Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

OMG...That thing is real?

Blech

Double Blech!

Yeah, they're real... real different. They look very comical hanging there in a shop - somebody was really drunk when they thought this one up.

Paul, just read the linked Gibson "info". If that is the case, I am truly surprised; it confirms me as a dyed-in-wool bass player. I'd never own a reverse V if I played guitar.

I kinda like it. Then again, I'm odd.

Are we any closer to the truth?

I'm all for an early 4000 reissue!!

aceonbass wrote:LOL! Seriously, I don't know why there are calls to reintroduce basses that never sold that well to begin with. I really think it's the "unobtainium factor". When I talked to Ben H. at last years SoCal RIC Fest, he hinted that "something without binding would be a good idea", so I'm guessing the new bass will be a reintroduction of the S model option.

Unless you're me, in which case you want double the binding, instead of none of it. Still, maybe if RIC inroduces a bass w/o binding, it will free up enough of the workforce to re-introduce a double bound six string to compensate.. .

I'd already forgotten about the reverse flying V. I might have to reconsider my opinion. We played the "Slab Ciy Riot" rally a couple of weekends back, out in the desert at a place called "Slab City," next to Niland, CA, past the Salton sea; there are no sanitation facilities there, and that guitar would have really come in handy for digging a latrine.

TWO latrines.
With one pass.
So to speak.

paologregorio wrote: there are no sanitation facilities there, and that guitar would have really come in handy for digging a latrine.

You're too funny !!

aceonbass wrote:LOL! Seriously, I don't know why there are calls to reintroduce basses that never sold that well to begin with.

Ahead of their time maybe? The single example of a 4002 I've played on several occasions is a bass masterpiece.

OTOH I doubt the 4004s sell all that well either, they surely can't hold a candle in sales to the 4003s made. It's nice that smaller audiences get at least some attention though; and I'm not even clamoring for a 4004 either, I've played close to ten examples, I like them, but if they went sayonara tomorrow I wouldn't shed a tear. I likes me the 4003.

cassius987 wrote:OTOH I doubt the 4004s sell all that well either, they surely can't hold a candle in sales to the 4003s made. It's nice that smaller audiences get at least some attention though; and I'm not even clamoring for a 4004 either, I've played close to ten examples, I like them, but if they went sayonara tomorrow I wouldn't shed a tear. I likes me the 4003.

Joshua, I know that someday you will have a 4004. When you do, you'll have the time to really get acquainted with it, much more than you can in a music store, Then you might be spending a bit less time with the 4003.

Judging by the bodyshape of some of the one-off models I'd say a reissue 1970s model maybe. (72-73 - the ones with the goodies)
Someone must have put that shape in the CNC.
A good second guess may be a RM1999.
Since thay can't do 63 or Macca's bass again this would be the logic continuation of the same bass.
As long as there are baby-boomers and 60ies fans around to buy them off course.
This leads me back to the seventies models, which appeal to that generation whose kids left the house now and have wallets full of nostalgia to buy.