Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

bassduke49 wrote:I'm not sure what you find objectionable. The CS was in production for about ten years, and yes, in parallel with the V63. At the time of its introduction in 1991, the CS retailed for $1529, while the V63 was $1429. So you were paying a hundred bucks more for the special wood, different paint, and signature pickguard (some suggest there was some other modifications made but I can't confirm). Sounds reasonable to me. But the secondary market seems to have increased the value and asking price of the CS basses much higher than comparable V63s. That's our tough luck. If people are paying more for something they want, we have only ourselves to blame.

As far as the "consistency" goes, RIC never claimed that the CS would be exactly like Squire's original (to our benefit), and the subtle changes over the years can be considered improvements by some. There's no implied promise that the last one would be identical to the first one.

I don't find anything objectionable at all Paul.

I never played one so I can't judge myself, however over the years I have read nothing solid that makes this bass any different then a V63 with a Vermilion Fretboard and inferior paint job?

Don't get me wrong.

The reason I researched was the fact I was looking to acquire one.

I have a love/hate relationship with Rick which started when I bought a 4001s in 79' or (78?). Everything I read about it said it was the same as the 4001 except mono, no binding and dotted fret markers. When I research it said Neck through body... when it arrived it was a set neck... gee thanks for the update Rick, there was nothing about a set neck in ANY literature from my distributor in Canada...none.

However if just swapping out parts/pieces in the guise of 'improvements' seems a little disappointing.
Has anyone owned a same production month/year V63 and 4001cs and can compare in detail?

Really I am just trying to understand whats the 'Magic' on these over a V63 and a 4001 cs of the same time period production run?

Hi Andrew,

I owned both a v63 and cs at the same time.[both lefty's]The sound simalar but not the same.I think the finish being softer is t

he biggest difference on the cs. After 20yrs it changed a bit.It's a little brighter now.The neck on v63 moved alot more then cs.

mike

pamenter wrote:Hi Andrew,

I owned both a v63 and cs at the same time.[both lefty's]The sound simalar but not the same.I think the finish being softer is t

he biggest difference on the cs. After 20yrs it changed a bit.It's a little brighter now.The neck on v63 moved alot more then cs.

mike

Well thanks for the reply, But that doesn't really answer my question (unless both basses were built during the same production time period?)
I mean V63 and any other rics all sound different depending on the production run and parts/pieces available.

But thanks for the reply

I've never understood why these command such a premium over the comparable V63's, especially with the huge number built. As mentioned before, a COY V63 is far more rare, but that combination of color/wood, and, the Squire factor keep these basses to a very high resale.

From a technical standpoint, the years here have shown they aren't exactly identical to Chris's old bass, or, even to each other. Looking back now, with over a decade of production, that original thought does seem rather optimistic. The tone of such basses is purely subjective, as is the discussion that follows.

I highly doubt 20 years ago, even with his forward thinking, John Hall could have imagined a worldwide website where members would be measuring necks widths and pick up impedance with a view to critiquing minutiae!

Bottom line. Enjoy them. It would appear they have certainly gained the collector status, and, they sound and look good great as well...

ajish4 wrote:IMHO, it has a sound ALL it's own.

I own both a V63 & a CS. The V63 is a 1988 and the CS is a 1995.

I don't know if it is the Vermilion or what....but as was said earlier...it sounds almost "piano like".

The V63 has a more IN YOUR FACE sound. Just more guttural, very different indeed.

I'd agree. I've owned two CSs, both very different in some ways, but sonically they were the most similar of the 100 or so Rics I've played, and that sound was very piano-like. Compared to the V63s I've played (and I've played a V63 from the same year as my 1st CS) it was certainly different, and to be honest less to my liking. I absolutely Iove the look of the CS (and those early necks) but the two I've had haven't set my world alight sonically; not enough growl for me (of course your definition of growl may differ to mine). I definitely think the vermilion has something to do with it as the sound of both of mine had a somewhat different quality to every other Ric I've played.

I've owned a CS since I bought it new in '92 - #425. I also briefly owned a '92 V63, and I can tell you that they were 2 very different basses in both sound and feel. There is definitely something very special about the CS. The body is 1/16'' thinner, the neck is thinner, and there's the vermillion. Yes, there was an issue with the paint job at some point, but Ric re-finished the bass at no cost to me.

Droog, you obviously have a bit of a thing against Rickenbacker, we get it. But maybe lighten up on the confrontational attitude and you'll find a lot of useful information and help around here.

Sorry Tom, I had to edit your post, but you're right and I agree with your feeling.
Someone is going to be next on the time-out list if the confrontational attitude does not stop.

Droog61 wrote:

bassduke49 wrote:I'm not sure what you find objectionable. The CS was in production for about ten years, and yes, in parallel with the V63. At the time of its introduction in 1991, the CS retailed for $1529, while the V63 was $1429. So you were paying a hundred bucks more for the special wood, different paint, and signature pickguard (some suggest there was some other modifications made but I can't confirm). Sounds reasonable to me. But the secondary market seems to have increased the value and asking price of the CS basses much higher than comparable V63s. That's our tough luck. If people are paying more for something they want, we have only ourselves to blame.

As far as the "consistency" goes, RIC never claimed that the CS would be exactly like Squire's original (to our benefit), and the subtle changes over the years can be considered improvements by some. There's no implied promise that the last one would be identical to the first one.

I don't find anything objectionable at all Paul.

I never played one so I can't judge myself, however over the years I have read nothing solid that makes this bass any different then a V63 with a Vermilion Fretboard and inferior paint job?

Don't get me wrong.

The reason I researched was the fact I was looking to acquire one.

I have a love/hate relationship with Rick which started when I bought a 4001s in 79' or (78?). Everything I read about it said it was the same as the 4001 except mono, no binding and dotted fret markers. When I research it said Neck through body... when it arrived it was a set neck... gee thanks for the update Rick, there was nothing about a set neck in ANY literature from my distributor in Canada...none.

However if just swapping out parts/pieces in the guise of 'improvements' seems a little disappointing.
Has anyone owned a same production month/year V63 and 4001cs and can compare in detail?

Really I am just trying to understand whats the 'Magic' on these over a V63 and a 4001 cs of the same time period production run?

Andrew you had a thread completely deleted for similar comments this morning. The attitude that you are continuing to display is not appreciated and will not be tolerated. The fact that your thread was deleted should have been enough to let you know that you crossed the line and broke the rules. If I have cause to warn you again there will be no coming back for another attempt to take a round out of RIC and their management.

My apologies to the rest of the particpants in this thread for being forced to drive home a point to a single member in my previous post. Please carry on with your discussion.

I have always regretted not getting the CS I tried out in the '90s. I was in a Fender phase at the time and bought a jazz bass that I traded about four years on... What a doofus!!!

As a V63 owner, I have to admit that the CS is a bit more special, but that the market price premium pretty much takes this into account.

gearhed289 wrote:I've owned a CS since I bought it new in '92 - #425. I also briefly owned a '92 V63, and I can tell you that they were 2 very different basses in both sound and feel. There is definitely something very special about the CS. The body is 1/16'' thinner, the neck is thinner, and there's the vermillion. Yes, there was an issue with the paint job at some point, but Ric re-finished the bass at no cost to me.

Droog, you obviously have a bit of a thing against Rickenbacker, we get it. But maybe lighten up on the confrontational attitude and you'll find a lot of useful information and help around here.

Actually that is far from True, I love Ricks and Rickenbacker. Thats is why I paid top dollar to obtain 2.
I do however, have a dry sarcastic humor, perhaps that doesn't display in the tone of my writing and for that I apologize.

However I have read different reviews on the 4001 CS, I am not trying to be combative, but really wanted to know if there was something to the 4001cs. I myself have been in pursuit of one for several years.

(On another note when I brought up the S set neck topic I was eventually getting around to the point that perhaps it should have been a 4000 'special'?, I wasn't suggesting a lawsuit or deformation there people)

The questions I asked no matter how 'direct' or 'troll like?' they may have seemed, were statements made in other reviews from forums I researched (perhaps i should have referenced said links?). Some people mentioned temperamental paint? others said they where the same as a 4001v63.
These are not my personal statements as I have NEVER seen a 4001 CS.

I repeat I have NEVER seen held or played a 4001cs

I have no true opinion

As I mentioned before which seemed to get overlook, I myself am looking into one so if anyone has an opinion please PM me.

These negative statements are out there and whether fallacy or not, I was hoping some one here could address this down to the acid test.
However I have seen that one must be careful how one words anything on this forum.

Thats it,... peace out.

I too have never held, played or even seen a 4001CS.








(If anyone wants to help me out though by lending me one for a bit, then that'd be grand!)

I had a small shot of Big Ts CS last year and i was bricking it.I imagined all kinds of final destination scenarios got to say it was an awesome bass to behold..

I know one thing, I miss mine bad! Had #207 and dealt her a while back.

Would this one be considered #0?