Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

I got back from Wildwood Guitars about 15 minutes ago, and thought I'd post my impressions on playing a new 4004Cii for the first time. I will attach two pics taken with my cell phone. One of them is the trans blue 4004Cii alone, and the second is the bass with my 1998 4003. The 4003 was for real-time A/B comparison. Here are the pics: Note that my bass in the second pic is sitting lower. The basses are approx. the same height when both placed on the floor, but the scale of the 4003 looks longer I think partly due to the bridge position. The trans blue 4004Cii is likely the one with the prettiest fingerboard in the Wildwood website pics. I think it is the one in the upper right on this page:
http://www.wildwoodguitars.com/electrics/ric/

As background, my 4003 is probably my best "player" with a fast neck and "super" vintage tone (two .0047 caps for more bridge pickup cutoff). I have two caps in parallel to get more classic Ric sound since the newer pickups have more bass compared to my two 1982 "S" models with their more "crystaline" sound. Due to better low end and vintage sound, this Ric gives me the closet sound to what I hear in my head. I always blend the two pickups on the 4000 series basses, never using just one pickup.

Anyway, here's the scoop. The fingerboard is indeed unsealed as many have noted. It seems to be bare wood. If a clear seal is there it is very light. The bass comes with roundwound strings (which surprised me), but due to the humbuckers still is very "bassy" compared the standard Ric sound. I made sure to also play it with the tone set to treble. The neck of the 4004Cii was thicker and wider than my 4003, but still felt good as many have commented. I thought that the basses were about the same weight, but maybe the 4004Cii was slightly lighter. Fit and finished of course was very good. I couldn't see any defects at all.

I could detect no dead spots on the 4004Cii, especially in the usual spot we see them with the 4000 series. I really tried, and even did the trick where I try to feel for sympathetic vibration from the E string with another finger when paying various notes. I personally think that thicker and wider neck of the 4004 minimizes dead-spot issues. My 4003 used for the A/B actually has the worst dead-spot of my 4 Rics, and it has a thinner and narrower neck than the 4004 does. I also thought that sustain on the 4004 was great with those roundwounds.
I used one of my favorite felt picks with both basses. I got a clear "thunk" edge when I plucked the strings with the 4003, but not so much with the 4004Cii. The humbucker character took over too much here.

If you are a "single coil" person like I am, the 4004Cii probably isn't for you, but if you like lots of low end and sustain then it just made be. I much prefer the "high fidelity" sound of my 4003, two 4000 series S models, and 2030 with single coils, but we are all different. I only have two other humbucker basses, with the others all being single coils.

The folks at Wildwood were very friendly and helpful. I got to use a little practice room for my checks. I used Fender guitar amp with tone controls at nominal. With the 4003 there, I was able to really compare the two basses well.

Your findings are pretty much right on with what most say about the differences. The warmer and heavier sound of the humbuckers is the most apparent difference in a head to head comparison. There are several other factors but they are far less significant. Pickup placement plays a role and to a lesser degree do the body woods. The walnut core tends to take the edge off of the brightness of the maple but it is mostly in the body wings which don't figure into the tone nearly as much as the neck does.

The fingerboard is sprayed with a thin seal coat like the finish on the (natural) 4001C64S. It is normally used as a grain filler before the paint and / or CV is applied. It is there just difficult to detect.

Dead spots are tricky business. Because of the variability of wood. Two otherwise identical instruments can have totally different locations and intensities of dead spots. You are right in that they usually occur in predictable places. In my experience, Ricks tend to be dead at the fourth or fifth fret on the G string and somewhere between the seventh to the tenth fret on the D string. Some are severely affected and others hardly at all. It is all in the wood.

Cool A/B !

I need to post one correction. I put the .0047 caps in series on my 4003, which cuts the capacitance in half. I realized after posting that I'd remembered it wrong, but my electronics training jogged the right memory.

Also, I was comparing different strings (as my 4003 has D'Addario flats), but I think that the 4004Cii would simply have even more low end if it had flats installed.

I prefer a .100 ga. E string myself , 105 always has too much bass for me . 1st thing I did to mine on day one .

4003 dead spots are because of the bridge/tail piece. Hipshot fix. 4004 for ever .

scott,#1 on the lighter e string,i have found i prefer the feel of lighter strings,and just add a bit of bass on the eq if necessary. i have a 40-100 set on the cii and the 4000,i think for the hb1's the lighter set helps to keep the inherent bassiness in check....i get a decent amount of grind,but i prefer a smoother tone,overall. the cii is just a nice alternate ricksound to have---i am off to do the "coil tap" mod on my cii today,to see if it brings the cii sound a little closer to 4003 territory.....

Jeff Scott put a pair of toasters on a 4004Cii a few years ago and liked the results. It sounded more Rick-like and looked pretty cool too. I believe Mark Walker now owns that bass. I find the HB1s to have a huskier and less complex tone than either the toasters or high gains. The 4004 is a different model and apparently not meant to sound like its sister models.

Someday I'd like a 4004Cii with 3 pickups, possibly all higains. Just for something really different.

rickfan60 wrote:Jeff Scott put a pair of toasters on a 4004Cii a few years ago and liked the results. It sounded more Rick-like and looked pretty cool too. I believe Mark Walker now owns that bass. I find the HB1s to have a huskier and less complex tone than either the toasters or high gains. The 4004 is a different model and apparently not meant to sound like its sister models.

Brian Crisman has it now, back in Cleveland!

He is supposed to be doing some major mods to it like making a new neck for a 5 string bass.

VRICKY63 wrote:4003 dead spots are because of the bridge/tail piece. Hipshot fix. 4004 for ever .

I have found the Hipshot actually makes dead spots more obvious rather than better. When I switched back I noticed a couple of dead spots actually went away, and the one left remaining got a lot better. Not to go OT or anything..

cassius987 wrote:

VRICKY63 wrote:4003 dead spots are because of the bridge/tail piece. Hipshot fix. 4004 for ever .

I have found the Hipshot actually makes dead spots more obvious rather than better. When I switched back I noticed a couple of dead spots actually went away, and the one left remaining got a lot better. Not to go OT or anything..

Might be off topic, but you've stated a good observation that shows that an aftermarket replacement part is not necessarily an automatic improvement.

I used to put Badasses on my Ricks in hopes of improving the intonation. They did but did NOT eliminate the dead spots. I suppose it could work on some basses and perhaps it did on yours (Cheers if it did!) but as a general rule dead spots are a function of the wood and construction techniques. Maybe I will start a thread about the things RIC has done over the years to eliminate/minimize dead spots. They spent a ton of time and effort trying to eradicate what they call "less prominent notes". Many of the major and minor changes we all know were rooted in their quest for a consistent bass.

I've got some HB's in my 4001. It gives the bass a VERY different sound. Much bassier a lot less treble twang. I'd like to hear the difference of my 4001. With HB's and a 4004.