A early 4004C prototype maybe? On ebay

landon · Post by **landon** » Wed Feb 05, 2003 9:33 pm

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2506264670&category=29864

This bass on ebay is interesting... Any story on this one? What did RCA have to do with it??

jwr2 · Post by **jwr2** » Thu Feb 06, 2003 4:18 am

I would say that is a 1st generation 4004 with chrome trim instead of gold and the main theing that make it custom/one of a kind is the added pickguard ... kind of a 600 series look to a 4000 series bass ... I always thought it would be cool to build a bass based on the 600 series body shape ...

So I believe it is a modified off the shelf Ric 4004 bass ....

maybe Rca is the record company that he signed with ...

johnhall · Post by **johnhall** » Thu Feb 06, 2003 6:20 am

This was the earliest incarnation of the 4004. We built several special runs of guitars (ala 380L) and basses for RCA Records Nashville. Each December they then presented them to their artists that had gone gold (or platinum, I forget) during the previous year.

The most famous instrument of this series went to Rocky Ryan, their president, who has a doubleneck 4004-650 left handed.

leftybass · Post by **leftybass** » Thu Feb 06, 2003 7:55 am

Wow...a left-handed 4004/650 doubleneck, eh?? Do any pics exist of this??

landon · Post by **landon** » Thu Feb 06, 2003 8:12 am

Possibly Mr. Hall could answer this one.. I have a copy of the book "The Complete History of Rickenbacker Guitars" By Richard R. Smith. And on page 205 right below Paul McCartney, there is a picture of maybe the earliest of all 4004's?? Or maybe where the Idea came from. It says it is a Experimental 4001S from 1967. It is JG with the hardware of the old 4005 bass. Very cool, and does that bass still exist?

jeff_ulmer · Post by **jeff_ulmer** » Thu Feb 06, 2003 9:13 am

Nice bass, but ...ugh... why do people find it necessary to deface these instruments with autographs? That cuts the value in half as far as I'm concerned, as it is no longer original. Sure, include an autograph with it, but not on the guitar!

racket · Post by **racket** » Thu Feb 06, 2003 9:41 am

I completly agree with Jeff about the bass being ruined with a signature. Autographs just aren't worth that much (with rare exceptions). At the very least, he could have signed the pick-guard.

It will be interesting to see how the auction goes with this "added value" signature

landon · Post by **landon** » Thu Feb 06, 2003 9:48 am

IMO, Being a 4004 with a tung oil finish, one could use some steel wool and maybe sand it off and then touch it up. If they did not care about the signature.... Although, those sharpes are pretty lethal.

johnhall · Post by **johnhall** » Thu Feb 06, 2003 10:54 am

Answering Landon's question, no this instrument really has nothing in common with the 4004, as the critical elements of the body laminations/wood choice, pickups, and bridge weren't present. Yes, this instrument hangs about 20 feet away from my desk presently.

There IS a photograph of the 4004/650 doubleneck but it might be difficult to locate here quickly. Wasn't this published here or somewhere once before? Anyway, I'll keep my eyes open for it.

jwilli · Post by **jwilli** » Thu Feb 06, 2003 3:06 pm

I think that I had a jpeg of the doubleneck but that was a couple of computers ago......I've lost so much info/pics in the past, it makes me sick.

landon · Post by **landon** » Thu Feb 06, 2003 3:14 pm

Maybe only in a dream, but, there has got to be a dvd/video made someday of a tour of Rickenbacker for all us Rickenbacker fanatics. Or maybe a updated "history" book with a included DVD. Has Richard R. Smith ever considered making a 2nd edition? Now where is that winning wonka bar?

jwr2 · Post by **jwr2** » Mon Feb 10, 2003 11:31 am

no bids ... it must be overpriced ...

landon · Post by **landon** » Tue Feb 11, 2003 7:14 am

Why pay that much if you had the cash to burn. When you could get a autograph free 4001c64, instead, for the same price or less. Just a thought.

doctorwho · Post by **doctorwho** » Thu Feb 13, 2003 11:11 am

In the case of this auction, "collectability is in the eye of the seller" and not the potential buyers. If the autographer was a high-profile recording artist, then maybe it would have gathered some bids. I have a B.C. Rich bass with John Entwistle's autograph on the body, and have no problem that he signed it that way.

jeff_ulmer · Post by **jeff_ulmer** » Thu Feb 13, 2003 2:42 pm

I agree that the added collectablity is in the mind of the seller. Have an autograph to go with the bass? Excellent. On the bass? No thanks.

Even if there was an opportunity to have the autograph of someone I deeply admired and it HAD to be on a guitar, I would prefer it be on an instrument that had no use other than a display piece.

If I am going to blow $2000+ on a guitar, you had better bet it will be something that is going to be used to make music.