Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

So, I just got the '91 White B/T 4003s I bought from Daniel a few days ago. Cool bass and Daniel was great to work with. After setting it up to my liking and stringing it with the exact same strings that are on my '87 4003, I was very surprised at how different the tone is between the two basses. Thought it might be the pickups at first, but it as, if not more, noticeable unplugged. Really different acoustic sounds. The '87 is more resonant and zingy - a more cutting tone with more highs. It is also louder. The '91 has a woodier, thumpier tone. Not bad at all, but quite different.


I'm wondering how much of this might be due to how the bridges are mounted? My '87 has 7 screws, which firmly anchors the entire bridge to the body. The '91 is lacking those two screws on the back of the bridge and has some amount of tail lift that is so common. If I keep the '91 I would be inclined to add the two screws that it lacks compared to the '87. Particularly if that is indeed what accounts for the difference in tone. It would make sense that this would change the tone as having the bridge anchored more to the body is bound to transfer more vibrations from the strings to the body. Perhaps there are other differences I'm unaware of though - different woods or something.

Anyone have any ideas to share?

- Tim

There are a number of previous threads dealing with the extra tailpiece screws, the addition of washers under the tailpiece, and the extension of the bridge height adjustment screws through the bridge to the wood of the body - all mods that have been done to 'increase the resonance'/'improve the sound'/... My personal experience has been only with the addition of the extra tailpiece screws on my 4003S/5 SPC 'quasi-Blackstar' which had the severe tailpiece lift. Granted, I added the screws to be sure that the tailpiece would not lift again, but consider that I had no qualms about doing it to a very, very rare bass (perhaps only five to seven made).

The tail lift does have some effect on the tone. But if you are going to fix it, make sure you do the "washers under the tailpiece" trick at the same time. I usually shim so that the front of the tailpiece sits a little high of the body (by about 1/10 to 1/4 of a mm) this will actually help deter the tailbend a bit.
If you are going to straighten the tailpiece, make sure you pad it well in the vice to avoid marking it and only clamp in the bit where the bridge sits and either use a rubber hammer or a press to straighten it.
They can break (I've not lost one yet though) and it should be noted that the black ones are weaker than the normal chrome tails. (the thin chrome plating probably adds a surface strength that the powder coating does not have)
If you have to drill the extra holes it is somtimes worth filling the underside of the tailpiece where you are drilling with Devcon or some other sort of plastic metal. It will avoid the dent around the holes that the 7 hole tails often seem to have and add some strength..
It is not unusual to see black trim tails with the extra holes and there is no doubt that it works but use it as a last resort!
Eden.

Adding 2 extra screws is a simple engineering solution that always fixes the problem.

I have a couple observations of my own to add, Tim. No solutions though:

I have two '87 4003S's and an '88 4003 with BT. All three basses have the seven screw tail. All three are stock. The '88 with the BT is noticeably less bright than my two '87's with the chrome. I'm not sure if the difference is in the chrome vs. BT, but I've suspected it. I even used a drill bit to make sure there was no powder coating in the recessed dents that the bridge height adjustment screws rest in. Has anybody else noticed this with BT? Does the powder coating dampen the vibration? If you were to remove both a powder coated BT tail and a chrome tail and tap on each with a screw driver I suspect it wouldn't sound the same. Would this same line of thought be relevant when the tail is mounted on the bass?

I also have a '94 4003S with a chrome 5-screw tail. It too, is noticeably less bright than the two '87's, but I think in a different way than my '88 with BT. I don't remember if the '94 sounds different un-plugged than the two '87's. But it has different electronics and I always assumed the difference was due to the electronics. In 1990 or so, RIC changed from using the 500K ohm tone pots to the 250K ohm tone pots. Also around the same time the pickups changed from the hand-cut bobbins to the plastic bobbins still used today.

Yours has the new-style plastic bobbins doesn't it, Tim?

you guys need to sell some of those basses...




























to me.

rickaddict wrote:I have a couple observations of my own to add, Tim. No solutions though:

I have two '87 4003S's and an '88 4003 with BT. All three basses have the seven screw tail. All three are stock. The '88 with the BT is noticeably less bright than my two '87's with the chrome. I'm not sure if the difference is in the chrome vs. BT, but I've suspected it. I even used a drill bit to make sure there was no powder coating in the recessed dents that the bridge height adjustment screws rest in. Has anybody else noticed this with BT? Does the powder coating dampen the vibration? If you were to remove both a powder coated BT tail and a chrome tail and tap on each with a screw driver I suspect it wouldn't sound the same. Would this same line of thought be relevant when the tail is mounted on the bass?

I also have a '94 4003S with a chrome 5-screw tail. It too, is noticeably less bright than the two '87's, but I think in a different way than my '88 with BT. I don't remember if the '94 sounds different un-plugged than the two '87's. But it has different electronics and I always assumed the difference was due to the electronics. In 1990 or so, RIC changed from using the 500K ohm tone pots to the 250K ohm tone pots. Also around the same time the pickups changed from the hand-cut bobbins to the plastic bobbins still used today.

Yours has the new-style plastic bobbins doesn't it, Tim?

I have noticed that black trim will rust and bend sooner than chrome trim.

Also the 80s 4003 basses will have 250k ohm volume pots and 500k ohm tone pots. 90s 4003 basses will have all 250k ohm pots.

Also some of the 80s pickups were overwound to 12k or more. In the 90s the high gains should always be 11k ohms.

Also about 1990 the Ric body got a little bigger than the 80s model. Then in 1997 Ric adopted a 60s style slimmer horn shape. That is probably when they switched to CNC for the 4003.

rickaddict wrote:I have a couple observations of my own to add, Tim. No solutions though:

I have two '87 4003S's and an '88 4003 with BT. All three basses have the seven screw tail. All three are stock. The '88 with the BT is noticeably less bright than my two '87's with the chrome. I'm not sure if the difference is in the chrome vs. BT, but I've suspected it.... But it has different electronics and I always assumed the difference was due to the electronics. In 1990 or so, RIC changed from using the 500K ohm tone pots to the 250K ohm tone pots. Also around the same time the pickups changed from the hand-cut bobbins to the plastic bobbins still used today.

Yours has the new-style plastic bobbins doesn't it, Tim?

Jeff -

My '87 is also B/T so that is not it in this case. The electronics are certainly different (I had the rear pickup of my '87 rewound by Michael Dolan. He used a different guage wire than Rickenbacker resulting in an amazing sounding pickup), but what I'm really noticing is the acoustic tone.

I bet that tailpiece has a lot to do with it. Wonder if using an aftermarket HIptshot bridge might do the trick with no drilling, etc??

Well, one way to test that theory would be to remove the 5-screw tail from your new bass and test it out on your '87. If the '87 isn't as bright anymore, you have your answer.

No new holes required!

rickaddict wrote:Well, one way to test that theory would be to remove the 5-screw tail from your new bass and test it out on your '87. If the '87 isn't as bright anymore, you have your answer.

No new holes required!

Good thinking, Jeff. An easy test.

Thanks!

No prob. I'll be interested to hear the results.

Maybe the difference is just in two different pieces of wood.

...We shall see...

rickaddict wrote:No prob. I'll be interested to hear the results.

Maybe the difference is just in two different pieces of wood.

...We shall see...

that's my thought as well. my 85 sounds and feels so much different than my 86 and both have the same tailpiece config.

Crazy things, these bass guitars!

all your bass are belong to us

That's some creepy stuff, Sean.

Tonight I'm sleeping in my bass guitar room with my loaded Glock under my pillow.

Consider yourself warned, Alien scum. Touch my Ricks and your green blood will flow!