Rickenbacker 4000 as a cheaper alternative?

[fremaochris]

Also, losing the neck pickup, a couple bells, a handful of whistles, and dot inlays wouldn't drop the price all that much

[Bisounourse]

Originally Posted by Ric5

There is a reason why Rickenbacker does not make the 4000 single pickup bass. It didn't sell well. Also remember it is not patents Rickenbacker is protecting. There is no state of the art technology in a 4003 bass that needs protecting. The bass is a slightly updated 50s and 60s design. What Rickenbacker is protecting is their trademark. The trademark is their name, their logo, and certain shapes of their instruments. A good analogy is you can't brew beer in your basement and put a Budweiser logo on it.

Also a lot of the 4000 basses got a neck pickup installed by an owner who wanted his 4000 to be a 4001. That is another reason why there aren't very many 4000 basses.

If I'm not mistaken (correct me if I'm wrong), the Rickenbacker trademark is only protected in USA, not in Europe or the rest of the world. (That's why you can find Rickenbacker type copies in Europe).

@ ggvicviper: the Peavey T-40 is sometimes referred to as a 'poor man's Rickenbacker' (there are some video's on Youtube that A/B them).

[bill reed]

[quote=Bisounourse;13666248]If I'm not mistaken (correct me if I'm wrong), the Rickenbacker trademark is only protected in USA, not in Europe or the rest of the world. (That's why you can find Rickenbacker type copies in Europe).

QUOTE]

Rickenbacker took out two pattens in the Uk in 2003, it was the headstock and the trussrod cover.
they only took out trademarks in the USA in 1988 and 2000 after John hall and his sister took over the company.
i think that copy's get away with in in the UK as the dont have the name Rickinbacker on the Trussrod cover so the headstock could not be mistaken for a Rickenbacker, so they are not ment to decive.
Gibson went to court in Germany about a headstock and lost as the court said no one could mistake that guitar as a Gibson when it had another name on the headstock.

[kcole4001]

If the shape is trademarked, then it's illegal to copy it.

If it's the general look, then there's a grey area, so it's less likely to be upheld in court.

[PaulBoyer]

Some corrections if I may. I am not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV. Patents and trademarks (or trade dress) are different things (at least here in the U.S.). I believe that RIC's efforts to protect their products from being "copied" involve trade dress. I don't know how much power U.S. trademark law has with manufacture or distribution in other countries, but it apparently applies to any imports into the U.S.

I don't think John Hall has a sister. He is CEO of Rickenbacker International Corporation (RIC), his wife, Cindalee, is President. John purchased the company from his father, F.C. Hall, in 1984. F.C. Hall had purchased the Electro-String company from Adolf Rickenbacker in 1953.

RIC is privately held (owned) by John and Cindalee, so there are no stock holders, no board of directors, etc. Their son, Ben, is production manager.

[Ric5]

Originally Posted by Bisounourse

If I'm not mistaken (correct me if I'm wrong), the Rickenbacker trademark is only protected in USA, not in Europe or the rest of the world. (That's why you can find Rickenbacker type copies in Europe).

@ ggvicviper: the Peavey T-40 is sometimes referred to as a 'poor man's Rickenbacker' (there are some video's on Youtube that A/B them).

Sorry ... but you are mistaken ... trademarks go accross some borders ... they are harder to enforce in some countries. Some of the Asian countries don't play by the same rules as the Americas and Europe. Rickenbacker has stopped companies in Europe from making Rick copies. As per tha Asian ones sometimes they can be seized by customs upon import into the USA.

To really understand this you may have to talk to a lawyer and research the regulations from the World Trade Organization. It can get confusing with patents, trademarks, intellectual property, international borders, and legal agreements between various countries, etc ...

[bill reed]

Originally Posted by Ric5

Sorry ... but you are mistaken ... trademarks go accross some borders ... they are harder to enforce in some countries. Some of the Asian countries don't play by the same rules as the Americas and Europe. Rickenbacker has stopped companies in Europe from making Rick copies. As per tha Asian ones sometimes they can be seized by customs upon import into the USA.

To really understand this you may have to talk to a lawyer and research the regulations from the World Trade Organization. It can get confusing with patents, trademarks, intellectual property, international borders, and legal agreements between various countries, etc ...

i think some trademarks do apply worldwide but do not think the Ric ones do. remember that Ric only applied for tradmarks in the USA in1988 and again in 2002, before that there was no trademarks listed.
in 2003 the did applie for two in the UK and they were granted. so if the 1988 trademarks had applied to the Uk then why take out more in 2003.
the only two trademarks that apply to the UK are the headstock with the trussrod cover fitted and the truss rod cover on its own. no other trademard is listed here.
If anyone can find any for the UK please let me know as I have searched for many weeks with only the two found.
I am sure its very diffrent in the USA and maybe even Canada and I know the have in the past stopped ric type basses geting into the USA.
I also can't find any record of Ric taking any company to court for copyright, sent them letter but never going to court!

[ggvicviper]

Originally Posted by Ric5

There is a reason why Rickenbacker does not make the 4000 single pickup bass. It didn't sell well. Also remember it is not patents Rickenbacker is protecting. There is no state of the art technology in a 4003 bass that needs protecting. The bass is a slightly updated 50s and 60s design. What Rickenbacker is protecting is their trademark. The trademark is their name, their logo, and certain shapes of their instruments. A good analogy is you can't brew beer in your basement and put a Budweiser logo on it.

Also a lot of the 4000 basses got a neck pickup installed by an owner who wanted his 4000 to be a 4001. That is another reason why there aren't very many 4000 basses.

This was exactly the answer I needed. If they only hold a trademark on their shapes and brand name, then someone could make Ric-esque pickups, put them on a bass of their own body/neck design in the same positions a Ric would have. Wire it up the same way, and you have something that can mimick the sound (to an extent).

I still wonder why no other manufacturer has jumped on this yet, aside from the Rickenfakers of course. Some of those aren't accurate pickup-wise either, as I have heard and seen.

[Red_Merkin]

If Gibson can manufacture a quality, no frills, through neck, two pickup bass in Asia, I don't see why Ric can't also. Us poor people need a budget Ric!

[bill reed]

Originally Posted by Red_Merkin

If Gibson can manufacture a quality, no frills, through neck, two pickup bass in Asia, I don't see why Ric can't also. Us poor people need a budget Ric!

Could not agree more. If Ric licenced a China made bass for around £500 then most of the copys would never sell as everyone would get the licenced ric bass! Just like Epiphone and Squire are a cheeper version of the real thing!

[ggvicviper]

Originally Posted by Red_Merkin

If Gibson can manufacture a quality, no frills, through neck, two pickup bass in Asia, I don't see why Ric can't also. Us poor people need a budget Ric!

Doesn't need to be Ric either if you only want to try to simulate the sound!

Do think about this though as far as Ric creating a cheaper Ric themselves: There wouldn't be a Squier without the Fender copies first, like Ibanez, Aria, and Greco.

[bill reed]

Originally Posted by ggvicviper

Doesn't need to be Ric either if you only want to try to simulate the sound!

Do think about this though as far as Ric creating a cheaper Ric themselves: There wouldn't be a Squier without the Fender copies first, like Ibanez, Aria, and Greco.

and Tokia who made some of the best strats copys ever made, also did a really good SG too.

[Music Scholar]

Originally Posted by Ric5

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.

That's what I did to my 4003S. Now it looks like a 4000 model.

[Red_Merkin]

Originally Posted by ggvicviper

Doesn't need to be Ric either if you only want to try to simulate the sound!

Do think about this though as far as Ric creating a cheaper Ric themselves: There wouldn't be a Squier without the Fender copies first, like Ibanez, Aria, and Greco.

Exactly. The bigwigs at Rickenbacker need to wake up and realize, the same way that Fender and Gibson did 30 years ago, that every counterfeit Ric sold is money that could have been in their pocket.

They won't lose business for the US instruments either, because people who are buying the knock-offs couldn't afford a US made Ric anyway. That's why they're buying the knock-off!

[kcole4001]

Originally Posted by ggvicviper

This was exactly the answer I needed. If they only hold a trademark on their shapes and brand name, then someone could make Ric-esque pickups, put them on a bass of their own body/neck design in the same positions a Ric would have. Wire it up the same way, and you have something that can mimick the sound (to an extent).

I still wonder why no other manufacturer has jumped on this yet, aside from the Rickenfakers of course. Some of those aren't accurate pickup-wise either, as I have heard and seen.

You can do this quite easily yourself with RIC's own pickups and parts you buy from Warmoth, etc.

In fact Ric5 has done this many times, and the basses sound very close to a 4001/3 if the pups are in the same locations.

[ggvicviper]

Originally Posted by kcole4001

You can do this quite easily yourself with RIC's own pickups and parts you buy from Warmoth, etc.

In fact Ric5 has done this many times, and the basses sound very close to a 4001/3 if the pups are in the same locations.

You are correct, but not everyone wants to build their own bass.

[Ric5]

Originally Posted by kcole4001

You can do this quite easily yourself with RIC's own pickups and parts you buy from Warmoth, etc.

In fact Ric5 has done this many times, and the basses sound very close to a 4001/3 if the pups are in the same locations.

Yep ... build a bass with a maple body and a maple neck and add Rickenbacker pickups in Rickenbacker locations and you will have Rickenbacker tone.

That is why the Peavey t-40 sounds like a Rick. The construction and electronics are similar enough to a Rick.

That is why the Mouradian cs-74 bass has a Rick like tone.

[Ric5]

Another bass with a Rick like tone ...

The Gibson G-3



The Microfrets 6 string short scale bass the Rutherford used on the Lamb lies down on Brodway got a great Rick-like tone.

[Ric5]

Also The 51 style p-bass can get a good Rick tone ...

[ggvicviper]

Originally Posted by Ric5

Another bass with a Rick like tone ...

The Gibson G-3



The Microfrets 6 string short scale bass the Rutherford used on the Lamb lies down on Brodway got a great Rick-like tone.

How can the G-3 get a Ric tone with that pickup configuration/placement?

Also, none of these were cheap options, aside from the T-40 (which is cheap used).

By the way, that Mouradian is awesome looking. I always liked Pat Badger's Reality bass too.

EDIT: I know what you mean about the '51. I owned one, it's all about the single coil. It's not really a Ric sound though. Too deep, not enough bite.