference.

So, like, 1.5" neck pickup spacing?

[cassius987]

Dunno if you're being sarcastic or not but sure. That would actually be pretty cool.

[shamustwin]

Anthing like a V63 would be all right with me!

[antipodean]

Dunno if you're being sarcastic or not but sure.

C'mon Josh, we all know Wes is a bloke with an ironic sense of humour....