Ted...
Here is another observation I found..
I am just putting out my learnings in the hopes that it may help others..or possibly stimulate other ideas and solutions...
Speaking strictly about the acoustic behavior of the bass..
I noticed that some of these older 4001 basses have weak notes on the E-string, but not all notes are weak... usually the 3rd to 7th fret area of the E string... Well, upon closer examination it appears that the frets are poor shape and flat and very spread out flat, since they have the heaviest usage...THIS I believe may cause problems....since the string is only anchored at two locations when fretted..The saddle and the fret...If the saddle is proper, then what about the fret shape and condition??? If this is a problem then the string never gets a chance to properly make a solid note..
Chris
4003 - known for a "weak" bottom E string?
Moderators: rickenbrother, ajish4
That is consistent with what I have noticed for years. I wrestled with dead E strings back in the 70's and '80s. That is one of the reasons I owned and dumped so many 4001s back then. There were nearly a dozen all told before 1985. The open E string just did not ring like the others. Fretting up between the third and seventh frets, as you say, was OK. I have to agree with you about Rickenbacker factory fret jobs back then. They were pretty bad. The recent stuff I have seen is quite good though. It seems that they leveled the frets, some nearly flat and left them like that. (Hey, Fender did it too) The frets rarely had proper rounded tops. That practice caused a lot of buzzing, rattles, and minor intonation error. The more recent ones I have seen are nicely polished and properly rounded.
I have only had problems with open E's but then again I rarely play above the 5th fret on the E string on any bass as the notes always seem to be boomy and blurry to me. I have always managed to solve the open E problem with one of the above methods. I got rid of a really nice 75 4001 with old features before experimentation and I regret it because I now know I could have fixed it. I posted about this bass close to three years ago after I had sold it and found many of the methods I posted above back then. The truss rod idea came from JH and is probably the best idea of the bunch. I wish the archives that used to be here were still available somehow as they are a treasure trove of info and would solve a lot of this reinventing the wheel many of us do here now. I believe 99% of weak E problems are from set up problems espeically with old 4001's, maybe some even from the factory back in the 70's. I have three 4001's right now and they all have good strong E strings, I too used to think the problem was a mystery until I tried various methods of set up. It would be nice if the poles were adjustable but they aren't so we have to adjust the bass to the pickup rather than the usual other way around. The buttons are supposed to follow the curve of the bridge which is why the E and G buttons are lower than the A and D buttons. But especially intonation with rocking of the bridge can change that. Just keep fooling with it with all the above methods and you'll solve the problem and learn a lot about set up in the process if you don't already know it.
I think the problem is more fundamental and mechanical. I could hear it acoustically on my basses. The sound of the other three strings (A,D,G) was strong and punchy but as I transitioned to the E string the strength of the bass sound quickly dropped off. It is most evident on the open string but does show up on fretted notes to a lesser degree. I have tried all kinds of things over the years to address the problem. Different strings (brands, sizes) , various pickup adjustments, reshaping the bridge saddle, Badass bridges, brass nuts, different tuners, Shunting the cap, helper magnets, truss rod adjustments, and winding the strings lower on the patent posts. In most cases the problem persisted. On one bass I did most of those things at once. A Badass, brass nut, different tuners and the E string still refused to resonate properly. I believe the problem is that the bass itself, for whatever reason, absorbs or excentuates certain frequencies more so than others. The open E being one, the A at the 7th fret of the D (sometimes other notes in the same neighborhood) the other. I have not experienced this much on later Ricks (post '84), mostly on 70's 4001s. The neck pickup shift and the lead weight in the neck starting in '75 were part of an attempt to remedy the problem, as was recently told.
Though it was made in that era, my 4002 does not have this problem in the slightest. I can only guess why though. The materials and methods are nearly identical (maple, shedua) except for the fancy trim. The biggest difference being the lack of a REALLY deep route for the treble pickup.
Though it was made in that era, my 4002 does not have this problem in the slightest. I can only guess why though. The materials and methods are nearly identical (maple, shedua) except for the fancy trim. The biggest difference being the lack of a REALLY deep route for the treble pickup.
If it's any help, the E string on my 4001 now has a lot more presence with the Hipshot bridge installed. This is most evident acoustically more than when plugged in, but there is a noticeable difference. It's possible that some of the old tailpiece castings were more "in tune" with the bass than others.
My bass sounded quite dark before, but now has come to life with the Hipshot &the original neck pickup (courtesy of Sergio!) back in place.
Of course, the pickup has no bearing on the unplugged sound of the bass, but maybe the casting was not quite up to par, or had aged badly. The bass certainly didn't live a sheltered life.
I have to believe that each bass (& guitar) differs in the density of the wood used for it's body & neck. No two pieces of wood are ever going to be exactly the same, so each guitar built will have it's own characteristics. The 4000 basses are a perfect example. They are absolutely nothing like a 4001 tonally, yet the construction is not all that different.
My bass sounded quite dark before, but now has come to life with the Hipshot &the original neck pickup (courtesy of Sergio!) back in place.
Of course, the pickup has no bearing on the unplugged sound of the bass, but maybe the casting was not quite up to par, or had aged badly. The bass certainly didn't live a sheltered life.
I have to believe that each bass (& guitar) differs in the density of the wood used for it's body & neck. No two pieces of wood are ever going to be exactly the same, so each guitar built will have it's own characteristics. The 4000 basses are a perfect example. They are absolutely nothing like a 4001 tonally, yet the construction is not all that different.
Plus five minus five!
Good point about the tailpieces. Perhaps the original castings were not so consistent.
The pickups will have an affect (albeit small) on the acoustic sound because of the magnetic fields they produce. The movement of the strings will tend to be pulled into a vertical ellipse by the magnets. I suspect that the shape and orientation of the string waves are the basis for the instrument's tone.
The pickups will have an affect (albeit small) on the acoustic sound because of the magnetic fields they produce. The movement of the strings will tend to be pulled into a vertical ellipse by the magnets. I suspect that the shape and orientation of the string waves are the basis for the instrument's tone.
The only explanation I have ever heard for those plastic spacers is that they were applied on instruments that have thinner headstocks. They are apparently spacers to ensure that not too much post was presented beyond the face of the headstock. At least one of my basses that had the E problem did not have the plastic spacer.
May I respectfully point out that the 'black plastic spacers' were there for a very good reason. Remove any one of such tuners and the reason will become immediately apparent. Or, if you prefer, try to install such tuners with said plastic spacers removed...
A Rickenbacker bass is much like the Jaguar E car - perennially ultra-fashionable.