• 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.

*Official* MF MID Rickenbacker Sale thread

How Satisfied Are You With Your New Rick?

  • Very Satisfied

    Votes: 47 45.6%

  • Satisfied

    Votes: 18 17.5%

  • Neutral

    Votes: 19 18.4%

  • Unsatisfied

    Votes: 7 6.8%

  • Very Unsatisified

    Votes: 12 11.7%
  • Total voters
    103
Status
Not open for further replies.
#361
GeezerDeacon69 said:
Yeah, I'm diggin' the pup cover; was POSITIVE I'd want to take it off, but It's real comfy the way it is.
Click to expand...

Yeah right now I kinda feel like taking it off, but the more time I spend with it the more I like it. I also love the way it looks...so...yeah. Messing around in drop D, playing with a pick, this bass ROCKS. I'm seriously considering getting/making a Rick-o-sound box to play with that option.
 
#362
GeezerDeacon69 said:
Here's a dumb question: what exactly constitutes "tail lift"? The tail end of my bridge is not exactly flush to the body. There's a small gap on each side. Is ANY gap like that considered tail lift? It obviously is not affecting the tone or playability.

Doesn't seem like a big deal.
Click to expand...

It's actually a good question.

Of course, flush to the body is the ideal, but most people seem willing accept a tiny gap. There is no screw or support holding that part of the bridge down.

If the gap begins to widen, then you may have cause for concern. I had one get so high the strings were nearly parallel across the saddles with very little break, which could have had a major negative impact.

I replaced it with a Hipshot aftermarket, which is very nice.

It seems this used to be a problem in years past, but recently I don't hear about it quite as much. Yours will probably stabilize and not widen.
 
#364
paganjack said:
Yeah right now I kinda feel like taking it off, but the more time I spend with it the more I like it. I also love the way it looks...so...yeah. Messing around in drop D, playing with a pick, this bass ROCKS. I'm seriously considering getting/making a Rick-o-sound box to play with that option.
Click to expand...
You will love the ric-o-sound!

I always expect to "tweak" a new or even an used bass. Sometimes those adjustments go on for a couple of weeks.
Mine shipped today. UPS says WED.

I have a '71 FG 4001 and will probably play this one more out in the bars/clubs. BTW, the "blue" thing is not my fav color...but the price was hard to beat.

Also, I have never turned the truss rods on my '71:smug:
 
#366
electracoyote said:
It's actually a good question.

Of course, flush to the body is the ideal, but most people seem willing accept a tiny gap. There is no screw or support holding that part of the bridge down.

If the gap begins to widen, then you may have cause for concern. I had one get so high the strings were nearly parallel across the saddles with very little break, which could have had a major negative impact.

I replaced it with a Hipshot aftermarket, which is very nice.

It seems this used to be a problem in years past, but recently I don't hear about it quite as much. Yours will probably stabilize and not widen.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the info; I'll keep an eye on it.
 
#368
The stock RIC strings do have the colored ball ends like D'Addario. The minor amount of tail lift described is normal and caused by two things..1)there are no screws in that area to hold it down....and 2)the route underneath the bridge is a little too deep, causing the rear to lift a little when the three screws in that area are over tightened. A washer of the right tickness under the bridge at each screw position tends to fix this. Mine was this way when I got it too. When the 4003 first came out, it had two extra screws at the rear to not only fix this problem, but to hold it nice and tight to the body which actually improves sustain. A bunch of whiners complained about the cosmetics of the two screws, so they were removed sometime in the mid-late 1980's. I add them to all of the 5 and 8 string conversions I've done for obvious reasons. I replaced my tailpiece with a vintage style unit from a C64 bass which only has the three screws holding it down under the bridge pocket. So far the rear of my tailpiece has stayed put, but if it lifts past 2mm, I'm drillin' the two extra holes.
 
#369
Well, I came home from work, walked out to to the mailbox and the UPS truck rolled up.

The bass is in good condition, the case was intact and the box didn't look like it had been banged around too hard. I ripped it open like a starving man and took a good look at it. Manufacture date appears to be December of 2010. It's a lot lighter than I expected.

6023908454_f925c75036_z.jpg


The only issues I see are yellowed body binding between the horns and the neck, and that small gap at the back of the bridge (is that what you call "tail lift"?). Also, the join lines are visible on the body and headstock wings on the back. All three of these I pretty much expected from reading other folks' experiences.

6023908774_cea1647997_z.jpg


6023353295_6dc961b3cb_z.jpg


I tuned it up and plugged it in, and it sounds reeeaaal nice. Did a function check to make sure the switches and knobs were all working properly, so far so good. The neck has a slight bow to it, when I get some time later I will make a slow, careful attampt to adjust it. The action is a little higher than I'd like, but not horrible. Will also see about that when I do the setup. I took some photos for POB (proof of bass):

6023353885_f19390ced5_z.jpg


The pickup cover looks really cool; it's in my way but I don't want to take it off immediately. I really wish it was something you just remove before using, like a camera lens cap. I'll have to see about that as well. One more shot, with the Family:

6023910312_ea7a8c2df0_z.jpg


I think I'll keep it, despite the small flaws in the finish and bridge fit. But, trolls notwithstanding, I certainly understand anyone who sends theirs back. For a company with such a legendary reputation as Rickenbacker, you have a right to expect the very best. That said, I see these join lines on lots of nice instruments, and the lines on mine won't show up in photos. The yellowing is probably due to storage more than anything else.

I also will say that I always thought I'd get a Jetglo Ric someday, but this blue is astonishingly good looking, much deeper than I expected. I think the crappy photos you see in catalogues must be due to the lighting they use. Looking at this bass in natural sunlight it really shows a nice range of metallic hues.

It could also be possible that I'm just drinking New Bass Kool Aid, or worse, Rickenbacker Kool Aid. Overall, I give the poll a "satisfied" rating.
 
#370
Spectrum said:
6023908454_f925c75036_z.jpg


The only issues I see are yellowed body binding between the horns and the neck, and that small gap at the back of the bridge (is that what you call "tail lift"?). Also, the join lines are visible on the body and headstock wings on the back. All three of these I pretty much expected from reading other folks' experiences.

6023908774_cea1647997_z.jpg


6023353295_6dc961b3cb_z.jpg




6023353885_f19390ced5_z.jpg



6023910312_ea7a8c2df0_z.jpg
Click to expand...

Yours is pretty much identical to mine (slight yellowing in the same area and my bridge looks EXACTLY like yours).
 
#371
Mine arrived a couple of hours ago - Feb 2011 build date... appears immaculate, no issues whatsoever that I can see - just gorgeous (could use a decent polishing , tho..) Case (and heck even the shipping box) were also completely intact. Setup is not bad as well, I prefer generally pretty low action and will surely lower it a bit when I change the strings. A few (hopefully objective) observations:

1). In certain light, the body binding particularly does indeed look yellow - but when I look at it under proper clear lighting, I can see it is not. Now, I am not saying that some or all of those who reported this issue did not have good lighting nor truly yellowed binding, but just making a call-out that, due to the overcoat, binding can appear different based on the lighting - just as the beautiful midnight blue finish can be lighter/darker based on the lighting.

2). My strings do NOT have colored ball ends, have a good bit of zing left, and seem to be a pretty light gauge - any ideas what brand they are?

3). Bridge, nut work, frets, inlays, electronics all seem top-notch. No apparent finish issues at all - binding lines where it meets the paint are especially sharp and clean.

4). You can clearly see the seams between the body wings and 2-piece neck thru the paint on the back of the bass, but it's the same on my old Spector NS5CRFM, so always assumed that was kinda normal and expected...

Am really happy with the bass and of course the price right now...
 
#372
Aceonbass said:
The stock RIC strings do have the colored ball ends like D'Addario. The minor amount of tail lift described is normal and caused by two things..1)there are no screws in that area to hold it down....and 2)the route underneath the bridge is a little too deep, causing the rear to lift a little when the three screws in that area are over tightened. A washer of the right tickness under the bridge at each screw position tends to fix this. Mine was this way when I got it too. When the 4003 first came out, it had two extra screws at the rear to not only fix this problem, but to hold it nice and tight to the body which actually improves sustain. A bunch of whiners complained about the cosmetics of the two screws, so they were removed sometime in the mid-late 1980's. I add them to all of the 5 and 8 string conversions I've done for obvious reasons. I replaced my tailpiece with a vintage style unit from a C64 bass which only has the three screws holding it down under the bridge pocket. So far the rear of my tailpiece has stayed put, but if it lifts past 2mm, I'm drillin' the two extra holes.
Click to expand...


My bass just shipped from just down the street from you. You don't happen to work for GC / MF, do you?
 
#373
Just got mine this evening. After GASing over a RIC for years, I returned a 4003 FG two weeks ago out of buyers remorse. I was hoping the cheaper price tag on this one would be the clincher.

Like many other posters, the body binding is yellowish all of the way around and you can see the neck joints on the back of the body. Binding on the FG one was perfectly white. The seams were also visible but that is the nature of a transparent finish. Neither of these two things bother me at all. The only cosmetic issue I see is that the binding around the bottom of the neck just above the pickguard is very sloppy. This was not evident on the FG one.

Right out of the box, the MID one is setup a whole lot better than the FG one. It does have some slight neck bow and tail lift, but this is expected and I'm sure a good setup will nearly cure both. To start the setup, I took the truss rod cover off. The pocket is just plain nasty, like something I would expect to see on a Squier. The screw holes for the cover are on the edge of the pocket, the paint is half scraped off in there and the truss rods look nothing like the FG ones did. Below are two pics (not the best I know, only have my phone camera on me) to get everyone else's opinion.

97104c83.gif


b11fd1db.gif


As long as this is normal, the bass is a keeper. For the few minutes I played it, it made me remember why I had wanted a RIC all of these years. I'm just hoping this one works out.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back