Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Basses [BG]' started by Navybass, Sep 27, 2008.
Rickenbacker electronics are basically 1960s electronics ...
Well of course they are I stated for the time they were advanced.
NO and thank God!
Remember when a Fender was a Fender and a Gibson was a Gibson?
Now it's is it a tex-mex? or a japano-korean or a "custom shop" or a "private reserve" or secret stash ... ENOUGH!!!!
Who thinks up this crap?
Just give me a no-bs, up to snuff instrument.
Rick has not gone with that corrupting business model and thank God!
I had to wait way over a year to get new pickups for my old 4001. Their website said "temporarily out of stock" for so long I had about given up. I checked back every couple of weeks, sent e-mails to Rick, talked to big-time Rick stores (they had no more sucess than me) ... One day I was on a TB thread griping about it and a dude posted that they're now listed available on the Rick website. I immediately ordered and got them. Who knows what makes Rick tic.
God forbid a company try to produce a similar product at a lower price point for those who don't want to drop a lot of cash on a bass...
I wish there was a rickenbacker lower end model...
Does it matter if they were on a guitar or bass, it was done before by Gibson, so, it's not that revolutionary to just borrow from a guitar and put on a bass.
As far as your bass picture, If you were to actually read my post, I said "Fender made the first commercially successful bass" not the first bass. I'll even take that statement one further and say that ender made the first comercially successful bass that's played like a guitar. The bass you have pictured was designed more to be played like an upright. Also, it wasn't all that sucessful.
Also, the 4001 is the direct continuation of the 4000, not the 4003. The 4003 came about in the 80's as a bass they made to handle round wound strings, as Ric said in their literature, which is why they beefed up the neck and put in stiffer truss rods. Both the 4001 and 4003 co-existed in their lineup for a little while until Ric dropped the 4001.
The dual truss rods on Ric's came about out of necessity, not really because Ric wanted to be innovative. They realized that they had to put 2 truss rods in their necks. I remember reading somewhere that the first 4000's had a single truss rod and were being returned because the rod couldn't handle the tension, so they put 2 in there to be able to handle it. They say it's to be able to adjust each side of the neck independently, but in reality, the neck isn't that wide and when you adjust one rod, it actually affects the whole neck, not just one side of the neck.
I'll give them the neck through design. They were probably the first to market a comercially sucessful neck through.
To be fair, the store rep with whom the Rick employee got snippy either hadn't been working there long or knew in advance the answer to that question, and I suspect it was the latter, so if he or she was going to needle Rick about the backlog, he or she should not complain of discourtesy.
Not that I'm saying it's appropriate for a customer service rep to be rude, but come on, EVERYBODY knows that Rick has a long and indefinite delay in production of anything. Really, what did that store rep expect? "Hey, lucky you, we have just changed how we do things and now, for the first time ever, I can tell you exactly how long it will take to get your order, which we have never been able to tell before!" I can see how that question could be perceived as, "So, have you knuckleheads figured out how long it will take to build this stuff yet?"
If I was king of Rickenbacker I might do a few things differently than John Hall, but it's tough to argue with demand that outstrips supply. Until that situation changes, there is no reason for Rickenbacker to do anything differently.
I sometimes think the current situation may be a bit of a bubble---a combination of fashion favoring Rickenbackers at present coupled with a somewhat natural desire of people to want what they can't have. But when and if in the future the situation reverses and there are walls of Ricks sitting unsold in stores, then maybe criticisms of how Rick does things would be more valid.
Whenever this subject comes up somebody or -bodies always bring up that there are better basses for the money, but I can't think of another bass that is really interchangeable with a Rick. There may be better-made or more versatile basses, but they don't sound or feel like Ricks. I've heard comments that you can get a Rick sound out of a Peavey T-40, but having had both a T-40 and a 4001, I'm not sure that's really true, and anyway, those are two very, very, very different-feeling basses.
Although I have never GASed for a Ric, it seems to boil down to this.
1. For those who want them, the $2K price tag is not outrageous, they are for the most part a well made, classic bass.
2. A 2 year wait is also fine as long as the customer is aware of that up front and decides it is worth it.
3. There is no excuse for crappy customer service...EVER. This would be the killer for me.
I obviously am comparing to my NYC Sadowsky (many would say it is overpriced, many would say the 8mo. wait was too long, but no one ever complains about the customer service of Roger and the gang).
I'll just toss in my two cents since my experience with Ric has been great.
1. I paid $2,000 for my '08 JG 4003 a few months back and feel it was well worth it; it's since become my main player.
2. I ordered it online at MF and waited -- get this -- a week! Two year backorders don't need to hold you up if you can find online retailers with stock. When I orderd mine from MF they had more than 20 in stock.
3. My customer service experience with Ric was great. I had some questions, emailed them and got fast replies with helpful answers.
It's too bad not everyone had such a good experience with Ric but I'm glad I did.
To all you who are trying to justify Ric's inability to manufacture enough, explain this................There has always been a demand for Ric guitars and basses, why, all of a sudden, can they NOT meet the demand now, when they were able to in the past? I honestly don't think that the demand jumped a significant ammount in the last 2 years.
What's really ****** up to me is when people who don't even like the basses are buying them, and flipping them on ebay for several hundreds of dollars in profit. I don't know how Rickenbacker thinks that is ok. I'm not too familiar with their CEO/owner/what have you, but from my impressions thus far, he doesn't seem like that great of a guy, especially when it comes to good business.
my rick pretty much fell into my lap last week... lol
went into sam ash looking to mess around with some basses (i was in research mode cuz i was gana buy a new bass anyway) and the clerk is all "why not get a rick?" to which i replied "you dont have anyway".... dude pulls it out right from the factory sealed box, i was the first to play it.... next day i came back and snatched it up
I was just going to use this as an answer to my question. I've noticed that trend going on lately with Ric's. It's very unfortunate to the people who are waiting for a Ric because they themselves actually want to own and play the instrument. However, it is backfiring on some people that start their price at over $2000 though, which is a good thing.
Great thread to read all the different opinions on price and quality.
Isn't it funny how everything is relative? I'd never dream of buying a $4,000+ Fodera or Alembic unless I was a touring or studio pro. I have a 2006 4003 that I like very much, but I paid $1149 for it and probably wouldn't pay today's going rate, not because I don't think it is worth it, but that I am too cheap
Anyway, I was talking to a friend who is an excellent violinist. His sister is even better, playing with the Seattle Symphony. A good, INTERMEDIATE, violin is $4 Grand!!! His sister's violin set her back about $33,000.
Wow, that makes some the boutique basses, really nice Les Pauls, Fenders, Rickenbackers, etc. seem very inexpensive and a great value by comparison.
One thing I always find interesting about Ric threads concerning their business model, rarity, and relative lack of copies, is the interesting concept that everyone has a deity-given right to buy anything they want, no matter what.
We are so used to copies, counterfeits, every available option being available when we want it (usually yesterday), etc, that we simply can't accept that some things just are what they are, at the price they cost, and rare to boot.
Want a Ric? Buy one. Can't buy one? Boo-frickety-hoo. I want an Audi R8 with a pair of morally challenged twins squeezed in the passenger seat.
I could probably get you that quicker than I could get you a Ric. just kidding
1) Rickenbackers are cool bases.
2) They sound really great.
3) They're really hard to get
4) They are quite expensive compared with the competition.
5) I will never buy one
i've owned 7-8 rick basses,and 2 rick guitars over the years,every one of them used,and usually sell them when the muse fades,for what i paid or better,usually to buy a different model rick. i have owned a lot of different makes,and the ricks just have the jenny- seequa that i don't find in other basses. i like the unbound models best,which are not the majority sold. the pickups sound great to me,there can be a bit of noise,but that's what you're gonna get with such a wide frequency band-my jazz bass is just as noisy. but generally,if you want one,there's usually 50 or so on ebay every day,occasionally even reasonably priced....i guess i am not really qualified to comment on ordering a new bass,but then,i don't usually buy new basses (of any make). i did just pay over $2k for a v63,and feel it's worth every penny-that is the most money i have ever paid for a bass.
Out of curiosity I just checked MF's website and you can get a 4003 in Midnight blue -- now!
If you (or your credit card) have/has $1,950.