Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

Tommy wrote: Certainly a Hofner bass is not the best bass out there, but people pay three grand for one.

Well, define "best"..... A Hofner may not do all things but it is the best at doing what a Hofner does....

Interesting discussion. Aside from the RIC website (which is a disgrace and needs to be completely redone), the question of how to best secure RIC's future is a tough one. I suspect this is in large part due to a customer base that has favored traditional designs over RIC's more modern endeavors. The 4004 and 650 series have been around for over two decades now, so they have some commercial viability (and they're great instruments), but they seem to be lesser sellers than the older models. Design-wise, I'm not sure what RIC ought to do to modernize more, given that it's selling all it can make of the traditional models. I'm not sure some of the ideas I'd like to see would make better business sense than what they're already doing.
As far as visibility, giving guitars to the Beatles remains the best thing RIC ever did for itself, and nothing that can be done today will match that legacy. Still, a bit more hustle to introduce artists to RIC, and better online promotion for those rocking Ricks, wouldn't go amiss.

Good thread guys.
I dont see Rick having a problem moving everything they produce at present with Ricks being such great looking instruments with a unique appearance
which also seem to have a knack of turning up on video promos even if you know that the Rick wasnt even on that track to begin with.
We see quite a few Ricks turning up on Later with Jools Holland and Glastonbury so the TV profile is high.

I have banged on for years about the need for Rick to replicate the aluminium hardware used on their 60s basses and other manufacturing tweaks to finally bring out a faithful replica of the basses that started it all for Rickenbacker when people like McCartney Squire Entwistle Gibb and Quaife appeared on TV with their 4001s basses.

Although its not meant as a company comparison you have to tip your hat to Gibson and their quest to replicate the
iconic 1958 Les Paul Sunburst guitar going to great lengths and turning out guitars that are the closest mere average wage earners will get to
owning a priceless piece of Rock History.

It would be nice to see the definitive Rickenbacker 4001 and 4001s 60s replica bass finally hit the shops so that a new generation of musicians can get their hands on a piece of history and start making their own.

So what recording artists did RIC have at their booth at the NAMM show this past weekend??

Kopfjaeger wrote:So what recording artists did RIC have at their booth at the NAMM show this past weekend??

Well, I could have worked it into my busy schedule!

Kopfjaeger wrote:So what recording artists did RIC have at their booth at the NAMM show this past weekend??

Well, if the premise of this thread is true, RIC probably had at their NAMM booth Roger McGuinn, John Fogerty, and Suzi Arden.

Tommy wrote:

Kopfjaeger wrote:So what recording artists did RIC have at their booth at the NAMM show this past weekend??

Well, if the premise of this thread is true, RIC probably had at their NAMM booth Roger McGuinn, John Fogerty, and Suzi Arden.

But they weren't, so they didn't.

This thread brings out a lot of interesting conversation. I think an important issue to consider is why Rickenbacker’s are not as prevalent in today’s music. Other posters have pointed out the lack of new Rick users out there. Why is this? I think the answer, at least in part, is image.

Rickenbacker is sort of a victim of their own image. Rickenbacker guitars are known as “jangle machines”. If that is the sound you are after, nothing works better. I personally think that Ricks are more versatile than this, but I am probably in the minority. This mantra has been beaten into our head for decades. You can’t find an article or review of a Rick guitar without the word “jangle” being mentioned. In the minds of the general “guitar playing” public, a Rick is nicely pigeon-holed into that very specific genre of music.

The tone clichés are very well defined. If you want to play blues, you plug a Stratocaster into a Twin. If you want to play classic rock with the gods, you plug your Les Paul into a Marshall. If you are a shredder, you need to grab that pointy headstock thing. If you want to play “A Hard Day’s Night” or “Mr.Tambourine Man”, then get out your Rick and AC30.

Can Rickenbacker break this image? Should they? Rickenbacker has tried breaking the traditional mold in the past. In the past, they released the models 230 and 260. To my recollection, these models were intended to introduce a less expensive, stripped down model to the public. The model 230 could be had for around 500 bucks in the late 80’s. I bought a 330/12 in that time frame that cost me about $1000, to give some price comparison. Apparently, the experiment didn’t work well because these Ricks were discontinued. There was also the 650 model. This is a great guitar that, imho, can hold its own next to Strats and Les Pauls. Once again, this model didn’t catch on with the general public. Why? I think image. Price wasn’t a factor. You could have a 650 for about the same range as an American Strat, and way cheaper than a Les Paul standard.

Other posters have pointed out that you don’t see many Ricks in music stores. This has also been my experience. I have never walked into a guitar store and had a wide range of Rick guitars to try. Like many others, I came to Rickenbacker because of John Lennon and Roger McGuinn. After I became a Rick fan, I appreciated the history, the classic looks of the instruments, the workmanship, ect. Ricks just seem to feel “right” for me. This isn’t because I played them in stores until I found something I liked. It’s really just happenstance that the guitar of my idols felt like it suited me. Or maybe it isn’t happenstance. Maybe I forced it to feel right because that is the guitar my idols played. Honestly, I don’t know. But back to the point, Ricks aren’t very visible to the general public. You pretty much have to seek them out if you want one. So then you place the order, and wait 8 months to 2 years to get your guitar. Most consumers can just grab a Fender off the rack (of 8 colors and multiple pickup configurations to choose from) and whip out the credit card. Bam instant gratification.

At the end of this wall of text, should Rickenbacker bet on their past to ensure the future? Sure, why not? That’s what people seem to want from them. They can stay busy and work at capacity to meet this expectation. Along the way, some cool stuff like the 4003S and 1993 Plus can be issued. Win all around.

tcsmit29 wrote:Rickenbacker’s are not as prevalent in today’s music.

This is just hearsay as far as I can tell. I see many more people with Ric basses now than I did a decade ago. No idea about the guitars, but I'd imagine it's the same. When I got my first Ric many people had no idea what it was, and now everyone seems to know about Rickenbacker when I pull my bass out at a gig. To me it seems like RIC's visibility has gone up a lot. Fender is still the predominant bass seller of all the instrument companies, but some of the boutique bass fads that were popular when I was getting started seem to have come and gone. RIC seems to have carved into some of that territory in the cultural landscape.

It occurs to me that we could level the same criticism ("betting on the past") at the Fender P and J basses, but no one is giving them a hard time for staying basically the same for decades. Sure Fender makes subtle changes to them, but so does RIC to its instruments. I think the 4001/4003 deserves a similar amount of respect, and judging on the 4003S I got recently, RIC is still subtly improving on the quality of their designs.

Just a bit of a side comment: the first time Rare Blend played the Columbus Rib & Jazz Fest (early '00s) we were on in the early evening after a bunch of bands had already played; when I pulled my old July '73 Fireglo 4001 out of the case the sound man looked at me and said "Finally, a real bass!"

cassius987 wrote:It occurs to me that we could level the same criticism ("betting on the past") at the Fender P and J basses, but no one is giving them a hard time for staying basically the same for decades. Sure Fender makes subtle changes to them, but so does RIC to its instruments. I think the 4001/4003 deserves a similar amount of respect, and judging on the 4003S I got recently, RIC is still subtly improving on the quality of their designs.

The difference is that Fender's bass lineup encompasses more than two models. http://www.fender.com/basses/

Hell I was going to do a comparison but the Rickenbacker website is so bad I can't even tell what models are still in production. Do they still make the 4004? Do they even make 5-string basses at all anymore?

Grey wrote:

cassius987 wrote:It occurs to me that we could level the same criticism ("betting on the past") at the Fender P and J basses, but no one is giving them a hard time for staying basically the same for decades. Sure Fender makes subtle changes to them, but so does RIC to its instruments. I think the 4001/4003 deserves a similar amount of respect, and judging on the 4003S I got recently, RIC is still subtly improving on the quality of their designs.

The difference is that Fender's bass lineup encompasses more than two models. http://www.fender.com/basses/

Hell I was going to do a comparison but the Rickenbacker website is so bad I can't even tell what models are still in production. Do they still make the 4004? Do they even make 5-string basses at all anymore?

Of course, they do; it is not hard to find them.

http://www.rickenbacker.com/model.asp?model=4004L
http://www.rickenbacker.com/model.asp?model=4004Cii

And, you can tell what models are discontinued:

http://www.rickenbacker.com/model.asp?model=4004Cii/5
http://www.rickenbacker.com/model.asp?model=4003FL

Thanks for pointing that out, my fault for missing the (DISCONTINUED) text. So they still make the 4004, but no 5-string models at all? No fretless models anymore either i'm assuming?

It's fair to say Rickenbacker has never stopped tinkering with the design but their product line is nowhere near as diversified as Fender. Take the Mustang Bass or the Jaguar Bass, no earth-shattering innovations there right but a popular mash-up of two great designs. How cool would a 325 bass be? Rickenbacker really only has one bass these days. They have several variations on that one design, but only that one design.

Grey wrote:It's fair to say Rickenbacker has never stopped tinkering with the design but their product line is nowhere near as diversified as Fender. Take the Mustang Bass or the Jaguar Bass, no earth-shattering innovations there right but a popular mash-up of two great designs. How cool would a 325 bass be? Rickenbacker really only has one bass these days. They have several variations on that one design, but only that one design.

Okay... So what? Who is this hurting exactly? Are you worried about them?

I see a lot of punk, Indie and newer rock bands incorporating 6 and some 12-string RICs into their songs, vids and live performances. If you plug a RIC with the Hi-Gains into a decent amp you can get just about any sound you want from grunge to blues. Quilters give a great range of tone with RICs. I don't think the company is betting on the past at all, although the past hasn't hurt the bottom line I am sure. RICs are great looking guitars, light on stage (as opposed to a Les Paul, for instance) and are great especially for rhythm chording and some leads. And the basses have held their own for decades. The RIC corp Facebook site features Warpaint, The Districts, Tame Impala, The Vaccines and Elephant Stone along with Peter Buck and Pete Townsend. Those are happening current groups. RIC is betting on the here and now. The Past is along for the ride. If they turn out more guitars like the 1993 Plus, the future looks pretty bright I would say.