Rickenbacker 4000 as a cheaper alternative?

AlecRob · #1 03-30-2011, 11:06 AM

Here is what i have been thinking, Rickenbacker could make a new 4000 and market it as a cost-reduced bass for people that want the basic rick tone without all the bells and whistles. It would have no neck pickup, no rick-O-sound, and dot inlays.

So, would anybody buy this, or is it a stupid and ridiculous suggestion?

panama · #2 03-30-2011, 11:13 AM

The cost reduction wouldn't be enough unless they were made outside of the U.S.

mikezimmerman · #3 03-30-2011, 11:16 AM

I'm sure people would buy it, but I seriously doubt Rickenbacker would make it, at least not as a "reduced cost bass". More likely, it would be a "vintage reissue" that would command a higher price than the standard 4003.

Big_Daddy · #4 03-30-2011, 11:18 AM

For a Rickenbacker bass (still made the same way as before) made inside the United States still wouldn't have that price reduction. Not like an American Fender versus a Mexican Fender.

Also, losing the neck pickup, a couple bells, a handful of whistles, and dot inlays wouldn't drop the price all that much, IMHO. It'd definitely have to be made outside of the United States.

Spinal Tapper · #5 03-30-2011, 11:20 AM

like this, but new?

1978 Rickenbacker 4000 Bass | eBay

waleross · #6 03-30-2011, 11:41 AM

Ric's are costly but worth it. Anything else isn't worth it.

Dr. Cheese · #7 03-30-2011, 11:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spinal Tapper

like this, but new?

1978 Rickenbacker 4000 Bass | eBay

That was the first good bass I ever bought in 1978. The funny part is that I bought for $448 because it was the cheapest "good" bass that the shop had at the time!

SMILEYSIXX · #8 03-30-2011, 11:49 AM

Most of a ric's cost is labor because it's American, and making it outside the U.S. might make that ric quality suffer. I don't see it as a viable possibility.

bassman10096 · #9 03-30-2011, 11:58 AM

Quote:

That was the first good bass I ever bought in 1978. The funny part is that I bought for $448 because it was the cheapest "good" bass that the shop had at the time!

I bought mine in '74 for the same reason. I think the second pickup would have cost me $75 more. Compared to the 4001, the 4000 lacked for deep bass (it's just got the bridge pickup) and even with Roto round wounds, I couldn't get much sizzle. Ultimately, it was a disappointment and I traded it for a '72 Jazz (which I sold in '04 for $2K).

Dr. Cheese · #10 03-30-2011, 12:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bassman10096

I bought mine in '74 for the same reason. I think the second pickup would have cost me $75 more. Compared to the 4001, the 4000 lacked for deep bass (it's just got the bridge pickup) and even with Roto round wounds, I couldn't get much sizzle. Ultimately, it was a disappointment and I traded it for a '72 Jazz (which I sold in '04 for $2K).

I loved mine! It was the best neck on a bass I ever owned, and the sound actually worked well for finger style. I was really into Bernard Edwards and Leon Sylvers back in the day, and that Rick worked well for that sound. It also got a really decent slap tone back in the day too.

I kept that bass over seven years, the longest I ever owned a bass. I think that is why I have had GAS since then because I let go of my true love, and have never been able to catch that lightening in a bottle again.

iamthebassman · #11 03-30-2011, 12:43 PM

I don't see why RIC would want to make a reduced cost bass, they can't make enuff of the "costly" ones to keep up with demand.

**Ric5** · #12 03-30-2011, 02:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mikezimmerman

I'm sure people would buy it, but I seriously doubt Rickenbacker would make it, at least not as a "reduced cost bass". More likely, it would be a "vintage reissue" that would command a higher price than the standard 4003.

Yep that is the way they would do it. That is what they did with the C64. It was based on the cheaper "s" model but they sold it for $1000 more than the 4003.

The 4000 reissue will not Happen. The 4000 did not sell well when it was a standard model. There is no market for a 1 pickup Rickenbacker bass. Also many of the 4000 basses got converted into 4001 basses by having an extra pickup added.

But if someone were so inclined they could take a 4001s or 4003s model and remove the neck pickup and replace the pickguard and they would have a 4000 bass.

kcole4001 · #13 03-30-2011, 02:46 PM

As Jeff said, it never really caught on well enough to keep in production.
I got mine in '86 for $750 Cdn because it was the only Rick I'd ever seen in person and it was available.

I would have preferred a 4001, but it turned out to be a fantastic bass anyway.
It actually has the most sustain of any bass I've ever played, stays in tune best, and it plays beautifully.
It's just a little limited tonally compared to a 4001 and especially a new 4003.

The 3000 series were a more budget-minded bass for the Rick fan, but they didn't catch on either.

I guess that just shows that many Rick buyers have been a strange, hard to predict bunch.

ko stradivarius · #14 03-30-2011, 03:02 PM

I had one I bought new in '86 or '87 dirt cheap. It played really well and sounded good. It was a nice bass until I threw it at our drummers kit one night and snapped the neck off. Oh to be young and very stupid. I traded it for an coin op asteroids game though.

I<34080 · #15 03-30-2011, 03:19 PM

It's really a case of if anything goes out of production it'll upset some people, while in reality the masses don't really mind. 4080, 4000, 4002, 3000, 3001, 4008...they didn't sell like 4001 and 4003, so John Hall feels like they shouldn't waste the time or materials to build them. Makes sense.

Now if you'll excuse me, I'll be complaining about the halt in the production of the Ford Festiva.

Jools4001 · #16 03-30-2011, 03:38 PM

I would definitely buy one.

I have a 4001 and I've found that I'm using the soloed bridge pup almost all of the time these days (I must live a charmed life because it is virtually hum free when soloed even under the flourescent light in our rehearsal room).

I think this is helped by the fact that I've had a Barefaced Big One speaker cab for a few months that gives me all the bass end I could wish for, so using the bridge pup gives me a lovely growl and bright top end yet still retains a lot of bass end beef - I play exclusively finger style (nothing against picks but I can't use them as effectively).

I would really like a 4000 as a backup bass, but like everyone else I doubt that we'll see Ric make one

**Ric5** · #17 03-30-2011, 07:34 PM

Here's my favorite 4000 Ric bass ... YouTube - Paul Gilbert - Scarified

BassGen · #18 03-30-2011, 08:04 PM

The desire to produce low cost instruments is all about greed and mass appeal for the manufacturers. Everyone else has succumbed to that pressure and put out some pretty crappy instruments with their valuable trademarks on them. Look at the "Player Packs" in most music stores with a cheesy amp, crappy accessories and ****** guitar.

I'm personally glad Rickenbacker has avoided taking that dreadful step.

**Ric5** · #19 03-30-2011, 08:07 PM

They did the 4000, the 3000, 3001, 2020, 2030, 2050, and 2060.

All were cheaper basses.

iridiumrocks · #20 03-30-2011, 08:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by iamthebassman

I don't see why RIC would want to make a reduced cost bass, they can't make enuff of the "costly" ones to keep up with demand.

True. I would see no need for them to try to target a lower cost market. They have their niche in the market with a loyal following. As long as demand is high and they are selling the current models at a premium price, why mess with success?