Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

I'm refinishing my '77 4001 and would like the opportunity to try either 1/2" or 1" neck spacing. Can anyone post a picture of the factory transitional dual route from around '75 that would allow both? Even a picture of the 1/2" neck route of around '74-75 would be helpful. Thanks.

I have 5 '75s on my project pile. If nobody else posts a picture before I get home I will dig one up for you.

That's a heck of a pile, Ted! I'll tell you what, just to help you clean it up...

TEd, any luck with the pictures?

You mightn't want to turn one of those 75s into a mapleglo S-bass with walnut headstock wings, would you now? And send it to me? I can write a check . . .

Here's one for you - a typical '75 route.


I think that step route at the end of the neck is a critical part of it. My theory is that the pickup was moved for structural and not necessarily sonic reasons. There is a serious stress point at the end of the neck and I think the move was intended to get more wood there. A lot of older 4000 series basses have developed cracks/separations at that point.

Well it turns out that my theory was wrong. Damn. Anyway, the step is apparently not structural and the relocation of the pickup was to address problems with "less responsive" notes. My '63 has a few of those! The relocation of the pickup was accompanied by a small amount of lead placed somewhere under the fingerboard presumably to alter resonance.

My '76 has a big hole like that. Doubt I'll take advantage of it though.

So does the V63/C64 have these unresponsive notes with the 1/2" placement and the reissue scatterwound toaster?

...oh and thanks Ted. See you in Milwaukee.

The V63 and C64 are built differently from the 4001. Just a guess but perhaps the 4003 design evolved to address that problem in different ways. Maybe the one-piece tapered neck slab and modern rods are part of the plan.

I still think it must have been - at least in part - for structural reasons. I've seen necks (one of them on a Ric that I own) that are dead straight and still you need to set the bridge as low as it will go for low action. That means that either the neck angle was wrong from the start (which I doubt) or that it has changed over the years, where the weak spot is.

We've also seen the neck pickup in the 4004 basses move backwards - not for sonic reasons but to enable slap/pop technique. Then it was moved back against the neck - again, not because of 'hot' or 'cold' notes, a concept that I still have no idea what it means, but to enable access to the truss rods from the body end. So, do 4004 basses have a 'less responsive notes' problem? I certainly don't know because I've never had the pleasure of playing one. Do they?

I talked about dead spots once with the head builder at Lakland. He said that EVERY stringed instrument will have resonance issues of some kind. Some are barely noticeable and others can make the instrument undesirable. It is a **** shoot because wood is so highly variable. Lakland started putting graphite rods in the necks of the Chicago-built instruments to improve stability but found that the rods seemed to minimized or eliminated the common dead spots. He said that by altering the density of the neck in selected places they were able to reduce the canceling effect of certain resonances. I suspect that the lead in the 70's Rick necks was put there for the same reason.

The modern truss rods require (for the most part) 2 side access to service them. That is why you can see the ends when you remove the guard of a 4003. On the 4004, the rods are accessible from the neck pickup route. Moving the pickup away from the neck almost eliminated body-end access. At the very least complicated removal.

I'm not sure if "hot" and "cold" notes are the same as dead spots. I know what a dead spot is, I don't know what hot or cold mean in this context.

I'm also not sure if relocating a pickup will change that. I am almost sure that it's impossible to hear the difference, if there is any, when the neck pickup is moved a half-inch backwards. With the bridge pickup, like early 70's Fender Jazzes, of course the difference is much more noticeable. But with the neck pickup - well personally I can't hear a difference, maybe others can.

To me it's like Eric Johnson's first cover story in GP, where he said that he could hear the difference between a bone nut and a plastic nut on a Strat, and that he could tell the brand of battery in a distortion pedal just by hearing.

Anyway, the aesthetic loss is much bigger than the sonic gain. But I assume that at least it's stronger this way.

We all know that pickup placement directly affects the frequency response of an instrument. Granted, in the case of the 4001 it would be difficult / impossible to hear the difference a 1/2 inch would make but maybe that was the idea. They were trying to address an issue of harmonic resonance not give the instrument a new sound. I've not heard the expressions hot spot and cold spot in reference to stringed instruments before but I can understand how they apply. Every one of my basses has a unique sonic personality. If only I could put the best parts of each one in a single instrument....

Eric Johson is a bit like the princess from the Princess And The Pea. I wonder if he could tell you the date of dime just by sitting on it.