Bridge differences on older 4001's?
Moderators: rickenbrother, ajish4
Bridge differences on older 4001's?
I've got a chance to pick up an older 4001 for a good price, but I have one minor concern. There is a little bit of finish chipping near the bridge and when I looked closer I could see that the bridge is either bent or different from the current 4003's. The very bottom of the bridgeplate where the strings mount doesn't touch the face of the bass for about the first inch of it's length, and the bridge itself (including the adjustment studs)is slanted at an angle. There are no obvious signs that either of these pieces are bent (ie. flaking chrome or different angles from side to side) so I'm wondering if Rick made a change in their design at some point.
Thanks.
Thanks.
There's nothing wrong with the tailpiece. As for the saddle block, or bridge proper, though, sometimes it does tend to tilt when you raise it a certain amount. A good solution, once you've determined the exact action you want on your 4001, is to place some sort of shim under the saddle block to prevent the latter from tilting. Ideally, the shim should be made out of metal.
A Rickenbacker bass is much like the Jaguar E car - perennially ultra-fashionable.
Thanks Sergio,
I'm going to go back and look at it again today. The studs didn't look bent, but I didn't know if they fastened into wood, the metal bridgeplate, or some other way. I only occassionally play bass, but I used to and I had a 4001 about 25 years ago and have always had a soft spot for them.
I'm going to go back and look at it again today. The studs didn't look bent, but I didn't know if they fastened into wood, the metal bridgeplate, or some other way. I only occassionally play bass, but I used to and I had a 4001 about 25 years ago and have always had a soft spot for them.
-
jwr2
I guess that's what we're talking about. The bridge itself angles back toward the strap button, and the tailpiece doesn't quite touch the body starting about where the strings anchor (but the plate doesn't appear bent). The brand new 4003 next to this one sits almost flat on the body except for maybe the last 1/4". Is this something to prevent me purchasing the bass?
I went back and played it again today and really like it. The action is nice, the neck has just a touch of relief, it sounds good and has zero fretwear. It also has flats on it so I'm guessing it may always have had them. Do you guys think $675 (no case) is too much for a 1991 4001S as desribed above that has a couple of nicks and some finish crazing?
I went back and played it again today and really like it. The action is nice, the neck has just a touch of relief, it sounds good and has zero fretwear. It also has flats on it so I'm guessing it may always have had them. Do you guys think $675 (no case) is too much for a 1991 4001S as desribed above that has a couple of nicks and some finish crazing?
I think I'll be going back on Monday. I've always loved the plainer "S" models, and even though I'm not really a bass player I like to have one around. I was all set to get it today and took my Warwick to either trade or leave on consignment and then after playing it again I found out they didn't have the case for it. With a new SKB style adding about $100 or a silver one even more I wasn't sure if it was quite as good a deal so I decided to think about it a little more. About 30 minutes after the store closed I was sorry I didn't, but I figured that since I had to wait until Monday anyway I would ask a few more questions here.
-
jwr2
i found this a huge problem on my old 73 i sold...... that bass needed its saddles all the way back to intonate right, if the bridge tilted back, it went way sharp again for some reason. Also, The E string did not have eenough pressure over the saddle because the saddle was tilted over and the tailpiecehad lifted overtime . The result was a big mechanical buzz aall up the E string - thru my amp!!!
The email address shown is down, you can email me at [email protected]

