The only reason I have an issue with it is because of the process I had to go through in shielding it. Mine was built in 97' though, so I'm sure things have improved.
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.
I think I want a Rick...
- Thread starter benthughes
- Start date
The only reason I have an issue with it is because of the process I had to go through in shielding it. Mine was built in 97' though, so I'm sure things have improved.
With certainty? Well I've never claimed certainty, I've claimed personal view. And yes I can.
Even a small sample of a product...a product that supposedly goes through a standardized set of processes during it's manufacture will be representative of the whole. Why wouldn't it be? Will it be refutable? Of course. Is it still representative of the whole? I think so.
Great. No disagreement. No one is claiming an across the board problems despite your assertions.
A fair point, I suppose. Probably does make that a little more difficult.
I've not looked "under the hood" on mine since I had it restored, but I still have the before pictures. It's not especially horrifying, though it does have the hilarious series of holes instead of a smooth route between the main route and the neck pickup. I wonder if the wood in those routes is still red...
I still believe that. But that doesn't mean that every bass has problems, which is what "across the board" would mean.
But it isn't representative of the whole. That's the point. Sartori nailed it earlier.
You don't know how many basses were sold during this time. You don't know how many had problems. People from TB weren't the only ones buying these basses.
You have a very vocal minority (like Gibenbackerbass who also came back as another user and cried) that scream foul.
Using topics on a forum as metrics is a sure-fire way to be completely off base. Using the little facts we all have and coming to a conclusion that there are QC issues is an absurd math problem.
I'm not saying you can't believe there's a QC issue. I'm saying that you believing there is a QC issue based on some conjecture and speculation and half-assed numbers online is an absurdity.
It's bad math.
It's unfortunate that you can't see the difference between the two types of information. "Flat" is something that is measurable, quantifiable and readily discernible for someone of below average intelligence. One can buy any number of tools to determine if something is flat, as opposed to virtually flat or mostly flat. Flat is flat, and that can be measured.
Your second example is one of samples. Simply put, there is no way to accurately measure RICs QC issues. They certainly won't release that data, so we have to go on sample information. Usually, that's pretty difficult, because data is sporadic. In RICs case, however, the MF sale represented one hell of a sample, since over 100 instruments were sold in a very short period of time, and many of those instruments (literally dozens) were sold to members of this forum. To see the number of issues that we saw in that sample is an indicator of a problem (or, more likely, an intentional decision to keep overhead lower.)
I'm sorry this is difficult to comprehend. I hope this helped.
The recent instruments that all had QC problems came from the factory, with all it's improvements and refinements. Buying fancy saws and CNC machines can't completely replace human craftsmanship, and can't overcome human interaction (or lack thereof.)
Nope. It's sampling, and it's a legitimate form of estimation when the known quantities aren't available. If our sample was small, it's even more telling, given the number of issues that were found. Go review the thread and count the number of problems. It would be distressing for any manufacturer.
Engine207
Losing faith in humanity...one call at a time.
I was one of the many that bought a new RIC during the MF sale... actually, I bought it through Music 123 as they were willing to price match when MF had run out of basses.
AS I have documented here, my first one arrived will non functioning tone controls. The RIC folks on this board told me it was an easy fix and were kind enough to go into detail as to how "I" could fix it. I thank them for their efforts, however under no circumstances should I, the consumer ever be expected to make a new product right... well, that's my way of thinking. Maybe I have been spoiled by other manufacturers, but that's how I feel.
That same bass, a Fireglo had black paint, under the clear coat... it went back.
The 2nd bass Music123 sent me, was perfect from a finish perspective... however after stuggling trying to get it to play all over the board, I took it to a local luthier. I watched as he examined the fret work... it needed a number of frets levelled in order get the first 7 frets playable. I chose to have that work done, rather than hope that the next one Music 123 sent me would be better.
Maybe I'm just unluicky in life, but that has been my experience with RIC... actually one more thing.
I took the p/u cover off the bass as I perfer it that way, only to find that the p/u under it, is crooked! I called RIC "customer service" only to be told that the crooked p/u is "only a cosmetic" issue. Huh... cosmetic is NOT something I should expect from an instrument at this price range? Really?
I have kept the bass, mainly because here in Canada, getting a RIC is very difficult, both from a time perspective as well as a cost perspective. I know I can sell it and make money on it.
Just my experience...
Fishheadjoe
AS I have documented here, my first one arrived will non functioning tone controls. The RIC folks on this board told me it was an easy fix and were kind enough to go into detail as to how "I" could fix it. I thank them for their efforts, however under no circumstances should I, the consumer ever be expected to make a new product right... well, that's my way of thinking. Maybe I have been spoiled by other manufacturers, but that's how I feel.
That same bass, a Fireglo had black paint, under the clear coat... it went back.
The 2nd bass Music123 sent me, was perfect from a finish perspective... however after stuggling trying to get it to play all over the board, I took it to a local luthier. I watched as he examined the fret work... it needed a number of frets levelled in order get the first 7 frets playable. I chose to have that work done, rather than hope that the next one Music 123 sent me would be better.
Maybe I'm just unluicky in life, but that has been my experience with RIC... actually one more thing.
I took the p/u cover off the bass as I perfer it that way, only to find that the p/u under it, is crooked! I called RIC "customer service" only to be told that the crooked p/u is "only a cosmetic" issue. Huh... cosmetic is NOT something I should expect from an instrument at this price range? Really?
I have kept the bass, mainly because here in Canada, getting a RIC is very difficult, both from a time perspective as well as a cost perspective. I know I can sell it and make money on it.
Just my experience...
Fishheadjoe
