Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Best Year Rickenbacker bass?
- Thread starter lfmn16
- Start date
I suspect that run of Midnight blue Rics were blems, but they neglected to mention that in the sale. I mean really - that price was lower than used Rics go for.
FWIW - I've played USA Fenders that were dogs too. All basses are different one to the next - go to GC and try three Precisions in a row. That is why I never buy a bass unless I can try it out.
FWIW - I've played USA Fenders that were dogs too. All basses are different one to the next - go to GC and try three Precisions in a row. That is why I never buy a bass unless I can try it out.
Actually, they started having trouble with "blue bleed" in 2004...I bought one used from a guy who hated his Ric....the "bleed" was minimal and for the price, I could live with it easily and have a great bass! One helluva player!!
Ric5
Inactive
- Jan 29, 2008
- 29,772
- 30,452
- Disclosures
- I like 5, 8, 10, and 12 string basses
Here's my take on a previous post ...
- Inconsistent quality - I have owned a lot of Rics from 1968 to 2011 ... they were all consistantly high quality
- Multiple dead spots on the fretboard - I have never seen a Ric with a noticeable dead spot.
- Poorly cut nut - I have never seen this either.
- Nut and truss rod cover that extends beyond the neck - what ??? I haven't seen this.
- Crooked truss rod cover - Never seen this either.
- Poor bridge - it bends, it's not always able to advance down far enough to get the action right you mean the tailpiece ... it just needs 2 extra screws.
- Excessive neck bow - maxed out truss rods - Real neck problems on Rics are rare.
- The Midnight Blue bleeding issue - I had one mid blue bass and the color did not bleed.
- Poor finish quality - I would disagree. Rics have a high quality finish.
- Inferior quality wood - truss rod ends dig into the soft wood which creates adjustment - problems - they max out in no time - They use Maple ... that is a good wood to use for musical instruments.
- Defective electronics They use high quality pots and sheilded wires.
- Weak pickups - Old 60s Rics had weak pickups. New Rics have hot loud pickups.
- Flimsy case that's prone to crack easily - they use the same type of case that most manufacturers use.
- Flimsy box they use for shipping - The box is cardboard. That's what everybody uses.
- A defunct customer service - Ya they are not famous for being customer friendly.
- Inconsistent quality - I have owned a lot of Rics from 1968 to 2011 ... they were all consistantly high quality
- Multiple dead spots on the fretboard - I have never seen a Ric with a noticeable dead spot.
- Poorly cut nut - I have never seen this either.
- Nut and truss rod cover that extends beyond the neck - what ??? I haven't seen this.
- Crooked truss rod cover - Never seen this either.
- Poor bridge - it bends, it's not always able to advance down far enough to get the action right you mean the tailpiece ... it just needs 2 extra screws.
- Excessive neck bow - maxed out truss rods - Real neck problems on Rics are rare.
- The Midnight Blue bleeding issue - I had one mid blue bass and the color did not bleed.
- Poor finish quality - I would disagree. Rics have a high quality finish.
- Inferior quality wood - truss rod ends dig into the soft wood which creates adjustment - problems - they max out in no time - They use Maple ... that is a good wood to use for musical instruments.
- Defective electronics They use high quality pots and sheilded wires.
- Weak pickups - Old 60s Rics had weak pickups. New Rics have hot loud pickups.
- Flimsy case that's prone to crack easily - they use the same type of case that most manufacturers use.
- Flimsy box they use for shipping - The box is cardboard. That's what everybody uses.
- A defunct customer service - Ya they are not famous for being customer friendly.
My first was a '72 Burgundyglow with check binding. First thing I did was install rotosound 66 swing bass strings, as I was in to British Prog. Being totally ignorant; my first Rick and fir4st set of rotos, I put on the meteal washers. DO NOT DO THIS....Each washer dug into the finish as I tuned the strings. I didn't realise what I HAD DONE, UNTIL THE DAMAGE HAD BEEN DONE. I used rotos exclusively on that bass, which was stolen in mid 80's.
'72 had a lucite (finger grip?) which I never used, although I never removed it. I did remove the [ useless in my opinion] pickup cover over thr bridge pup. This increased playing ease, whether I used pick or fingers.
OLDER MODELS ONLY: Nature of the beast: sharp edges on body. After a 4 sets, I had a gauge in my forearm. Bridge pup is half VOLUME OF NECK PUP. I took it in for a set up in 1980, complained about bridge pup. With permission, they clipped a capacitor, which equalized volume and lost the extreme treble from bridge pup.
I replaced stolen '72 with a used '78: No checked binding, totally different feel from '72:different pups, no bridge pup cover, no useless lucite finger grip. Seemed like a cheaper instrument overall, still a Rick. I replaced stock Grover tuners with Schallers, replaced pups with Bartolini Jazz. Now, it neither sounds like a Rick nor a jazz; still a great bass..rick-o-sound if neeeded, too.
I used rotos on the '78 until 1998, when I returned to my electric blues roots and installed LaBella Jamerson flats. I had grown weary of the ting-n-tang tone of the roto swing 66 strings, which are still my fave round-wounds; brilliant and harmonically rich. CAUTION: THAT SOUND quickly diminishes, leaving you with great stings, just less harmonic richness. If I was playing pro again, I would recommend changing rotos more often.
I haven't used newer Ricks; can't speak on their behalf, but older Ricks; early 70's and older in good condition will be at or near entry level "boutique" price point@ $3-4,000. At that price I would buy a used ZON and have $$ left over.
My 2 cents...Thanks....zon6c-f.
'72 had a lucite (finger grip?) which I never used, although I never removed it. I did remove the [ useless in my opinion] pickup cover over thr bridge pup. This increased playing ease, whether I used pick or fingers.
OLDER MODELS ONLY: Nature of the beast: sharp edges on body. After a 4 sets, I had a gauge in my forearm. Bridge pup is half VOLUME OF NECK PUP. I took it in for a set up in 1980, complained about bridge pup. With permission, they clipped a capacitor, which equalized volume and lost the extreme treble from bridge pup.
I replaced stolen '72 with a used '78: No checked binding, totally different feel from '72:different pups, no bridge pup cover, no useless lucite finger grip. Seemed like a cheaper instrument overall, still a Rick. I replaced stock Grover tuners with Schallers, replaced pups with Bartolini Jazz. Now, it neither sounds like a Rick nor a jazz; still a great bass..rick-o-sound if neeeded, too.
I used rotos on the '78 until 1998, when I returned to my electric blues roots and installed LaBella Jamerson flats. I had grown weary of the ting-n-tang tone of the roto swing 66 strings, which are still my fave round-wounds; brilliant and harmonically rich. CAUTION: THAT SOUND quickly diminishes, leaving you with great stings, just less harmonic richness. If I was playing pro again, I would recommend changing rotos more often.
I haven't used newer Ricks; can't speak on their behalf, but older Ricks; early 70's and older in good condition will be at or near entry level "boutique" price point@ $3-4,000. At that price I would buy a used ZON and have $$ left over.
My 2 cents...Thanks....zon6c-f.
BobNelson
Commercial User
- May 24, 2008
- 9
- 3
- Disclosures
- Owner: Nelson Instruments
For neck shape I always liked the late 80s to mid 90s models.
Personally I wouldn't go for the models with the old style truss rods. They are a pain to deal with. Not impossible to deal with but just annoying.
Also since it seems most people don't understand how to adjust them many have had fingerboards pop.
The other thing I have had to do too ofteh is replace the rods. Someone does make them still...though I forget who.
Many times people who didn't know what they were doing end up bending the adjusting ends of the rods. Then they remove wood under the nuts to try to get a wrench in there.
All that is to say, make sure you take a close look at any old ric bass to see if any butchering or amature repairs were made.
The best ric I ever played was a mint condition, black 4000 from the very early 80s right before they dropped the model.
I think they should reintroduce the 4000 as a slightly lower cost alternative.
Personally I wouldn't go for the models with the old style truss rods. They are a pain to deal with. Not impossible to deal with but just annoying.
Also since it seems most people don't understand how to adjust them many have had fingerboards pop.
The other thing I have had to do too ofteh is replace the rods. Someone does make them still...though I forget who.
Many times people who didn't know what they were doing end up bending the adjusting ends of the rods. Then they remove wood under the nuts to try to get a wrench in there.
All that is to say, make sure you take a close look at any old ric bass to see if any butchering or amature repairs were made.
The best ric I ever played was a mint condition, black 4000 from the very early 80s right before they dropped the model.
I think they should reintroduce the 4000 as a slightly lower cost alternative.
I second most of this. I've owned lots of Rics, and by no means is Ric5 an apologist.
Funny, grousing about dead spots on Rics while singing the praises of Fenders and Gibsons....
Most Fenders I've played have been unmagical, almost every one I've had has had neck issues, dead spots is almost synonymous for 'bolt on Fender neck' and I even sold a AMD Jazz that I otherwise liked, but got sick of adjusting the neck and intonation constantly. That being said, Fender is a fine company, puts out fine products, and is conscientious of the fact that they are a ward of a historic product. Same as Ric. For some reason folks just feel it's their cause to bash Ric.
BobNelson
Commercial User
- May 24, 2008
- 9
- 3
- Disclosures
- Owner: Nelson Instruments
In the past four years I never noticed a problem with blue bleed. Must have been a short term problem.
Let me offer one piece of advice. If you can help it, don't but from musicians friend or GC.
Why? I spoke with someone that worked at schecter about this. He explained to me that as the order quantities for those national chains were so great, they always sent them their defects and "b" stock.
Not saying they don't get nice instruments too, but that is the case. If you got a string of bad rics from MF I am not surprised as they probably were b stock instruments sitting in the MF warehouse for a while until they decided to blow them out.
Let me offer one piece of advice. If you can help it, don't but from musicians friend or GC.
Why? I spoke with someone that worked at schecter about this. He explained to me that as the order quantities for those national chains were so great, they always sent them their defects and "b" stock.
Not saying they don't get nice instruments too, but that is the case. If you got a string of bad rics from MF I am not surprised as they probably were b stock instruments sitting in the MF warehouse for a while until they decided to blow them out.
The reason that there is such mania over "vintage" instruments and instruments from certain time periods is that many companies, including most significantly Fender and Gibson, have been sold (sometimes multiple times) during their existence and in both those examples, new owners made changes that many people perceived as resulting in worse instruments. So whereas previously old guitars were just used instruments, suddenly they became hot commodities and phrases like "pre-CBS" entered the market. It's gotten to the point where in many cases people just assume that something old is better.
But Rickenbacker, perhaps uniquely, has been under continuous control by the same group of people for a long, long time---at least, throughout their entire bass-making existence. So there was never a shift in philosophy, a big move to suddenly and quickly cut costs, or anything like that. So there was never a "bad time" for them. The instruments have changed over time, but the changes are the kinds of things that would go to individual preference (e.g., chunky vs. thin necks; horseshoes vs. toasters vs. hi-gain pickups) rather than shifts in basic quality. Old Ricks cost a lot, but I suspect that's due to rarity and people wanting the same model that [Paul McCartney/Chris Squire/Geddy Lee/whoever] played.
For what it's worth, I've had two: a 1976 4001, which was nice enough but the frets were quite worn, probably from Rotosounds as other people have discussed---rather than sinking the cost of a re-fret into it, I sold it and got a 2006 4003, which I still have. That was the first year with the push/pull switch on the tone pot to switch between the vintage and modern tone circuits. My 4003 is Midnight Blue, and I have had no issues with bleed. The neck is a bit beefier on the '06, which actually doesn't bother me at all.
But Rickenbacker, perhaps uniquely, has been under continuous control by the same group of people for a long, long time---at least, throughout their entire bass-making existence. So there was never a shift in philosophy, a big move to suddenly and quickly cut costs, or anything like that. So there was never a "bad time" for them. The instruments have changed over time, but the changes are the kinds of things that would go to individual preference (e.g., chunky vs. thin necks; horseshoes vs. toasters vs. hi-gain pickups) rather than shifts in basic quality. Old Ricks cost a lot, but I suspect that's due to rarity and people wanting the same model that [Paul McCartney/Chris Squire/Geddy Lee/whoever] played.
For what it's worth, I've had two: a 1976 4001, which was nice enough but the frets were quite worn, probably from Rotosounds as other people have discussed---rather than sinking the cost of a re-fret into it, I sold it and got a 2006 4003, which I still have. That was the first year with the push/pull switch on the tone pot to switch between the vintage and modern tone circuits. My 4003 is Midnight Blue, and I have had no issues with bleed. The neck is a bit beefier on the '06, which actually doesn't bother me at all.
I recently bought a RIC while visiting Portland. For some reason, I too had erroneous preconceived notions about these instruments. I have to say, my new Midnight Blue 4003 is the BEST bass that I have ever owned. The tone is just "me". I did have a nut that needed adjustment (E string was to high), but the adjustment took it from "great" to "Sorry other basses in the stable." My opinion is subjective, but if it means anything, I love mine.
I currently own 3 - a 1968 4001, an early 1973 4001, and a 2009 4001C64.
The '68 has the thinnest neck I've ever played on a bass, the pickups are lower output, and it needs light strings to play properly. That said- it sounds literally like no other bass I've heard. Growliest bridge pickup I've ever heard, warm, fat neck pickup, very unique sound.
The '73 I'm pretty sure would survive a nuclear bomb. The bass is absolutely rock solid- I can put 40-95's or 55-110's on it and that neck WON'T move. LOUD pickups, balanced sound, and the neck is a baseball bat. Very solid piece of equipment.
The '09 4001C64 has an incredibly loud bridge pickup, and a very agressive tone overall. It feels like the '73, but it's not as smooth sounding.
All different, all fantastic sounding instruments.
The '68 has the thinnest neck I've ever played on a bass, the pickups are lower output, and it needs light strings to play properly. That said- it sounds literally like no other bass I've heard. Growliest bridge pickup I've ever heard, warm, fat neck pickup, very unique sound.
The '73 I'm pretty sure would survive a nuclear bomb. The bass is absolutely rock solid- I can put 40-95's or 55-110's on it and that neck WON'T move. LOUD pickups, balanced sound, and the neck is a baseball bat. Very solid piece of equipment.
The '09 4001C64 has an incredibly loud bridge pickup, and a very agressive tone overall. It feels like the '73, but it's not as smooth sounding.
All different, all fantastic sounding instruments.
I used to have one of these rare beasts:
4003 SPC Tuxedo - Limited Edition bass, featured all white body with painted maple neck, black microdot inlays, and black hardware. Production was 115 instruments constructed in two runs.
I got it from Guitar Center in Covina back in 1987 and I wish I had never sold it in the mid 90's to a guitar shop in Canoga Park, CA.
I have had two other Ric's (both 1970s vintage, one a 4001 and one a 4003) and, while they were both great, I'd go for that 4003SPC again in a heartbeat.
I don't care for the new neck profile on current 4003 models at all.
4003 SPC Tuxedo - Limited Edition bass, featured all white body with painted maple neck, black microdot inlays, and black hardware. Production was 115 instruments constructed in two runs.
I got it from Guitar Center in Covina back in 1987 and I wish I had never sold it in the mid 90's to a guitar shop in Canoga Park, CA.
I have had two other Ric's (both 1970s vintage, one a 4001 and one a 4003) and, while they were both great, I'd go for that 4003SPC again in a heartbeat.
I don't care for the new neck profile on current 4003 models at all.
I played a 68 4001 for many years ... many people considered it the "holy grail" of Ric basses.
But those 60s Rics have weak pickups and weak necks.
Then years later I got a 73 4001 and I rewired it with all 250k ohm pots and removed the .0047 capacitor. It was a better gigging bass than the 68. Then I got an 89 4003s5 and I really liked it. It was better than the 73.
I like the 90s Rics ever batter than the 80s. and the ones built in the last few years are the best of the bunch.
Your White five stringer looks a bit like mine! Except mine has a bit more wear and it's a 70s 4001S:
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
I use Roundwound strings, but with the Skunk Stripe neck I've had no problem--still going strong after 40 years!
Ric5
Inactive
- Jan 29, 2008
- 29,772
- 30,452
- Disclosures
- I like 5, 8, 10, and 12 string basses
Ric5
Inactive
- Jan 29, 2008
- 29,772
- 30,452
- Disclosures
- I like 5, 8, 10, and 12 string basses
Ricks are high quality, very versatile basses. They are a bit unique, and I think they take a little bit of thinking outside the traditional box when it comes to properly setting them up.
Most people are impatient, and dont want to take the time to learn. Its just too easy to give in and start bashing them as an overpriced substandard product, over and over again.
Most people are impatient, and dont want to take the time to learn. Its just too easy to give in and start bashing them as an overpriced substandard product, over and over again.
Ric5
Inactive
- Jan 29, 2008
- 29,772
- 30,452
- Disclosures
- I like 5, 8, 10, and 12 string basses
I got my 2011 4003 out today ... this bass is better than my 2001 that was my favorite for many years ...
I really dislike the stock bridge and the fact is has only 4 strings ...
I will have to fix to be like this one ...
I really dislike the stock bridge and the fact is has only 4 strings ...
I will have to fix to be like this one ...
