'Bulbous' headstock question.
Posted: Sat Apr 07, 2007 6:36 am
What's the significance of the 'bulbous' headstock. Is a new shape or has it a repro of a headstock shape from another era?
Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum
Rickenbacker Forum, Amplifier, Bass and Guitar Register
https://www.rickresource.com/forum/
'Bulbous' headstock question.
Page 1 of 6
Posted: Sat Apr 07, 2007 11:29 am
It is actually much closer to a '50s shape than a most realize. Just look at examples in the Rittor Book, and the one on Tom Petersson's 4000 is not too far off.
Posted: Sat Apr 07, 2007 12:50 pm
RIC switched over to the "bulbous headstock" sometime in late 1997/ early 1998. It looks more like the 60's headstock than the 70's, 80's, early 90's small headstock. But its about 3/8" shorter than the 60's headstock and the hook(cresting wave) is a little chubbier. There might be a corresponding increase in neck girth to go along with the bulbous headstock too.
Today, there are two machines that cut the RIC bass necks, one is programmed to cut them with the true 60's headstock shape and the other still cuts the bulbous headstock shape.
Most of the new 4003s that I've seen are still the bulbous shape. Pretty sure all of the 75th 4003s I've seen are bulbous. I have a 2006 4006 that has the true 60's headstock, but I unfortunately don't think I have any photos.
Today, there are two machines that cut the RIC bass necks, one is programmed to cut them with the true 60's headstock shape and the other still cuts the bulbous headstock shape.
Most of the new 4003s that I've seen are still the bulbous shape. Pretty sure all of the 75th 4003s I've seen are bulbous. I have a 2006 4006 that has the true 60's headstock, but I unfortunately don't think I have any photos.
Posted: Sat Apr 07, 2007 12:54 pm
it is a re-creation of the 60s headstock shape ...
Here is a 68 4001 ...
Here is a 68 4001 ...
Posted: Sat Apr 07, 2007 1:06 pm
Posted: Sat Apr 07, 2007 1:09 pm
Posted: Sat Apr 07, 2007 1:13 pm
Posted: Sat Apr 07, 2007 1:40 pm
The bass from the Rittor book is the earliest 4001 I have seen...the neck and peghead(not counting the inlays of course) are like a 1960 4000 or earlier, but the body wings are of the thinner variety found on later basses. The Rittor book has it labeled as '63, but it has more in common with 1962 Ricks IMHO....
Posted: Sat Apr 07, 2007 2:30 pm
It's much more like the 50's headstock pictured. It really isn't a elongated as my '68. The wave is larger than on my '68, as well.
Posted: Sat Apr 07, 2007 2:45 pm
Notice how close to the end of the headstock the TRC is on the one in the Rittor book.
Posted: Sat Apr 07, 2007 3:02 pm
In a strange way, I think it would be even more bitchin' if they brought back the 50's styling before the 60's styling.
Posted: Sat Apr 07, 2007 3:27 pm
Uh... Any 21 fretters in the Rittor book?...
Posted: Sat Apr 07, 2007 5:04 pm
Sergio: No, I don't believe there are any 4001 basses from the ca. 1970 period in the book...
Posted: Mon Apr 09, 2007 2:53 am
Bulbous:
Non-Bulbous:
Non-Bulbous:
Posted: Mon Apr 09, 2007 3:48 am
Ahh, it's nice to know that we, 21 fret 4001 owners, got something extra special in the Rickenbacker world. But if you were to see what I saw a couple months back, you'd say "That's the rarest 4001 of them all!". Sorry, but I'm not at liberty to expound any further. Cheers.