Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

jingle_jangle wrote:The hump is most likely a result of retooling the router patterns or patching the old tooling. It's just one of those details that somehow slipped through the cracks; this is something that just happens for various reasons.

The problem is that the ones coming off the line today have this ugly hump. Things shouldn't "slip through the cracks" on RIC's bread & butter bass. It's things like the lumpy pickguard that make me skeptical of their attention to detail at the factory today.

daveman wrote: I had understood that the reason for moving the neck pickup back 1/2 inch was to improve the stability of the area where the neck joined the body -- the original design created a large hole (the pickup route) too close to where the neck came free from the body wings, creating an area of weakness that could lead to neck problems. I had not thought it was intended to "improve" the sound of the instrument (and I don't think it does).

I'm with you on that. I think the .5" spacing really hits the sweet spot for the neck pickup, a spot few other basses take advantage of and why I prefer a 4001 to almost anything else out there. If their reason for moving the neck pickup is the same as the 24-frets on guitars, then that'd really be a shame.

Wes: Nothing slipped through the cracks! Paul did not mean it that way. Jeez Louise, these basses and some parts where still largely made by hand up until about 12 years ago. Variations over time are inevitable! There is no ONE right shape for any of the parts. Not using the the shape you prefer is hardly bad QC on the part of RIC. It is the same reason no two 60's basses look exactly alike and why most of them don't look like the v63 or c46 models.


The 1" space puts the pickup where the 24th fret would be on the BASS not the 24th fret on the guitars.

rickfan60 wrote:There is no ONE right shape for any of the parts. Not using the the shape you prefer is hardly bad QC on the part of RIC. It is the same reason no two 60's basses look exactly alike and why most of them don't look like the v63 or c46 models.

+1 This goes for the current discussion on headstock shapes, also.

rickfan60 wrote:Wes: Nothing slipped through the cracks! Paul did not mean it that way. Jeez Louise, these basses and some parts where still largely made by hand up until about 12 years ago. Variations over time are inevitable! There is no ONE right shape for any of the parts. Not using the the shape you prefer is hardly bad QC on the part of RIC. It is the same reason no two 60's basses look exactly alike and why most of them don't look like the v63 or c46 models.

I'm not talking quality control, I'm talking about attention to detail with regard to their designs. Has nothing to do with vintage, we're talking about 4003s rolling out of the factory today. Why do they have lumpy pickguards? Why not smooth, sloping curves like they used to have a few years ago? Did someone make the conscious decision to make lumpy pickguards, or was this something that just happened and no one in Santa Ana noticed or cared?

rickfan60 wrote:The 1" space puts the pickup where the 24th fret would be on the BASS not the 24th fret on the guitars.

I didn't mean anything like that. RIC put 24-frets on guitars to supposedly strengthen the neck joint. If they moved the neck pickup on the bass for the same reason that would be silly because they continued making basses with the .5" spacing anyways. Why not .5" on the 4003?

jps wrote:This goes for the current discussion on headstock shapes, also.

I have nothing against different headstock shapes, I just wish they would have sized TRCs accordingly instead of using the same one on everything regardless of size and proportion.

1965 wrote:I have nothing against different headstock shapes, I just wish they would have sized TRCs accordingly instead of using the same one on everything regardless of size and proportion.

I do agree with you on that, it would be nice if the RI TRC was shorter for the bass models.

jps wrote:

1965 wrote:I have nothing against different headstock shapes, I just wish they would have sized TRCs accordingly instead of using the same one on everything regardless of size and proportion.

I do agree with you on that, it would be nice if the RI TRC was shorter for the bass models.

+1. I wonder how hard it would be to cut one down an 1/8 or 1/4" and not destroy it??

It can be done. Some 2000 series basses have shorter TRCs. I agree, the TRC is just too long sometimes. The tip almost touches the end of the headstock.

I'm not talking quality control, I'm talking about attention to detail with regard to their designs. Has nothing to do with vintage, we're talking about 4003s rolling out of the factory today. Why do they have lumpy pickguards? Why not smooth, sloping curves like they used to have a few years ago? Did someone make the conscious decision to make lumpy pickguards, or was this something that just happened and no one in Santa Ana noticed or cared?

Attention to detail is meaningless here because RIC and RIC alone decides what the shape of any part is at any time. You and I might not like the shape of the guard but that does not make it an "attention to detail" issue. They are what they are.

rickfan60 wrote:You and I might not like the shape of the guard but that does not make it an "attention to detail" issue. They are what they are.

...and easy to change if desired. Case in point:

My experience with nut replacement is that the current RIC nut (at least the white one) doesn't fit the 4001 (79) neck as well as I would have liked. The A and D string grooves are too shallow. Fortunately I had read some posts here about filling in the grooves with baking soda and super glue and that worked pretty well (and easy, too). I just have to check it with every string change. The nut is slightly wider than the fretboard, but I don't mind that since I figure the new boards are a touch wider than the old ones and I'm too lazy too attempt to shave it the "correct" size. As always, I reserve the right to have messed something up during installation

nukebass wrote:My experience with nut replacement is that the current RIC nut (at least the white one) doesn't fit the 4001 (79) neck as well as I would have liked. The A and D string grooves are too shallow. Fortunately I had read some posts here about filling in the grooves with baking soda and super glue and that worked pretty well (and easy, too). I just have to check it with every string change. The nut is slightly wider than the fretboard, but I don't mind that since I figure the new boards are a touch wider than the old ones and I'm too lazy too attempt to shave it the "correct" size. As always, I reserve the right to have messed something up during installation

Some trimming may necessary as the widths may vary slightly. The standard nut slots are probably not to everyone's liking.

OK, quite possibly the most nit-picky (sic) question: which way are the control knobs supposed to face when they are full 'open' ? On my 1976 4001, the dot on the knobs face to the 12 o'clock position - pointing straight up the neck. On my 1989 Blackstar (bought used) the dots point to the 2 o'clock position. On my recently acquired 1999 4001V63, the line points to 3 o'clock (or to my toes if I am holding it). Yes I can change it to any position I want, but how were they set in the factory? And has the 'correct' position changed over time, and could the correct setting on the V63 be different than others?
Thanks!

Ron, here is how the factory has them:

http://img3.musiciansfriend.com/dbase/p ... 589579.jpg

My 1998V63 and 2003C64S came with knobs facing 3:00 when on a stand (or straight down when holding) as you describe.

My 1980 4001 (my first, bought new) came with knobs facing forward when holding; 12:00 when on a stand...Not sure if they were exactly 12:00, or with dots facing my eyes when holding the bass, but they were generally forward. I got used to the dots facing forward from playing that bass for over 20 years, so every subsequent Rick I've bought, I've moved the knobs to match my first one.

Thanks John & Jeff. Sounds like the positions vary. My Blackstar is set just like the factory photo, my 1976 4001 (only owner) did come with the knobs pointing 12 o'clock. I'm used to that and it's what I prefer. And it seems like the V63 was correct for that type, but I hate looking down and seeing the set screws. They're all getting moved to 12 o'clock. High noon! Thanks!