Page 1 of 3
Big time 4001 intonation problem!
Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2003 2:49 am
by ojobob2
Help! my 73' 4001 will NOT intonate properly.
The E string, even with its saddle ALL the way back is far too sharp. The A is also slightly sharp when all the way back. The D and G are ok, buty the saddle must be flipped backwards.
To make matters worse, with the saddles so far back, the saddle plate just drops backwards under string pressure. It will not stay upright unless the saddles are in the "normal" postions, and like that, the bass is like a whole semitone sharp at the twelth fret.
The neck is totally spot on, so that cant be the problem, and im using standard guage strings (GHS b52 boomers 45-105) same thing happens with rotosound swings
I hear the taipiece can be moved back, but that would involve drilling a nice old bass
HELP!!!
Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2003 3:13 am
by paul_yan
Owen,
I'm sorry to hear about your situation and you have my best wishes for solving the problem.
How's the straightness/relief of the her neck? (What's the distance between your E string and the 8th or 9th fret when it's pressed down on the 1st and last frets in playing position?)
How's your string action? (What's the distance between your E string and the last fret when unfretted in playing position?)
Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2003 3:20 am
by jwr2
A Rickenbacker is designed for a flat neck ... if you have too much bow or relief it will not intonate properly ... also once in a while this can be a result of an improperly cut nut.
Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2003 3:59 am
by paul_yan
Totally agreed.
Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2003 5:05 am
by ojobob2
Guys - all those variables (relief , string height etc) are spot on.....and I managed to solve the problem!
I managed to stop the bridge from tilting back by letting the A and D screw heads hang out of the back of the saddle plate. The screw heads stop the bridge tilting back against the tailpiece. With the bridge at its proper angle, the intonation is spot on - tho the E must be all the way back still
Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2003 6:31 am
by big_g
Owen, what about getting with a luthier and getting the nut reloacated, maybe even a compensated cut for the E-string, making the string notch come out farther back towards the headstock.
There was a guy on the internet that made a compensated nut for different electric guitars a few years ago, there maybe more now.
Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2003 7:27 am
by ojobob2
yah, but ive fixed it now

Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2003 7:51 am
by jwr2
I've seen that on a few old 4001's ... but every time I was able to intonate it ... sometimes just barely ...
Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2003 8:35 am
by paul_yan
Very smart solution, Owen.
Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2003 10:01 am
by rictified
Yeah, I've had that problem before but also was able to solve it by tinkering with the neck relief, and string height, and also a smaller gauge string. And I too think they intonate better with a flat or almost flat neck. The higher your action is the worse the problem will be because when you press the string down you actually stretch the string a little bit making it a little sharper, so if your action is lower it will be less sharp when fretted. and both bridge height and neck relief impact that.
And one thing doesn't make sense to me, if your bridge is tilting back that will make make the string a little bit longer, also the action is a little bit lower that way also. If you've corrected that, to me it should be even more sharp, unless you've dropped your bridge which might fix that problem anyway. When I've had 4001's with the bridge tilting back it was always because I had the bridge adjustment screws set too high for whatever reason (usually too much relief, or heavy gauge strings which need higher action so they won't buzz).
Try a .100 E string Owen that might help too because you can lower the action a little more.
Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2003 10:34 am
by paul_yan
Bob said: "And one thing doesn't make sense to me, if your bridge is tilting back that will make make the string a little bit longer, also the action is a little bit lower that way also. If you've corrected that, to me it should be even more sharp, unless you've dropped your bridge which might fix that problem anyway."
That's what I'm wondering about too. Care to let us know more about it, Owen?
Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2003 11:04 am
by rictified
Yeah, com'on fess up Owen.
Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2003 12:31 pm
by ojobob2
lol, well lets ignore all other strings except the E here, as thats the most problematic....
with the saddle (s) all the way back, the bridge wont stand up, the angle of the strings over them makes the bridge drop back. if i let the bridge drop, i must raise the height to compensate for the tilted bridge (tilted back = less height right?)
so...left like this..weird stuff happens - the E its strangly REAL sharp, and theres a fat mechanical buzz as i dont think the string has enough pressure over the saddle as my tailpiece is old and lifted up at the back.
I managed by letting the A and D screws hang out the back - to jam the bridge from falling over. This does not affect the height adjustment it still works fine.
now, my E is amazingly in tune! its still all the way back but its in tune.
And theres no way i could ever go to a string set other than 45 -105......on any bass .anything lighter kinda goes "splat/fart/rattle" and anything heavier its a finger strainer
so i guess its just one of those weird old guitar phenomenon thingies!
phew....glad i got that all out of my system

Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2003 12:45 pm
by motoryeshead
Hehe (hides his 40-90 rounds) I'll have your splatting farting rattling basses if you dont want them! Someone once suggested the Rickenbacker 4001 sounds like a handful of gravel hitting a tin bath, but I think he meant it in a bad way. Mmmmmm, gravel!

Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2003 12:48 pm
by ojobob2
gravel is good.....farty gravel is not
