Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

Good morning all..

I've just purchased my first Ric as well as first bass.

It's a 1999 4003 in Jetglo, mint condition, absolutly NO scratches, dings, dents. I damn near don't want to play it ! .

S/N 99 04034

A few questions if I may ask.

I've already done the Schaller straplocs as advised by a few of you (thanks guys, great help and response)

First, about the finish, I have a few guitar stands that specify "not recomended for guitars with Nitro Cellulous finishes"

Will these give the finish on my Ric fits ?

Also, I generally use Martin guitar polish on the rest of my guitars. Is this ok to use on the 4003 ?

I've also heard the debate over the high gain button pole pup, which I assume this has vs the horseshoe and toaster variety. What's the deal with that ?

I've heard somethwere that the Ric's have unique finish, so I want to be most protective of it.

Finally, and the big one, what are the weak / strong points of the 99 4003 ?

Thanks guys, this is a GREAT forum and a fantastic exchange of info..

Appreciate it..

Mark..

Hi there, Mark.
I think I can point out some of the weaknesses and strengths of a '99 4003 (though I've never owned one!).
Objectively, its pluses are: neck stronger and easier to adjust, virtually perfect as concerns construction & finish, hotter pickups.
Subjectively, its minuses are: does not sound as unique as a 4001 from the 60s or 70s, and sports an ugly-looking (for a 90s Rick, that is) 60s headstock and a somewhat re-designed pickguard which is not particularly pleasant to look at.
As for pickups, much has been said, all of it accurate and worth reading! Enjoy the Forum and your new 4003.

Hi Serge,

"... sports an ugly-looking (for a 90s Rick, that is) 60s headstock ..."

As opposed to what? Are you saying that a 400x once sported a nicer looking headstock different from the "60s headstock?"

Hi Mark,

Congratulations!

You'll not regret this purchase, for sure. You didn't just buy a bass; you've embarked upon a magical journey, and joined a privileged community of RIC owners!

Thanks guys..

Yeah, I'm pretty stoked..

It's all I imagined and more.. even though I'm up to 11 guitars at present, and most vintage, I keep coming back to the 4003..

Just such a unique instrument..

Hey Mark,
Congratulations on a great acquisition.
My 4003FG was made in May 1998, but I got it new in July 2002.(She was shipped to "Jammin' Jerseys" in Northridge, CA and stayed in their storage room for 4 years before my friend went and asked for her.) Believe me, you'll want to get more 400x basses in the future. Never "too many"!

John,
From my limited knowledge, the current 4003 headstock is a bit shorter than that of a '70s-early '80s 4001. Seems the tilt-back angle is greater too. But they are all desirable to me, no matter what year. However, I've set my mind on scoring a pre-'73 4001 with checkered binding, Toaster neck PU, and 21 frets---Sergio knows me well on this.

Mark,
Just curious.
How's the output level of your 4003's neck pickup, compared to that of your bridge pickup.
My neck PU yields 2/5 less level than the bridge PU.
Maybe it's a defeated component. I don't know.

Paul, there should not be a difference in output level. AFAIK it's the same pickup in a different mounting. Just wondering...could it possibly be the way you have it EQ'd?

Dave,
Thanks for your concern.
I've tried my 4003's standard output both with my Ampeg B0100R with its EQ setting flat(all tone knobs in the middle neutral position with proper preamp gain) and various DI boxes into my studio's SSL mixing board's mic inputs flat with no EQ.
The results are the same:the neck hi-gain puts out a level that's 2/5 lower than that of the bridge PU. Both pickups have similar distances to the strings, so i think mine is probably a defeated one.

Is there any way I can check if the neck hi-gainer is a defeated part?
Or is it possible that the wiring was done wrong at the factory?(The neck PU volume and tone knobs seem to work fine albeit the weak output level.)

Oh man, it's not a good feeling knowing your baby was not born healthy. What's even worse is that my baby is not covered by RIC's warranty as I don't live in the USA and there's no authorized dealer in my country (a friend of mine bought the bass in LA, CA for me last year.).

Mortivan: as I'm sure you know, the current headstock is the 60s design revived, and to me that's where it belongs - in the 60s!
Paul, I'm positive the problem is caused by the absence of the C3 capacitor. A 1992 lefty 4003 I owned about a year ago had the very same problem.

Address it as follows:

Replace the original treble p.u. magnet with a weaker one. Better still, replace the original bass p.u. magnet with a stronger one. Better still, leave the magnets alone and install C3 capacitor.
Dave4004 is right, the pickups are similar but for the magnets.

Sergio, you're absolutely right.
I emailed Mr. Hall after my last posting and got a prompt reply:

-------------------------------------------------
Paul:

(Question)
From day one, the neck pickup's output level is only half as loud as that of the bridge pickup (amplified with flat EQ or through a DI box with no EQ).

(Answer)
This is absolutely normal. If you prefer it more balanced, you have two choices. Either you lower the treble pickup or you install the .0047 in line with the treble pickup. Both equalize the volume but the latter
makes the instrument brighter overall.


Cheers,


John Hall

----------------------------------------------

Now I can go on installing the toaster to see what happens, sound wise. (At least I know it's gonna look good.)

That will, of course, make it even more unbalanced. But as you say, it will look good.

Thank you again, Mr. Hall.

I'll post my impression of the result. (Hey hey, baby's gonna look good!)