Hello. Just registered, have been reading for a while. I did a search and found some info, but still am trying to find more.
I've had a Fender USA Jazz for several years; before that always had a Rick bass...like forever! The Jazz is passive w/single coils. But it wasn't long before I missed the Rick I'd always had prior; so I bought a new Midnight Blue 4003 a couple years ago.
Fast forward to last week and I now have a line on a good deal on a new 4004L JetGlo.
I'm thinking of possibly selling the Jazz after I get the new Laredo...and owning just the two Rick's.
Anybody here own (or have owned) both a 4003 with a 4004 as your primary basses?, anybody try this combination but then sold one of the Rick's later?, (if so, which one did you get rid of?)...are they different enough to justify having both?, are they radically different?, or just a bit?
I want the Laredo as a recording bass as well as a comfortable player too.
The single coil's in both the Fender & the 4003 can get noisy, so the quieter humbucker's may be just right complement to the 4003.
I know the 4004 is going to be lighter in weight than my 4003. This is a good thing and is why I'm seriously considering going for the Laredo. The Jazz I have is a lighter than my 4003 & has been a reason I've liked the Fender.
If this works for me the Laredo may take the Fender's place nicely, it will wind up costing me some money but not much.
Thanks for any responses.
Joe B
4004L Laredo, how different than a 4003?
Moderators: rickenbrother, ajish4
Hi Joe! Welcome to the forum...
I've had both and ended up selling the L , prematurely I might add. I loved the sound but didn't like the neck at first. I should've kept it and gotten used to the neck, which was a bit too thick for me, at the time...I've since gone through a couple of different Ricks, both 4003's and 4004's and although they both have their merits, I'll get a LOT of playing time with my new 4004cii/BBR when it comes in. Those humbuckers are fantastic!
I've had both and ended up selling the L , prematurely I might add. I loved the sound but didn't like the neck at first. I should've kept it and gotten used to the neck, which was a bit too thick for me, at the time...I've since gone through a couple of different Ricks, both 4003's and 4004's and although they both have their merits, I'll get a LOT of playing time with my new 4004cii/BBR when it comes in. Those humbuckers are fantastic!
1973 4001 MG cb fwi
1986 4003 Shadow
2012 4004Cii FG w/gold trim
1986 4003 Shadow
2012 4004Cii FG w/gold trim
-
jwr2
the 4004L is a different bass ... first of all it has 15k ohm humbuckers wired in series ... this makes it darker sounding than a 4003 ... it is also lighter than a 4003 ... it is sleeker smoother ... no 1950's shaped plastic and chrome ...
I prefer the 4004ci to the 4004L the Cheyenne is warmer sounding and weighs less than the Laredo ...
I was not happy with the factory wiring and setup ... so I have experimented exstensively with my 4004L ... I tried humbuckers, high gains, toasters, 250k pots 500k pots, 1000k pots and a parallel humbucker wiring ...
currently is is wired with 2 hb1 pickups and 2 1000k volume pots and a 500k tone pot and no toggle switch ...
I can get a Squire-like tone out of it ... or like a cold sounding p-bass ... it has an interesting snarl ...
I prefer the 4004ci to the 4004L the Cheyenne is warmer sounding and weighs less than the Laredo ...
I was not happy with the factory wiring and setup ... so I have experimented exstensively with my 4004L ... I tried humbuckers, high gains, toasters, 250k pots 500k pots, 1000k pots and a parallel humbucker wiring ...
currently is is wired with 2 hb1 pickups and 2 1000k volume pots and a 500k tone pot and no toggle switch ...
I can get a Squire-like tone out of it ... or like a cold sounding p-bass ... it has an interesting snarl ...
Hi Joseph!
I do use a '98 4003 and a '95 4004L(recently) as my main instruments.
My 4004L is a tank: The neck is wide and thick and the weight is about 1kg more than the 4003. The sound of the 4004L is also more on the heavier side, very bassy and in the low mids, nice growl though and a very long sustain, but not as crispy as the 4003. The 4003 is a more sensitive lady. She is calm (never had a problem with noise of the PUs) not so heavy but with a lot of harmonics. The sleaky neck of the 4003 is not so tiring as the 4004L after 1hr of play. The thicknes of the 4004L neck at the nut is very uncomfortable. I also dislike the neck PU position of the 4004L, as it makes slapping quite difficult. The shape of the 4004L is more comfortable than the 4003 sharp binding edges.
I do use a '98 4003 and a '95 4004L(recently) as my main instruments.
My 4004L is a tank: The neck is wide and thick and the weight is about 1kg more than the 4003. The sound of the 4004L is also more on the heavier side, very bassy and in the low mids, nice growl though and a very long sustain, but not as crispy as the 4003. The 4003 is a more sensitive lady. She is calm (never had a problem with noise of the PUs) not so heavy but with a lot of harmonics. The sleaky neck of the 4003 is not so tiring as the 4004L after 1hr of play. The thicknes of the 4004L neck at the nut is very uncomfortable. I also dislike the neck PU position of the 4004L, as it makes slapping quite difficult. The shape of the 4004L is more comfortable than the 4003 sharp binding edges.
"The youth of today should start thinking about the state in which they want to leave this planet to Keith Richards..."! Quote by an unknown musician
I have a 75 4001 and just bought a new Laredo.
I like the Laredo neck, but it is "chunkier"...there was a very long thread on the subject here. But to me the differences are good...
I love the Laredo's sound, although I've only had one full band rehearsal with it so far (tomorrow should be #2). It pushes some serious current, and I only had my amp working about 1/2 as hard when I've played it.
Now, compared to a 4003, my 4001 is a tempermental lady. So the clean sound and simple electronics of the Laredo appeal to me...but it's also 2 pounds heavier than the 4004 (which after an hour can compensate for any fatigue in the hand from the chunky neck)...I doesn't get quite the sparkly highs as the 4001, but I use flats on the 4001 and generally keep my tone pot closed a lot...so the 4004 actually has a very good comparable high end with the stock rounds it has.
I also feel that my 4001 has a great low end, so there is no big difference there the way I have the 2 guitars set up...different sounds, but both get good highs and good lows.
The PU positions on my Laredo seem fine to me...there apparently is variation to this depending on the year. I don't really slap much, so that's not on my mind. But I do have a J Bass, and I certainly DON'T like where the neck PU is on that beast. I tend to play above the bridge PU on my Ricks, and the 4004 is super quite about it (no extraneous noise from my fingers hitting the PU like the J has).
I love all three of my basses...but I bought the 4004 so I could semi-retire the 30 year old 4001. So far I've found nothing with it to make me feel like I made a mistake. I even can get by with the single volume and tone knobs...With the amp not working as hard I can coax a lot of different tones out of those controls (in conjunction with the selector switch), so it's really not as restrictive as I had worried about. Besides, my 1966 Fender Mustang (guitar) has only a volume and a tone for it's 2 PU's, and I can get many sounds out of that beast.
So I really can't tell you one way or the other...personally I made sure I have all three!
I like the Laredo neck, but it is "chunkier"...there was a very long thread on the subject here. But to me the differences are good...
I love the Laredo's sound, although I've only had one full band rehearsal with it so far (tomorrow should be #2). It pushes some serious current, and I only had my amp working about 1/2 as hard when I've played it.
Now, compared to a 4003, my 4001 is a tempermental lady. So the clean sound and simple electronics of the Laredo appeal to me...but it's also 2 pounds heavier than the 4004 (which after an hour can compensate for any fatigue in the hand from the chunky neck)...I doesn't get quite the sparkly highs as the 4001, but I use flats on the 4001 and generally keep my tone pot closed a lot...so the 4004 actually has a very good comparable high end with the stock rounds it has.
I also feel that my 4001 has a great low end, so there is no big difference there the way I have the 2 guitars set up...different sounds, but both get good highs and good lows.
The PU positions on my Laredo seem fine to me...there apparently is variation to this depending on the year. I don't really slap much, so that's not on my mind. But I do have a J Bass, and I certainly DON'T like where the neck PU is on that beast. I tend to play above the bridge PU on my Ricks, and the 4004 is super quite about it (no extraneous noise from my fingers hitting the PU like the J has).
I love all three of my basses...but I bought the 4004 so I could semi-retire the 30 year old 4001. So far I've found nothing with it to make me feel like I made a mistake. I even can get by with the single volume and tone knobs...With the amp not working as hard I can coax a lot of different tones out of those controls (in conjunction with the selector switch), so it's really not as restrictive as I had worried about. Besides, my 1966 Fender Mustang (guitar) has only a volume and a tone for it's 2 PU's, and I can get many sounds out of that beast.
So I really can't tell you one way or the other...personally I made sure I have all three!
Above e-mail is inactive. try ed_ardzinski@**** where **** is Hotmail.com or Yahoo.com. I tend to see things inthe hotmail box quicker...
I'm at work, and my home internet has been down...But there are some threads.
The new 4004 pics are in a thread "Fireglo Laredo"...
I've put a few of me playing the 4001 at a gig in the "Pictures of you playing your Rick" thread...that's the monster thread with about 800 replies.
I do have a very small pic on the computer here. Hardly does it justice, the ones I took with a digital camera at home are a lot better:
Link to the better pix:
../5/41246.html"#FFEECC">
The new 4004 pics are in a thread "Fireglo Laredo"...
I've put a few of me playing the 4001 at a gig in the "Pictures of you playing your Rick" thread...that's the monster thread with about 800 replies.
I do have a very small pic on the computer here. Hardly does it justice, the ones I took with a digital camera at home are a lot better:
Link to the better pix:
../5/41246.html"#FFEECC">
Above e-mail is inactive. try ed_ardzinski@**** where **** is Hotmail.com or Yahoo.com. I tend to see things inthe hotmail box quicker...
Hi Ed,
I found them somewhere in the knots of the threads. The burgundy 4001 and the 4004Lii (to distinguish from the old version). I suspected already that my old one might be a nicely converted baseball bat in comparison to your new version one. But it therefore also might be worth considering to be "jeffed" (425). Mine is definitely about 1kg heavier than my 4003.
I found them somewhere in the knots of the threads. The burgundy 4001 and the 4004Lii (to distinguish from the old version). I suspected already that my old one might be a nicely converted baseball bat in comparison to your new version one. But it therefore also might be worth considering to be "jeffed" (425). Mine is definitely about 1kg heavier than my 4003.
"The youth of today should start thinking about the state in which they want to leave this planet to Keith Richards..."! Quote by an unknown musician
-
dr_rickenstein
- New member
- Posts: 23
- Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2005 6:39 am
Alberto-can't tell from your post. But my Laredo is like Jared's 4004 Cii's. The neck PU is about 1" from the end of the neck, and the Bridge PU is just about at the same place as the toggle switch.
And yes, mine has the unfinished bubinga fret board.
And yes, mine has the unfinished bubinga fret board.
Above e-mail is inactive. try ed_ardzinski@**** where **** is Hotmail.com or Yahoo.com. I tend to see things inthe hotmail box quicker...