Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

Wow, this thread is still active? Have any patterns or tendancies emerged from the measurements?

Ted, we're glad to see YOU are still active. Welcome back, buddy!

Welcome back Ted!! Good to have you join us again!

I finally figured out how to post here

Welcome back Ted!

rickfan60 wrote:Wow, this thread is still active? Have any patterns or tendancies emerged from the measurements?

Hey Ted! Patterns - everyone still likes the feel of the necks they preferred before! I searched, and it looks like there are Excel viewers for UNIX, like antiexcel.

I've never really made a big deal about the neck girth. I guess since I play 5 string basses quite a bit, I really am not bothered by a thicker neck. However since since thread has had quite the longevity that it has and I've had some spare time, I got curious and finally measured neck girths on my Ricks.

John A, I'll be emailing a copy of your excel file in a bit after I update it with my measurements.

I'll watch for it Joey.

Justs needs a DCM!

Is this Girth way of measurement working for all you guys and galls? For me it is not. For me size from e to g is most important. Size from fretboard to the back of the neck is much less important for me. I like small necks but not necesarily thin necks. I do not like thin and wide necks. I prefer measuring thickness and wideness like Ibanez does in this picture: or even better also at 3 and 5th fret.

berth wrote:Is this Girth way of measurement working for all you guys and galls? For me it is not. For me size from e to g is most important. Size from fretboard to the back of the neck is much less important for me. I like small necks but not necesarily thin necks. I do not like thin and wide necks. I prefer measuring thickness and wideness like Ibanez does in this picture: or even better also at 3 and 5th fret.

Yeah, its kinda funny Bert. Different measurements are more important to different people. I read a lot of discussion on this forum about thin neck Ricks; thin being the C or D measurement in your picture. My 2003 C64S has a very thin C/D measurement. But still, it was far from my favorite Rick bass neck and just not as comfortable for me to play. I was sure it felt much larger than my 70's necks and late 80's necks and I wanted to know why. When I play, my hand basically wraps all the way around the neck. Sometimes I find my thumb on my E string. Then it occurred to me that that wraparound distance was noticeably larger on my thin-necked C64S than some of my older Ricks. My C64S's neck is thin, but higher volume; its more "squarish" like a floor plank than my others. Then I wrapped a measuring tape all the way around the neck of my C64S and compared the measurements to a few of my favorite Rick necks. With this "girth" measurement I was able to see why I preferred one neck over the other.

Some people are like you; the "A" distance is the most important. For some people the "C/D" distance is the most important. Some people are like me; the wraparound (girth) measurement is most important. And for many (usually larger-handed people), none of these measurements really matter very much as they aren't particularly sensitive to the differences anyway.

rickfan60 wrote:Wow, this thread is still active? Have any patterns or tendancies emerged from the measurements?

TED! Happy New Year! Good to see you back! I'd say the general trend in neck girth seems to be (as we already knew!)... they've gotten larger over the years! In my opinion, the biggest change has been since about 1992.

After I started recording measurements in John A's spreadsheet, I was amazed that my S/5 had less girth than some of the 4 stringers!! However I am skeptical about a couple of the measurements that I saw on the spreadsheet.

rickenbrother wrote:After I started recording measurements in John A's spreadsheet, I was amazed that my S/5 had less girth than some of the 4 stringers!! However I am skeptical about a couple of the measurements that I saw on the spreadsheet.

What year is your S/5, Joey? My '89 S/5 has your typical small late 80's neck. My 2000 S/5 has a chunky neck like the 4003's made at the time. For a 5-string, I prefer the fatter neck. I think RIC just used a 4003 neck slab and put an elongated head wing on top to accommodate the extra tuner.

I agree with your skepticism though. In a perfect world, the same person would use the same tape measure and the same methods to measure all of the different bass necks. Many of the measurements were my own basses and a few others were somebody else's basses, measured by me. Those ones have consistent measuring methods and the same measuring tape. So its a less than perfect sample of info, but I think it makes its point.

rickenbrother wrote:After I started recording measurements in John A's spreadsheet, I was amazed that my S/5 had less girth than some of the 4 stringers!! However I am skeptical about a couple of the measurements that I saw on the spreadsheet.

I thought the S5's had the same neck as the S4's, only with 5 strings.