Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

I, for one, am in love with the position markers that go all the way across the fretboard, ala the pre-73 models. I have seen several NEW guitars made by Ric, and some of the acoustic models on their website that still have the inlay all the way across the fretboard. It might not be the crushed mother-of-pearl, but it is still being done today. My question is, why isn't it still being done on the basses made new today? Why was it changed in the first place? I have heard the material used pre-73 got very hard to get, and I understand the need to change, but why was the inlay "design" changed? Any of you Ric historians, please let me know if you know!

I would bet that only John Hall could give you a definite and complete answer to that one. It looks to me like it might make the inlay material more stable than if it was right up against binding, but I'm no expert...

I understand it is because the necks are stronger and more stable when the inlay does not go all the way across. From experience though I don't think that is the case as my '67 4005WB has an excellent neck.

Could it have anything to do with the possibility of the inlay being pressured out of its route due to normal hand/finger pressure along the edge of the fingerboard?

That's the first thing that popped into my mind.

Not all 4001 basses from 1973 have the shorter width inlays. My April 73 was made with full width Mother of Pearl inlays in it.
The shorter width inlay production seems to have begun around June of that year.
If you search for a thread titled
"1973 The Transistion Year" in the Bass archives there was alot of discussion about the changes made that year.

To me the old crushed MOP inlays make the pre 73 Rics. The binding, headstock wings and other things make for many a more aesthetically appealing bass, but the real jewel is when you see those inlays sparkle back at you. The first time I saw them in the flesh..just beautiful. Looking at Grant,s B/G 71 and Lefty,s 72 the last week still leaves me thinking this is one of the most gorgeous fretboards ever made. I,m pretty sure that if they were still available today, JH would have found a way to get them on basses and guitars. They are without doubt one of the most sought items (still) on Rics, and quite rightly so...

If I remember correctly, the vendor for the original crushed pearl inlay is no longer in existance.....And, so far, it has not been able to be replicated to the satisfaction of Rickenbacker. Some have come quite close---close enough to satisfy me, at least.LOL

But until John Hall likes what he sees, it will more than likely prove a sticking point in any plans to reissue any 60's-era deluxe model instruments.

Reissueing a bass with non crushed pearl edge-to-edge inlays is entirely possible. I have suggested before that using a 4001C64 as a basis, add checkerboard(or regular?) binding to the body, binding on the neck and(of course) the inlay material for the fretboard....a 4th screw to the nameplate and you have a re-issue of a 1963 4001.

John Hall has said that the inlay material for the 360/12C63 was a perfect match to what was used on George Harrison's 1963 360/12, so this material would be just fine for a "4001C63". Bring it on, JH!!!!

Even if the crushed pearl inlay material can't be reproduced, what is currently being used, such as that which is on my 660/12, is very nice looking in it's own way, and it is full width. In fact from what I can gather from photos I have seen of early '60s Ricks, most had a rather plain looking MOP; the ones on the 660/12 are a lot prettier. They have these really nice swirls in them; they look like clouds or nebulae, really very unique looking.

Ya .. re-issue a bass like this ...

It's nice to see that I am not the only one who loves this aspect of the older Ricks. I have a '73 (August, unfortunately) that does not have the checkered binding or the full-width fretboard inlay, and after seeing so many of them here like Jeff's, it just made me want one like that all the more. And then I got to wondering why not? Why aren't they like that anymore? Thanks for all of the info, I guess John Hall is the true authority on why it isn't being done in this pattern any more, and if it might be re-introduced. I know that the material is not the same, but if the inlay went all the way across, I would be satisfied, and I think it is a MUCH more beautiful neck. Thanks for sharing all of your gorgeous pictures and such, just keeps me thinking about it!

The 4001 v63 and c64 all had the dot neck ... re-issue an edge to edge triangular inlay neck

how about a re-issue 4001c68

Yes, a maybe foolish question from a lunatic Dutch bassplayer: why don't you go to a truly good luthier, to get one of your fretboards done this way? There must be guys out there who can do so. You will have the adventage off your own trusted bass, and it's feel, while at the same time you have the looks you like.......

Might sound lunatic, but I warned you all at the beginning of this reply LOL.

Robin,
As much as I want to have this feature on my bass, I dont want to do an irreversible mod to an otherwise superb vintage bass. I guess I was asking more of why isn't it still being done! I see it on current guitar models, and I wish it was being offered in a new bass model!

Hey steve what month is your 73? mines an August (MH) The inlays are the modern type and are almost completly clear - no texture or swirls. The varnish is so yellowed tho that they just look solid yellow. Kinda horrid.

My bass also has a original toaster and "the bridge from hell" which is too far forward and wont intonate without all the saddles right back. Also it falls over unless i wedge something under it.

Mine is an ML, and I have the same problem Owen. I wish it had the other inlays! I really should post some pictures, I havent photographed it in a while. My bass does not have a toaster, and yes, it has the bridge from hell also. I just had to adjust and intonate it, and the saddles are ALL the way back, and staying put, for the moment. But you know what? I love it anyway!