Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

teeder wrote:I still would like to get a '60's 4001, and something in a little cleaner condition.

What's wrong with the one you have?

Good call on keeping the 4002 Dave (although if you ever re-consider... ).
Was the P-bass the one at 12th Fret? I think was listed as a 58 so it may not be the same bass. I'm not a huge P-bass fan, but this is a nice one!
http://www.12fret.com/used/FenderPbass58n022899.jpg

86kubicki wrote:Good call on keeping the 4002 Dave (although if you ever re-consider... ).
Was the P-bass the one at 12th Fret? I think was listed as a 58 so it may not be the same bass. I'm not a huge P-bass fan, but this is a nice one!
http://www.12fret.com/used/FenderPbass58n022899.jpg

That was it! A friend of mine works there and gave me a heads up. After sleeping on it, there was no way I'd the 4002 go!

jeff thomas wrote No offense Woody, but...YUCK!! I have a 4005 and the thing about the bass that I dislike the most is the pickup spacing. I think RIC put them where they did for aesthetic reasons rather than tone.
yeah on the 4005,maybe,but another 4004,the lemmy model,has that spacing,with a third middle pickup thrown in. i just happen to like the bridge pickup being right next to the bridge,ala the 4002. actually i am very happy with my cii,just wishing out loud on that idea. (mine is one with the more rearward located pickups too)

I parted from my '99 4003 last year. I did this because I wanted to buy an 4001c64 JG. I also did this because I never really liked the way this Rick played. By reading on this forum I found out about different neck dimensions with Ricks. This one had a thick neck. I then knew why I mostly took my 4000 with me. The 4001c64 may also go someday. It is one of the best sounding Ricks I have but the neck of this bass is thin and wide. I like thin and small (like my '73 or my '86).

basse wrote:So I went home last night, took out my 4002 and played it for a while and then decided that regardless what was offered or available (unless it was one of Geddy's own 4001s) that I can't consider letting it go. No matter what's available! It was my dream to own this model bass for 15 or so years and now that I've got one I just can't let it go. Sorry Steve!!!!

And, I'm glad I made the decision before I found out that the '59 Precision is on hold for someone else. It just reinforces that I made the right one.

I guess I'm going to have to be content and settle my GAS with my most recent acquisition... It's a Precision shaped James Trussart Steelcaster. And yep, the body is made of metal. I was REALLY surprised how well it plays and how much bite it has for 2 jazz pickups. Definitely a winner!



Although, I'm getting more than a little frustrated in my search for another Ric... Anyone up for a trade of a 73 or earlier 4001, CS or non-MG V63 plus some cash for a very early Wal ProIIe? I can send photos if anyone is interested.

PM sent...although having said that the last 2 PMs sent seem to be sat in the Outbox and not in the Sent...am I doing something wrong? When I go in the Outbox it says they're sent. So why aren't they in the Sent folder and why are they in the Outbox?

rickaddict wrote:

woodyng wrote:what would it take? probably another rick i wanted more at the time,as in when i sold my 4002 and later bought a 4004cii....i still wish the cii had the pickup spacing like a 4005.....

No offense Woody, but...YUCK!! I have a 4005 and the thing about the bass that I dislike the most is the pickup spacing. I think RIC put them where they did for aesthetic reasons rather than tone.

Then again, some people like 'em...

...like me! I think the 4005 pickup spacing offers a greater range of tonal possibilities than the standard 4000 series spacing. Regarding the 4004 spacing, I too, think the wider spacing would be great; the bridge pickup on the 4004Cii I had with the pickups away from the neck had a great tone that I can not get with the bridge pickup on any of my other 4001/3 basses. I can get closest to it with my 4005WB. If nothing else, having the neck pickup against the neck and the bridge pickup in the further away position would probably be ideal on a 4004, and could easily been done since the two spacings have already been used on it at different times in it's life.

What would it take to part with your Rics...

Right now, a hell of a lot more than anyone's willing to pay. However, once I'm dead & buried, my heirs will be selling all of my guitars because I'm a lefty and they're not.

I guess I should leave them instructions on how to access the For Sale section of the forum. Right Peter?

D.I.V.O.R.C.E.

rickaddict wrote:

teeder wrote:I still would like to get a '60's 4001, and something in a little cleaner condition.

What's wrong with the one you have?

Note the "1" on the end.
There's nothing wrong with the '69 4001S conversion, but I do love the sparklies and checker binding!
It would have to be something very special though.

woodyng wrote: yeah on the 4005,maybe,but another 4004,the lemmy model,has that spacing,with a third middle pickup thrown in. i just happen to like the bridge pickup being right next to the bridge,ala the 4002. actually i am very happy with my cii,just wishing out loud on that idea. (mine is one with the more rearward located pickups too)

jps wrote: ...like me! I think the 4005 pickup spacing offers a greater range of tonal possibilities than the standard 4000 series spacing. Regarding the 4004 spacing, I too, think the wider spacing would be great; the bridge pickup on the 4004Cii I had with the pickups away from the neck had a great tone that I can not get with the bridge pickup on any of my other 4001/3 basses. I can get closest to it with my 4005WB. If nothing else, having the neck pickup against the neck and the bridge pickup in the further away position would probably be ideal on a 4004, and could easily been done since the two spacings have already been used on it at different times in it's life.

I think I'd like my 4005 more if the bridge pickup were in the 4001 location or if it had a third pickup in the 4001 bridge pickup location. I've actually considered putting a 3rd pickup in the middle and wiring the bridge and middle pickups together, using the 5th knob as a pan between the bridge and middle pickups. But then...I'd probably be spending the time and money to do the mod (reducing my 4005's value in the process), only to discover that I just prefer the 4001/3 anyway.

8mileshigh wrote:D.I.V.O.R.C.E.

Hide them at my place.

jeff-i could be wrong (duh), but i don't think adding a third pickup to the 4005 would be detrimental to its value. there are an awful lot of 3 pickup rick guitars out there,so i am surprised that option was never offered on the bass. i do think it would look cool as hell as well......

Woody, I'm gonna have to disagree with you on two points, here:

I don't believe that aesthetics had anything to do with original pickup locations on the 4005. I think the aim here was to get the neck pickup close to that "sweet spot" and to locate the bridge pickup as close to the bridge as possible. It really seems to follow standard Rick guitar philosophy, as well as using Rick guitar parts with the designs modded to work with 4 bass strings. The locations of the pickups would seem to offer a lot of tonal variation.

I agree with Jeff on the idea of a 3rd pickup and rewiring to offer a wider tonal palette, but of course it would affect the value. Anytime you as much as drill an extra hole into a valuable vintage Rick, you're messing with its value. I could see this instrument up for sale and links and photos being posted here...there would be a healthy debate on the value compromise of adding the 3rd pickup, and I think the conclusion would be, "too bad...he shoulda left it alone".

Of course, there would be the Jeff Scott/Rare Blend celebrity connection to consider, too...

woodyng wrote:jeff-i could be wrong (duh), but i don't think adding a third pickup to the 4005 would be detrimental to its value. there are an awful lot of 3 pickup rick guitars out there,so i am surprised that option was never offered on the bass. i do think it would look cool as hell as well......

I agree that it would look cool! I think it would help the tone (for my playing style and tone preference). Plus it would also be a nice place to anchor my thumb. Thanks for the opinion. I do have a matching hi gain pickup from a 4001. If the job were done right, it might not be a value killer. There might be others like us that like the idea of a third pup in a 4005.

A few months back, I put my extra hi gain under the strings of my 4005 just to see what it would look like. I liked it when it was in the 4001 position (closer to the bridge pup). It looked kinda Lemmy-like! But when I put it directly in the center it didn't look "right" to me.