• 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.

Finally the Schecter Startgazer is closer to Rick specs

Jason Bonilla

Supporting Member
Mar 15, 2021
1,021
3,016
I remember the Schecter stargazers from back in the 2010s. This model was always Schecter’s “Rick-alike”, but in looks only. I always remember feeling it was kinda dumb have the bass take obvious inspiration from a Rick only to give it totally different direction in terms of the pickups. It used to have a jazz pickup and music man pickup like a Lakland, in pretty much the same positions as a jazz or Lakland. They got discounted a while back. Now they’re finally doing it as an actual Rick-alike by putting the pickups closer to where they are on a 4003. I’m assuming it’s probably still 34” and bolt on or set neck. But at least it will still be a tad closer sonically and offer a cool alternative for kids drooling over Ricks like I did back in the day.
IMG_6572.png
 
If they get too Ric-like they’ll get sued for sure :whistle:
Ancient history.

RIC's litigation days ended with John Hall retiring, these are 8 maybe 10 years too late.

Aside from that the peghead is a different shape, lower horn cut out differs, top horn is in a different position, lower bout does not extend out.
Different fret markers, different pickups. I'm assuming they don't have stereo out.

John's boy has more sense than to attempt a case based on "They're selling a 2 pickup bass with binding."
 
he peghead is a different shape, lower horn cut out differs, top horn is in a different position, lower bout does not extend out.
Different fret markers, different pickups. I'm assuming they don't have stereo out.
What's interesting to me is that the bass has all the differences you've identified, and yet we all immediately saw that it was an homage to a Rick.

Extracting the design cues that tell us what they want us to know (but not making it a completely derivative knock-off) is a credit to the designers at Schecter.

IMO -the humbucker should be closer to P-bass position, and then the bass would have a much better chance of sounding like a Rick.
I converted one of my P-Basses to a double reverse P - with one pickup in the normal P-Bass spot and the other pickup up toward the neck - and it does a credible imitation of Rick tone.
 
If you study the comb filtering imposed by various pickup position schemes (I have Physics simulations of all that stuff), what you find is that Rics have pickup positions that are about 2:1 in terms of the distance from the bridge to the pickups.

Here's the frequency response of an A string with a 60's - ish pickup spacing - they pickups are actually a bit further out, but the ratios of distances from the bridge are the same:
Screen Shot 2025-11-19 at 12.27.45 PM.png

Note that the thing has a "lumpy" looking response - the humps are in almost chaotic heights, with a BIG dip in the low mids:

Here's the same analysis on a bass I built with 2:1 pickup spacing ratio. Note that the humps are rather different - they are two heights, with a distinct pattern - two humps down, two up, repeating for teh whole bandwidth of the thing.
Screen Shot 2025-11-19 at 12.29.13 PM.png



Fro t hose wondering what it looks like:

Rick Front.jpg


The hardware doesn't look at all like a Ric, but the pickups are in the right spacing, rationalized to a 34" scale. On a real Ric, playing around the bridge pickup is a pain, here the neck pickup kinda forces you to a very specific technique if you want to "pop" a string
 
Last edited:
The bridge pickup is too close to the bridge. As well as probably overpowering the neck pickup. This bass will tend to sound honky.
I just got one, the white 5st. It's quickly become my favorite neck (which does have some Ric flatness vs Fender's rounder D shape)
But sound? It's confusing, the neck pu dominates in all configurations (except turning it off) and the 2pu double coil combination sounds more like a Telecaster (neck MM) with an added J pu. So for me, it's a unique almost vintage sound to have and I'm still getting used to it. I put EBCobalt flats on it because the high end is razor bright and the cobalts sound punchy--just right high-end. The other benefits are it's lighter than most and probably the prettiest, so always tempting. It's high output Passive so you can be lazy and not unplug...
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 0260n25
If you study the comb filtering imposed by various pickup position schemes (I have Physics simulations of all that stuff), what you find is that Rics have pickup positions that are about 2:1 in terms of the distance from the bridge to the pickups.

Here's the frequency response of an A string with a 60's - ish pickup spacing - they pickups are actually a bit further out, but the ratios of distances from the bridge are the same:
View attachment 7371683
Note that the thing has a "lumpy" looking response - the humps are in almost chaotic heights, with a BIG dip in the low mids:

Here's the same analysis on a bass I built with 2:1 pickup spacing ratio. Note that the humps are rather different - they are two heights, with a distinct pattern - two humps down, two up, repeating for teh whole bandwidth of the thing.
View attachment 7371684


Fro t hose wondering what it looks like:

View attachment 7371686

The hardware doesn't look at all like a Ric, but the pickups are in the right spacing, rationalized to a 34" scale. On a real Ric, playing around the bridge pickup is a pain, here the neck pickup kinda forces you to a very specific technique if you want to "pop" a string
Very nice bass! How did you work out the phase cancellation between the two pickups? I see you used LTSpice.

Anyway, is "two humps down, two up" really a better response? Intuitively, I'd say that having more "chaotic" dips and peaks would translate to a more balanced tone with less "honkiness". Also, if the pickups are in the same position as a Rick (just adapted to a 34" scale) why is the response different?
 
I remember the Schecter stargazers from back in the 2010s. This model was always Schecter’s “Rick-alike”, but in looks only. I always remember feeling it was kinda dumb have the bass take obvious inspiration from a Rick only to give it totally different direction in terms of the pickups. It used to have a jazz pickup and music man pickup like a Lakland, in pretty much the same positions as a jazz or Lakland. They got discounted a while back. Now they’re finally doing it as an actual Rick-alike by putting the pickups closer to where they are on a 4003. I’m assuming it’s probably still 34” and bolt on or set neck. But at least it will still be a tad closer sonically and offer a cool alternative for kids drooling over Ricks like I did back in the day.
View attachment 7370974
These are kinda cool but not a fan of the PG and headstock. Idk, im not really seeing too much Rick vibe on these. maybe a lil bit on that top horn?
 
Very nice bass! How did you work out the phase cancellation between the two pickups? I see you used LTSpice.

Anyway, is "two humps down, two up" really a better response?
The response is a product of the electronics (easy to simulate in LYSoice) and the time delays inherent in a wave travelling aling the string - you use transmission lines to model that. For a 2 pickup system, you get an FIR filter with 2 positive coefficients (the wave traveling towards the bridge), and two negative ones (the wave returning from the bridge). Every string has a different response, as a higher tuned string has a greater propagation velocity.

If you understand the Physics and electronics involved, it’s relatively straightforward. If not, it’s voodoo.
 

Latest posts