Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

I have received my 1972 4001S last week and found that it is quite an unusual one.

First, a post 70, one piece neck 4001S is quite unusual but the real oddity on that one is that the neck is 1.5'' at the nut. Personally, I have never seen that on a 4001. But I am still a novice in the early 70ies world.

Maybe some of you have seen such a 4001 with a narrow neck before.

To the best of my knowledge, this has not been a modification. It definitely look like it was factory made. So is the TRC. From up close, you can notice the area where you would expect the model number and the ''Made in USA'' has been buffed. I am not sure if this was factory made due to the one off nature of this bass or if it is a TRC ripped off from a guitar and subsequently modified.

The bridge pick up is not original. At some point one will pop up somewhere and I will grab it. I am not loosing sleep over this one.

The bass feels very unique, sleek and fast. No buyer remorse...

Some pictures at the link below.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/92595223@N ... /lightbox/

Honestly, it looks like a normal early '72 4001S to me. By "one-piece neck" I think you are trying to say that it is NOT a set neck instrument (which came along later in '72). The neck-through assembly that you have is actually a "three-piece neck" if you count the shedua strip between the two maple halves of the assembly. Don't know about the oddity of your 1.5 inch nut. I just measured my three '70s Rick basses, and they all measure between 1.6 and 1.7 inches at the nut (I have a ruler marked in tenths of an inch). In fact, all of my Rick basses measure between 1.6 and 1.7 at the nut. If yours is 1.5, it may be due to an overzealous sander (or refinisher). Looks like a honey!

My 71 4001S has a single piece neck through.
The 4001S from 72 is exceptionally rare. They were
not regular production items and can vary greatly from
their deluxe counterparts.
They also are very crude as far as finish goes....

Yours looks great, regardless of the replaced pup.
Given that Rickenbacker had just changed the main
construction feature of the bass as well as changing
the peghead shape, the TRC is an example of an older
part being "fit" to the new shape.
The narrow nut width is likely a variance...

bassduke49 wrote:Honestly, it looks like a normal early '72 4001S to me. By "one-piece neck" I think you are trying to say that it is NOT a set neck instrument (which came along later in '72). The neck-through assembly that you have is actually a "three-piece neck" if you count the shedua strip between the two maple halves of the assembly. Don't know about the oddity of your 1.5 inch nut. I just measured my three '70s Rick basses, and they all measure between 1.6 and 1.7 inches at the nut (I have a ruler marked in tenths of an inch). In fact, all of my Rick basses measure between 1.6 and 1.7 at the nut. If yours is 1.5, it may be due to an overzealous sander (or refinisher). Looks like a honey!

Probaly odd was not the proper word to use for a 72 "non set neck". "Infrequently seen" would have been more appropriate. "One piece neck" is probably a "quebecism" that bass players from there frequently use to describe the neck through body type of construction, disregarding the number of lamination in the neck. Imagine my daily stuggle in Australia to be understood... I often not receive what I did order in a restaurant. Even after 6 years of living under Oz scorching sun.

What is odd is definitely the feel of the narrower neck. At least for what I am used to on a Rick. 1.5" was my Fender Jazz territory! I measured my other Ricks and they all fall between 1-6/8" and 1-11/16" at the nut.

Actually, they're all odd!

Looks pretty sweet! You'll find a Bridge Pup in time, it is worth it! My '74 4001 had a Di Marrzio at the Bridge a friend here had of all things a '72 Bridge Pup it sounds wonderful, so glad I switched them.

T.A.R. wrote:Looks pretty sweet! You'll find a Bridge Pup in time, it is worth it! My '74 4001 had a Di Marrzio at the Bridge a friend here had of all things a '72 Bridge Pup it sounds wonderful, so glad I switched them.

There is a dodgy one on eBay now with a BIN of $500. Quite unreasonable in my view, even for a top notch unit.

Very nice and thanks for sharing these nice photos.

admin wrote:Very nice and thanks for sharing these nice photos.

+1Yes very nice Wow 8 and counting

nice bass. i personally, would keep the rear pickup in as it is more balanced power wise with the long pole toaster. if not to get an early '73 screw top large mag pickup. nice score.

Congratulations Colonel!!

GORGEOUS acquisition.

BAD RONBO, KiLLeR DWaRfS wrote:nice bass. i personally, would keep the rear pickup in as it is more balanced power wise with the long pole toaster. if not to get an early '73 screw top large mag pickup. nice score.

Thanks for the tip. The output is very well balanced as it is. I guess I might get yet another pickup when/if a good deal ever shows up. it will likely remain in the case in the eventuality of a resale.

chefothefuture wrote:Actually, they're all odd!

Ooops... clumsy fingers and iPads are not meant to go together... Neck width at the nut for my other basses are between 1" 5/8 and 1" 11/16.

Yes,it does seem like no matter what era/vintage of Ric bass you get,anomalies will show up,which i think is part of their charm. That is a sweet bass,Sir! Is that a bone nut? It seems to have an interesting swirley pattern in it. I have deer antler nuts on 2 of my Ricks.

This could have well been a specific order for a S bass, and a 4000 model was quickly routed for the neck pick up. They certainly are unusual for this period. The neck width is thinner than usual, and quite probably the work of an over zealous sander/finisher as Paul mentioned, however it possibly could have been a request at the time of the order.