• 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 freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Custom Rutherford Double Neck Build

I have been looking through the various pictures of the build and want to first post the bass body as a "BEFORE" picture. The bass and some of it's original parts was purchased on an eBay auction. I didn't want to sacrifice any of my 4001's or 4003's so I decided to purchase a "4001" body. I prefer the 4001 to a 4003 in every way...that is just a personal preference. I am not stating that the 4003 is any less of an instrument and I own 4 of them so I wouldn't say that i don't like them. I just prefer the 4001 and chose that style to use for this project.

The bass, truss rod cover, and jack plate were all purchased by me and sent to Larry for him to inspect...it appeared to be a sound body with no repairs so that was good news. I didn't care about the state of the fingerboard and frets because I knew that I wanted new fingerboards anyway.I wanted them to match and my preference was ebony over the bubinga that Rickenbacker uses. I do have several "REALLY NICE" bubinga boards on some of my other Rics. It's a beautiful wood but the color of a dark ebony with the contrast of the crushed pearl and the Blue Burst was alot more appealing to me.I felt I wanted the instrument to stand out and reflect my personal taste rather than a copy of all the 4080's out there. Even the Rutherford style instruments are "ALWAYS" in Jetglo because that was the color that Mike Rutherford's was.

So here are a few pictures of the bass prior to it having any work done to it. Meanwhile I will sort through the many pictures and pick the best shots from the different phases of the build to post in the next few days.

IMGP8141 copy.jpg
IMGP8165.JPG
IMGP8146.JPG
IMGP8147.JPG
IMGP8159.JPG
 
To continue with some preliminary pictures of the bass, the fingerboard removal was the first thing that was addressed. It did come of rather easily with no damage to the neck and the truss rods were intact. I know that the one he did prior to mine, the owner wasn't concerned with matching the board woods and when I saw photos, it was pretty noticeable. Since I wanted a completely different wood anyway , I knew they'd be matched.
IMGP8374 copy.jpg
IMGP8375 copy.jpg
IMGP8376 copy.jpg
IMGP8377 copy.jpg
IMGP8384 copy.jpg
 
To continue with some preliminary pictures of the bass, the fingerboard removal was the first thing that was addressed. It did come of rather easily with no damage to the neck and the truss rods were intact. I know that the one he did prior to mine, the owner wasn't concerned with matching the board woods and when I saw photos, it was pretty noticeable. Since I wanted a completely different wood anyway , I knew they'd be matched.
View attachment 545619 View attachment 545620 View attachment 545621 View attachment 545622 View attachment 545623

Fire away!

I am enjoying this thoroughly!
 
The next step was to make a template and tracing to send to the case company to have the case made. Ameritage case company custom made the case and it is fitted to the template for an exact fit. The lower bout was compared to a previous one that was done. The body shape differed slightly since one was an early 70's 4001 and mine was an early '80's 4001.
Then the body was jigged on a saw and the upper bout of the bass was cut off.
IMG_0424 copy.jpg
IMG_0425 copy.jpg
IMG_0430 copy.jpg
IMG_0428 copy.jpg
IMG_0431 copy.jpg
IMG_0432 copy.jpg
IMG_0436 copy.jpg
IMG_0435 copy.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: BeeTL
The Finish was then stripped off. Paint stripper applied to the paint and then removed revealed that this bass was refinished black from a red (either Fireglo or Burgundyglo. I am not sure if this was done at the factory or not but it appears it was. I have seen Fender do this as well.
IMG_0502 copy.jpg
IMG_0504 copy.jpg
IMG_0492 copy.jpg
IMG_0497 copy.jpg
IMG_0499 copy.jpg
IMG_0501 copy.jpg
 
I'm sorry, but putting that Rickenbacher plate on the headstock of the guitar is just wrong. I read your post, I know you said you don't care...a lot of the rest of us do care, it's wrong.

I know you said a lot of you do care, but you're wrong. If he doesn't sell it off as an original Rick, and doesn't go around claiming it to be one, what's the issue? You don't lose money, he doesn't lose/gain money, nobody is cheated out of anything but snobs being cheated out of their absolutely irrelevant 'purity'. If someone does care, i'm sure he'll let them know that it's not the real deal.

If I change pickups on a Rick/Fender/Gibby, i'm not going to get rid of the decal of said company for the sake of people who want to see and know exactly what it is that I'M playing and whether or not it's as it came from the factory. If people care, they will ask, if not, they won't need to be a snob about it. Why do you feel the need to bring someone down about the way that they present their instruments if it's not in any way cheating anyone?
 
I was watching some reality TV show on Netflix about a guy who restores Americana stuff, stuff that is no longer manufactured. He rebuilds and restores lots of Coke machines and coolers from the early 1950's. There is no issue when they fabricate logos, paint logos, as they are obviously not passing it off as a "new" item because the item is no longer being manufactured; and are not taking any money away from Coke.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Walfretless5
Oh, forgot to ask. Did you ever get an explanation on why the original Jetglow finish was soooo cracked?

Not that it matters anymore.

I am not really sure but it seems that the bass was refinished because it has a fireglo or burgundy finish underneath the black. It was either done at the factory or by the original owner. I don't know why the factory would refinish an already finished instrument before shipping it unless it was to fill a specific order faster than a new build? I've heard about this being done and also fender doing the same , but not sure if that's the case with this one.
 
I know you said a lot of you do care, but you're wrong. If he doesn't sell it off as an original Rick, and doesn't go around claiming it to be one, what's the issue? You don't lose money, he doesn't lose/gain money, nobody is cheated out of anything but snobs being cheated out of their absolutely irrelevant 'purity'. If someone does care, i'm sure he'll let them know that it's not the real deal.

If I change pickups on a Rick/Fender/Gibby, i'm not going to get rid of the decal of said company for the sake of people who want to see and know exactly what it is that I'M playing and whether or not it's as it came from the factory. If people care, they will ask, if not, they won't need to be a snob about it. Why do you feel the need to bring someone down about the way that they present their instruments if it's not in any way cheating anyone?

Thanks Duke for telling it like it is ....I said I wouldn't address posts like this but since yours was positive I will take this opportunity to explain my views on it. "Whoever" can disagree or argue any point they like but I won't entertain it....my explanations will be stated here once. I didn't post this thread as discussion on "purist morals" of the Rickenbacker faithful and I won't let it turn into that. It is for people interested in these instruments and the build and decision making process that went into it. It wasn't built to offend anyone, it was built for a specific need for me as a musician...that is who the instrument will serve.

#1. ANYONE who knows ANYTHING about a Rickenbacker double neck would KNOW that this does not replicate ANY instrument originally produced by Rickenbacker so it is obviously NOT a 4080.
#2. I am not Claiming it to be one OR Calling it one.
#3. The bass side IS a Rickenbacker 4001 AND all of the parts except the bridge and tuners are as well. Many people change those out on original Rickenbacker products and that doesn't change the fact that they are STILL Rickenbacker products.
#4. I have no intention of selling this instrument, I realize the future can't be predicted but I would NEVER sell it as a Rickenbacker branded instrument,I would be honest as to it's origin. Also refer to point #1.
#5. It has the luthiers own serial number on it designating it as his build.
#6.I have an actual need for this instrument , I am a player , not a collector , the instrument needed to be customized to MY specifications...try asking Rickenbacker to do that for you....good luck. I inquired several times . They wouldn't even do a white finish for me when I asked them on several occasions years ago. They told me that white was too difficult a color for them to do now...(ever here of such a thing???) THEN they came out with the limited snowglo edition several years later...and I own two. If Rickenbacker would've make it , I would've bought it ...that is not the case so I had to go elsewhere to fulfill my specific needs.
#7. The name of the thread is "Custom Rutherford Double Neck Build" which is exactly what it is.

My intent is not to offend anyone, just to have the instrument that I need to have.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BeeTL and Duke Damn
Thanks Duke for telling it like it is ....I said I wouldn't address posts like this but since yours was positive I will take this opportunity to explain my views on it. "Whoever" can disagree or argue any point they like but I won't entertain it....my explanations will be stated here once. I didn't post this thread as discussion on "purist morals" of the Rickenbacker faithful and I won't let it turn into that. It is for people interested in these instruments and the build and decision making process that went into it. It wasn't built to offend anyone, it was built for a specific need for me as a musician...that is who the instrument will serve.

#1. ANYONE who knows ANYTHING about a Rickenbacker double neck would KNOW that this does not replicate ANY instrument originally produced by Rickenbacker so it is obviously NOT a 4080.
#2. I am not Claiming it to be one OR Calling it one.
#3. The bass side IS a Rickenbacker 4001 AND all of the parts except the bridge and tuners are as well. Many people change those out on original Rickenbacker products and that doesn't change the fact that they are STILL Rickenbacker products.
#4. I have no intention of selling this instrument, I realize the future can't be predicted but I would NEVER sell it as a Rickenbacker branded instrument,I would be honest as to it's origin. Also refer to point #1.
#5. It has the luthiers own serial number on it designating it as his build.
#6.I have an actual need for this instrument , I am a player , not a collector , the instrument needed to be customized to MY specifications...try asking Rickenbacker to do that for you....good luck. I inquired several times . They wouldn't even do a white finish for me when I asked them on several occasions years ago. They told me that white was too difficult a color for them to do now...(ever here of such a thing???) THEN they came out with the limited snowglo edition several years later...and I own two. If Rickenbacker would've make it , I would've bought it ...that is not the case so I had to go elsewhere to fulfill my specific needs.
#7. The name of the thread is "Custom Rutherford Double Neck Build" which is exactly what it is.

My intent is not to offend anyone, just to have the instrument that I need to have.

Sorry for bringing up the old argument, just didn't want to have someone bashing someone else for not also being a brand-nazi when it's clearly just a thread to showcase a beautiful axe. Looks like a killer instrument, have fun gigging with it (before you need a back operation :smug:)!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Walfretless5
Sorry for bringing up the old argument, just didn't want to have someone bashing someone else for not also being a brand-nazi when it's clearly just a thread to showcase a beautiful axe. Looks like a killer instrument, have fun gigging with it (before you need a back operation :smug:)!

Thanks again Duke! Much appreciated! :)
 

Latest posts