Page 1 of 2
Repeating this thread over here too.
Posted: Thu Nov 20, 2003 11:09 am
by big_g
This sight has some major Ric collectable guitars, there is one bass under the Rickenback link 72' checkerboard JetGlo, but you have got to see the one under the bass link. Wow! an amazing condition 63' 4001 in FireGlo. One can only dream! I can't afford them but I can appreciate.
http://www.garysguitars.com
Posted: Thu Nov 20, 2003 11:57 am
by rickcrazy
Pure magic!

Posted: Thu Nov 20, 2003 12:30 pm
by marcinkus
I'm droolin' ^_^
Posted: Thu Nov 20, 2003 12:32 pm
by rickcrazy
Well, any Rickenbacker bass is pure magic. This one is from late 1972.

Posted: Thu Nov 20, 2003 12:46 pm
by rickcrazy
I'm on a roll here. I'm sure for many of you a 21 fret 4001 also is pure magic. This one, a February 1971, is or was owned by a Forum member, and is identical to my November 1970 21 fret 4001.

Posted: Thu Nov 20, 2003 12:49 pm
by leftybass
The '63 4001 shown above would be pretty easy to re-create, from a manufacturing standpoint. This bass has solid edge-to-edge inlays rather than crushed-pearl. Take a 4001C64 in the early stages of production, add binding to the body and neck and an extra screw to the nameplate and (of course) the inlays, and voila---a 4001C63 is born. Make mine a lefty.

Maybe it's not made EXACTLY like that, but my point is the C64 is a great starting point to go a bit further.....
Posted: Thu Nov 20, 2003 12:54 pm
by rickcrazy
I totally agree.
Meanwhile, keep the magic strong...

Posted: Thu Nov 20, 2003 1:05 pm
by bigbajo60
Is it my eyes deceiving me, or is that '63 equipped with a more modern, reissue horseshoe? I think I see the "scooped out" area for better string clearance on the pickup surround ring/mount.
Posted: Thu Nov 20, 2003 1:10 pm
by leftybass
Alvaro: IMHO I think the whole bass is legit. You can go to Gary's website and see more close-up pics if you wish....
Posted: Thu Nov 20, 2003 1:49 pm
by rickcrazy
Hmm... Now you got me thinking. I mean, the fact that the pickup surround on that 1963 4001 has a recess to accomodate the strings is not unusual - I've seen many pictures of '63 and '64 4001's with just such a feature. What intrigues me is that said recess is much shorter than on any '63 and '64 4001 I've seen. Are we indeed looking at a reissue horseshoe pickup, as Alvaro suggests, or is that the original horseshoe pickup assembly with a recess someone has cut on it somewhere along the line? Anyone?
Posted: Thu Nov 20, 2003 2:41 pm
by leftybass
The measurements of the horseshoe pickup covers varied considerably in the early 60's; some have very long tapers at the front, some are very square at the rear edge nearest the pickguard....
For reference, compare the shape of the cover belonging to the 1964 4001 in the Bacon & Day book to the original horseshoe cover on Paul McCartney's bass...quite different....also the 1963 4001MG in the Smith book....
Posted: Thu Nov 20, 2003 4:17 pm
by big_g
I really think that Gary's is on the up and up here, he's asking a lot'o'dough in a very public way. I could be wrong here but I believe that that is a correct pickup.
Unless I hit the lottery, I won't have the dough for the '63, but she just makes my mind reel. I can't remember seeing one in that condition, that early, and for sale in a long time.
Posted: Thu Nov 20, 2003 6:06 pm
by jps
"For reference, compare the shape of the cover belonging to the 1964 4001 in the Bacon & Day book"
Where is the photo of the 4001 in that book? I have it and the only bass I can find is the 4080.
Posted: Thu Nov 20, 2003 11:58 pm
by rickcrazy
John is referring not to 'The Rickenbacker Book', but to 'The Ultimate Guitar Book', wherein you can find a shot of a 1964 4001S on pages 164/165.
Posted: Fri Nov 21, 2003 2:19 am
by leftybass
Ooops!!! LOL I meant "The Bass Book" by Bacon and (someone else)---sorry.
That book has the 1964 4001 ( not an 'S') for you to look at....