Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

I had the pleasure of playing Tony's bass yesterday, and all I can say is WOW!

Actually, I can say more, so I will! The neck is the thinnest and easiest to play of any Rick I've played. Definitely thinner than a '68, (my own, and two others that I've played) and I'd say it's even thinner than the handful of the '64 RMs I've played, which LOOKS scary-thin, but feels quite solid and holds tune fine. It really is an amazingly comfortable bass to play, and the response is very lively; great sustain. And the SOUND is incredible, especially for having only the horseshoe pickup. I don't know what that pickup is rated at, but it's a beast! It has far more volume and well-rounded frequency response than any horseshoe'd bass I've played. Tony and I A/B'd his '62 with a handful of other 60's era 4001/1999 basses, and the '62 horseshoe blew all the others away by a longshot. The poles on that '62 HS appear to be solid Alnico poles, as opposed to the P-90 screws used from 63-67, or pan-head screws used in 67-69.

Do you know if the pickup is rated at 7.5, Tony?

For what it's worth, all the basses we played were strung with Flats. I'd LOVE to hear that '62 with a set of Steel roundwounds!

I don't know Mark. I'm a bit hesitant to lift the pickgaurd.

Here are some more pics as promised...

No worries, Tony! Regardless of the ohm value, it sounds great! If you ever do get curious, you might be able to get a reading off the tip of the guitar cord.

More...

walker wrote:No worries, Tony! Regardless of the ohm value, it sounds great! If you ever do get curious, you might be able to get a reading off the tip of the guitar cord.

Not the most accurate method, but I guess we'll get an idea Mark. Let me check...

7.5K

Interesting. The dominant volume must be attributed to the strength of the magnetism. We did the touch test with a screw driver on top of the poles, and the '62 HS has far more pull than the other HS pickups we tested.

Beautiful bass. One thing that Tony pointed out was the "iridescent quality" of the fretboard wood. I don't know what kind of wood it is, but it almost looks like a quilted maple when you see the patterns shift around in the light.

So beautiful.

GRAIL.

That is sweet, Tony. I'd keep flats on it, one the sound, and two they tend to be lower tension in most cases. Those are some huge machine heads though. Sweet bass!

woodyng wrote:GRAIL.

Great Rickenbacker And Ivan Lovesit?

Hey Ivan,

Rounds!? Oh no...I'm strictly a flats guy! It's fitted with NOS '60s Ric Maximas.

opticnerve wrote:Hey Ivan,

Rounds!? Oh no...I'm strictly a flats guy! It's fitted with NOS '60s Ric Maximas.

Nice how do you manage to get those? Do you just jump on the opportunity when you see one, or do you have a hookup?
Good call on the flats, they have such a better sound.

IvanMunoz wrote:

opticnerve wrote:Hey Ivan,

Rounds!? Oh no...I'm strictly a flats guy! It's fitted with NOS '60s Ric Maximas.

Nice how do you manage to get those? Do you just jump on the opportunity when you see one, or do you have a hookup?
Good call on the flats, they have such a better sound.

Actually, Chris @ POTR's put on the Maximas. I do have a few sets though that I picked up on the bay.

I just replaced the TI's on my 1999 with Maximas yesterday....SWEET!!!

It's subjective as far as the sound difference between flats & rounds. Go tell Chris Squire that he's using the wrong strings!!

that bass is sooo nice-and i believe you said all-original...so how are the frets?