Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

Hey, I'm really struglling with the idea of removing my horeshoe cover on my 4001 v63. So much easier to play with out it. But it looks so much nicer with it. Is there a technical reason that it should remain on? Radio interference?

You mean the shoes?A real horseshoe pickup these shoes are magnetized on the re-issue there not so it doesn't matter if there removed.

I removed the 'shoes from both my v63 and my c64s. I didn't notice a significant difference in tone, but there were some other variables that may have come into play and it wasn't easy to tell which made the difference:

1) I installed new strings at the time I removed the 'shoes.
2) I was now able to play directly over the pickup which affects the tone.
3) I may not have set the pickup height exactly the same as it was prior to the operation.

There have been others here including John Hall who have argued that there has to be a difference in tone, but it wasn't anything I could hear. Maybe I should put the 'shoes back on again to compare!

No doubt the 'shoes look prettier, but playing bass with something covering the strings is like driving with a patch over one eye for me!

Agreed,especially if your a finger picker.

I personally like the cover/shoes on. The bass just doesn't look right without it. It looks like a car with a missing hubcap. I personally don't mind it being there. It doesn't get in my way.

Jeff-

you should take those shoes off-and send them to me!



They don't bother me, since I don't play...



I just like the look, but the "real" shoes do affect tone somewhat-your choice.

I play my V63 with fingers and the shoes on. It did take me a little while to get used to it, but now I wouldn't think about removing them. I rest my thumb right on the top shoe.
Now playing with a pick is a different story. I can do it, but I just don't have enough room.

Yes, I can see how some people could get used to the 'shoes. I know that some of you use them as a handrest or as a reference point to the strings.

Maybe someday I'll put mine back on and get used to them.

If I ever decide to give the 'shoes away Jared, you'll be first on my list!

I agree that the v63 and c64 look better with the shoes on, but I'm more interested in their functionality and for me its a big sigh of relief when that thing is out of my way!

I think a v63 would look cool with a 4003 surround and a high gain. Sort of a v68. Where's that photo of Ken's new C64JG again?

I play with a pick. The shoe does get in the way. I noticed when I play down by the bridge i have to angle my hand a certain way sometimes and it tires me out. I'll give it a chance and see if I adapt. Playing in front of the shoe is not that big a deal. I rest my hand on the shoe. But for that growly bite, i usually play down by the bridge.

"There have been others here including John Hall who have argued that there has to be a difference in tone, but it wasn't anything I could hear"

Since you can't hear a difference, I'll trade you a higain for the horseshoe pickup!

I would never remove the shoes from my V63, but, I have to agree with Jeff, They do cover what I consider to be the "sweetspot".

I am still amazed by the horseshoe interest and the debates over the years about sound/tone etc...

Without looking, I don't think the vast majority of people could tell the difference when playing an original bass with the horseshoes or without them.

The tone differential in this instance comes far more from my fingers and the placing of the plucking hand along with the instrument/amp settings.

In the V and CS series with the hotter pick ups I'd say it's even less of a difference, just more an aesthetic.

The later hi-gain is a far more versatile and effective pick up for the vast majority of bassists.

We all just wanna look like Squire with something that looks like an RM in our hands....

... That's what it boils down to... the bloody RM1999.

Mark nailed it. Well said.

...RM1999??? Is that a famous serial no.?
It does not ring a bell for me, sorry!