Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

Wow:

http://sfbay.craigslist.org/sfc/msg/371890521.html

I'm happy to help anyone out of the area to buy.

TS

Never mind... I see it has been well discussed in the for sale section

Yeah, and just in case you haven't seen the discussion there, it is not a '57, but probably somewhere between '58 and '61. Lots of replaced parts and mods, but a relic for sure.

Paul,
I thank you for all your research,& all the trouble you have surely encountered re: the '57 ric-bass I have introduced to all of you here @ this wonderful & informative place, "ricresource". I would never known it existed with-out meeting via e-mail, Andy Winter from your group! Nice guy! And of course you, recommended from the Rickenbacker corp. for info on RICS. Anyhow,if you didn't get info of how I came up with the dating & pricing of this bass, it was John Minutaglio's response to my letter stating "I'd go with the serial# for dating".
Paul, are you sure it's not a 1957?
Thanx again, Terry

What bothers me is that the serial given is reported in Smith's book as the "very first bass" made, but photos in the same book show the "prototype" as having a mahogany neck and the jack on the front face of the bass. While I can't profess in-hand knowledge of very early Rick basses, it appears that maple neck-through construction followed walnut neck-through, which followed the prototype's mahogany neck-through. The serial stamped on a jackplate could be genuine or an easily made copy. Unless I see more evidence that would indicate the true date of manufacture, I'm going with the maple-neck-through construction as the infallible evidence. (All this assuming the info in the Smith book is correct.) Thanks, Terry!

Paul: the very early ones used a Guitar Base Plate with 6 holes where the guitar strings went thru. For the Bass they only used 4 of the holes of course, and the serial numbers were hand stamped on the plate, example: B 145

Dale, what's your take on the maple through neck vs mahogany?

I'd rather have Maple for strength and tone. It's my understanding the 1st one was a Mahogany neck. Mahogany was used since the neck was a hand shaped proto-type and Mahogany is easier to work than hard Maple. The body halves were Alder. The next Bass was Walnut, probably chosen for it's beautiful wood grain. These were neck thru body instruments. The final model was Maple neck with 1&1/2 inch thick bodies, the upper horn was shorter than the ones made later in the early 60's when the upper horn was extended out for balance.

And the upper horn on this one look like a later one.

...right?

Mark, it looks to be like the ones made from 57 thru 1960 with the thicker body also.

Mark, no, this one has the short horn of the early models.

Dale, do you have data on when the switch was made to maple neck-through construction?

Andy Winter,
Thanks again Bud for introducing me to this fun & informative group. As discussed b4, you still have 1st bids on this old ric-bass of mine, if still interested?
Sincerely, Terry Hungerford

Thanks Terry, I'll mail you off forum.

I'll shrink the photo's that Terry sent me showing the neck area and post them here.

I'll go back to what I thought originally, and that this was a very early body that was refinished and sold later in '61.

(...gulp!...)

If I had to guess I'd say early 1958 before the NAMM show. 1961 for the total refinement to all Maple with longer horn and thinner body. The early ones also had Brazilian Rosewood fingerboards with no finish on it. I'd also ask Chefothefuture to chime in here and enlighten us with a few facts. John is a wealth of knowledge on these old thick bodied Basses. Terry, if you need a correct pickguard that is back painted Gold, I can help you with one. I can also make you a replica bridge and base plate. Just a little FYI service incase you sell this and someone needs it restored.