Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

sloop_john_b wrote:Gosh I hope that 4005WB sells at that price.

+1,000,000

An 8 string FL that RIC made for someone...

I forgot about that one Andy. Not just an 8-string fretless, but Desert Gold with black trim 8-string fretless.....

rickfan60 wrote:For rarity, there are probably a bunch of one-offs out there that have not yet surfaced. Celebrity guitars are a different category - not rare per se.

The ones we know or have some vague idea about:

'67 JG 4005WB owned by Jeff Scott 1
DCM Proto 1
4005LH 2
4001/8 2
4005LS 3
4004 RCA ?
4005/5 ?
4005/6 ?
4005/8 ?
4005/S Blackstar 1?
Shadow 50-60
4004LK 60
DCM 75th 75
Tuxedo 120 (or 125)
Redneck 125 (so says the cert anyway)
Bonafide RM ?
4002 Probably less than 200
4080 Probably less than 200
4001 21fret ?
GF Model ?
Blackstar 200
4001CS 1000


Did I miss anything?

Yes, these:

RM3261 4000FL There is also my 4001v63 with factory-original 1" neck pickup spacing, possibly a one-off, but who would know?

wints wrote:An 8 string FL that RIC made for someone...

IIRC that person also has/had a 4003S/5 FL in Silver ... Mark Rowe a.k.a. "Surf Rat"?

I might as well post this one that Ted has on his list:

4003S/5 SPC "quasi-Blackstar"

Yup, Mark Rowe.

I believe there was a lefty Shadow made...I recall it being on ebay.

Also a left-handed 4008 (yes- 4008) from 1982, with a custom mirror-image peghead (pre-dating the other basses by 6 years), in factory Azureglo. I bid on this one and lost....

Also: Any bona-fide 4001 prior to 1963. Where are they.....

Ginger's fretless 4002 must be fairly rare , I don't think there were many other fretless ones .

Rarest doesn’t much unless an instrument is also very desirable. I am not a giant fan of basses made after 1973 or any of the 4005’s. A one of a kind bass made after 1973 would have less intrigue than an earlier model. Respectfully, a 4005 regardless how rare it was may never out weight a 60’s 4001or RM1999 in value to some buyers. McCartney’s RM1999 is surely the Rickenbacker bass that would draw the highest auction price. In its condition however, without being owned and played by Paul it may not break the $10,000 mark even though it is an extremely rare RM1999 left handed bass.

vincent_gallo wrote:Rarest doesn’t much unless an instrument is also very desirable. I am not a giant fan of basses made after 1973 or any of the 4005’s. A one of a kind bass made after 1973 would have less intrigue than an earlier model. Respectfully, a 4005 regardless how rare it was may never out weight a 60’s 4001or RM1999 in value to some buyers. McCartney’s RM1999 is surely the Rickenbacker bass that would draw the highest auction price. In its condition however, without being owned and played by Paul it may not break the $10,000 mark even though it is an extremely rare RM1999 left handed bass.

I, in most respects, agree. Just because something is rare doesn't mean it has extreme value. An 8 string fretless bass, for example, would be rare because nobody has any use for one. Instruments become valuable in a world market because they are iconic. Paul McCartney's Ric is VERY iconic, Chris Squiers bass is iconic. Basses built in this spirit will, IMO, most likely remain the most valuable in a world market. Vintage examples built closest to the core of initial conceptualization will, almost always trump rarity - most often they are both.

I've played a lot of Ricks and, as a player, some of the sexiest/rarest ones I've held just didn't have a resonant E (i know there are fixes/theories etc about all that and I don't want to start a flame war) but my 72 has a HUGE E and all the goodies so, to me, as a player, the best one I can afford that does what I need it to do is the most valuable. Collector value and player value have nothing to do with each other - you CAN get both though.

Bubbles like this (rick forum) will hold value in a different light because this is more of a special interest group than a reflection of the Rickenbacker world market. I don't think I've ever even seen anyone playing a 5 string Rick. 4005's are so sought after and, after playing one, I don't get it (must be the rarity factor). Please take my opinions with a grain of salt - they are just that - opinions. Different strokes/folks.

For the record, McCartney's Rick is NOT an RM 1999 as it was given to him directly by F.C. Hall. It was never handled by Rose Morris. That was the point of my mention of bonafide RM's. There is a tendancy to call any early S model found in Europe ( or OZ for that matter) an RM. Strictly speaking, you would have to prove an instrument was actually distributed by Rose Morris to make that claim. The only way to do that is to have an original bill of sale or other documentation from RM or RIC showing the SN had in fact been shipped to RM. Otherwise, it is just an S.

Funny how Macca's bass, DA 23, and given to him, is seen not to be an RM, yet DA 24, once owned by Pete Greenwood is.

I tend to think of DA 23 as a RM bass in most all respects. It was made with the first export batch of RM basses, and held back, specifically for personal presentation to McCartney. If they had sent it to him in the UK, it surely would have been through RM and therefore "legit"...

According to Beatles' Gear, the Beatles were in Hollywood, and F.C. Hall and some other people of Ric came over to the place where they were staying and presented Paul with the 4001S.

Being the single most iconic Ric bass ever - does it really even matter?

vincent_gallo wrote:Rarest doesn’t much unless an instrument is also very desirable.

I tend to agree with this in principal, for I have owned and still own some one-off Rickenbacker instruments, or very low production instruments, i.e. two or three only made. While they are ultra-rare, they are not as visible as, say, a 4005 or a 360/12 O.S. from the 60s, of which they made dozens of each. Desire/demand does play a big role IMO....

wints wrote:If they had sent it to him in the UK, it surely would have been through RM and therefore "legit"...

Yes, "If" being the operative word.