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.
Played a 4003 this weekend...
- Thread starter bannerman
- Start date
I kept it:
and so did he:
I find the pup cover totally fine, but I did have to adjust the screws on the bridge as they are in the way.
and so did he:
I find the pup cover totally fine, but I did have to adjust the screws on the bridge as they are in the way.
I have a '76 4001, and it has the pickup cover removed. I actually don't find that I have any problem palm muting with the stock bridge. My biggest problem I have adjusting to it is that every bass I've ever played before had a contoured body. This is my first time playing a slab-style body. At the first gig I played with it, at the end of the night my forearm was rubbed raw and bleeding where my arm was rubbing against the top corner of the bass. I've had to adjust my arm angle, but it's worth it for me to adjust because I am just simply in love with the sound.
I sold the stock pickups. The ones in it now are made by Classic Amplification. They eat the newer stock 'high-gains' for breakfast...
Thanks, satellite4. This replaced the stock bridge after the first time I needed to adjust the intonation.
that sounds interesting, would you post some clips of those pups?
thats funny...I have a 4003 and LOVE it. bought a 4004 a few months ago and hated it.
I have owned several, and still have 1 4003, but since aquiring my 4004, I never play the 4003. It's what a modern Ric bass is all about.
Never seen or tried a real 4004, they even more rare then a 4003. Does the 4004 sound the same as the 4003? For my part even though the 4004 are nice looking basses, they lack this classical Ric look. But who knows, I might change my mind if I see or try a real one!
Never seen or tried a real 4004, they even more rare then a 4003. Does the 4004 sound the same as the 4003? For my part even though the 4004 are nice looking basses, they lack this classical Ric look. But who knows, I might change my mind if I see or try a real one!
no It does not sound anything like a 4003. the only thing about it that is ok IMO is the neck.
I too never saw one in real life. thought about getting one for years. finally asked at a local store and they said sure, come back in 2 years.....then someone turned me on to Pick of the Ricks........had one in 2 weeks
down side of that story is I hated it the minute I took it out of the case....for me...terrible soundingbass...I was very disappointed because I love the sound of my 4003
in my opinion you pretty much HAVE to replace the stock bridge on a 4003. i have owned and loved one for years but man that is one of the worst bridges ever designed. i tried the hipshot one but found that the string tension was too low to keep the saddles from wobbling all over the place. i eventually settled on an original badass and have never regretted it.
the Bridge is a common complaint. mine has not started to lift yet.
I dont know that anyone I have heard had to do it, I dont think I have heard putting a badass bridge on it.
I dont think thats a bad Idea. thats a much better bridge than the original, thats for sure and that Schaller bridge is over hyped
Untrue. Not only is palm muting possible on a Ric, it's no different and no more difficult than on any other bass. As an avid user of palm muting on a wide variety of basses, I stand by this as fact.
Removing the pickup cover is often the first thing people do to their new Rics. That thing goes back a long way when most bass players had very different technique, and Rickenbacker probably keeps using it because they are a company steeped in tradition and resistant to change. Fortunately, it is easy to remove. And yes, it is still a Ric.
As for replacing the bridge, your call. I don't find the stock bridge to be a problem, maybe a tad more time and effort involved, not a deal-breaker for Ric enthusiasts, but I did replace it with the Hipshot once, and that is a bit of an improvement in some ways. But it won't make palm muting any easier for you. I have found the stock Ric bridge to be as stable as can be.
Tail lift is normal in these bridges, Rickenbacker knows about it and refuses to change it, so you take it or leave it (or rant about it like an idiot on the internet, like some people do). Having played dozens of Rics, I find that the lift is a normal function of stringing the bass and putting tension on it. The tailpiece sits fairly flush with no tension, but it usually lifts in the rear about 1/32-1/16" with tension, stabilizes, and stops, causing no further problems with tuning stability. If you get the rare one that continues to lift over time, that is a flaw, but I have only seen that in person a couple of times. It happened to one of mine, and it's not pretty. The Hipshot replacement cures it immediately. The saddles on the Hipshot do not wobble if you work with them and set it up properly. Mine are rock solid.
Another thing that was nearly a deal-breaker for me is the ergonomics of a Ric. If you're used to more traditional or Fender-style basses with all the nice comfy contours, the Ric might feel weird at first. Fortunately for me, I knew that some great guitars (like Telecasters and Les Pauls) are also more slab-like, but certainly worth the effort. I found this to be equally true with Rics, and it didn't take long at all for me to get comfy with the Ric slab.
I loved the looks, but had many of the standard concerns before I bought my first Ric. I'm glad I took the plunge. Like most bass manufacturers, they ain't perfect, they have their idiosyncracies, but it is what it is and you either learn to work 'em to your advantage and love 'em, or you reject 'em and move on.
Of course, if you don't like the sound, then it's a no brainer; box it up and return it. At least you gave it a fair chance.
Re: Chris Squire and his pickup cover...
He couldn't take his off even if he wanted to as he plays a 4001s which has the original 'horseshoe' pickup at the rear. The split metal 'cover' is actually part of the pickup itself.
The plastic cover you find on 4001/4003 Rics are simply there to emulate the original pickup - to complete the original look.
He couldn't take his off even if he wanted to as he plays a 4001s which has the original 'horseshoe' pickup at the rear. The split metal 'cover' is actually part of the pickup itself.
The plastic cover you find on 4001/4003 Rics are simply there to emulate the original pickup - to complete the original look.
People work around Fender pickup covers too so I guess a Ric wouldn't be much different. Where I play was right over the rear pickup so that puppy had to go. Depends on where you play. I also put a Hipshot on mine and outside of a wobbly (at times) G string saddle I'm happy.
Untrue. Not only is palm muting possible on a Ric, it's no different and no more difficult than on any other bass. As an avid user of palm muting on a wide variety of basses, I stand by this as fact.
Removing the pickup cover is often the first thing people do to their new Rics. That thing goes back a long way when most bass players had very different technique, and Rickenbacker probably keeps using it because they are a company steeped in tradition and resistant to change. Fortunately, it is easy to remove. And yes, it is still a Ric.
As for replacing the bridge, your call. I don't find the stock bridge to be a problem, maybe a tad more time and effort involved, not a deal-breaker for Ric enthusiasts, but I did replace it with the Hipshot once, and that is a bit of an improvement in some ways. But it won't make palm muting any easier for you. I have found the stock Ric bridge to be as stable as can be.
Tail lift is normal in these bridges, Rickenbacker knows about it and refuses to change it, so you take it or leave it (or rant about it like an idiot on the internet, like some people do). Having played dozens of Rics, I find that the lift is a normal function of stringing the bass and putting tension on it. The tailpiece sits fairly flush with no tension, but it usually lifts in the rear about 1/32-1/16" with tension, stabilizes, and stops, causing no further problems with tuning stability. If you get the rare one that continues to lift over time, that is a flaw, but I have only seen that in person a couple of times. It happened to one of mine, and it's not pretty. The Hipshot replacement cures it immediately. The saddles on the Hipshot do not wobble if you work with them and set it up properly. Mine are rock solid.
Another thing that was nearly a deal-breaker for me is the ergonomics of a Ric. If you're used to more traditional or Fender-style basses with all the nice comfy contours, the Ric might feel weird at first. Fortunately for me, I knew that some great guitars (like Telecasters and Les Pauls) are also more slab-like, but certainly worth the effort. I found this to be equally true with Rics, and it didn't take long at all for me to get comfy with the Ric slab.
I loved the looks, but had many of the standard concerns before I bought my first Ric. I'm glad I took the plunge. Like most bass manufacturers, they ain't perfcet, they have their idiosyncracies, but it is what it is and you either learn to work 'em to your advantage and love 'em, or you reject 'em and move on.
Of course, if you don't like the sound, then it's a no brainer; box it up and return it. At least you gave it a fair chance.
The most sane post I've ever read in a Rickenbacker thread.
FWIW I remove pickup covers off Fenders but when I had a 4001 I loved the cover. It allowed me to play with a plectrum up near the neck with my wrist resting on the cover.
Yes he could. If he wanted it swapped out, he'd get it swapped out.... or play something else.
I like that treble bezel cover a lot. Pickup cover is not required to stay but I've played with it on no problem. I'm not loyal to the stock bridge but I don't think there's any real reason to replace it in my experience.
My dad had an 82' Ric 4003. It was in disrepair for years, but I took it up to the Atlanta Bass Gallery for a professional setup and repair a few months back so its now in near perfect shape. Rics are just those basses I really wish I could like...they're beautiful, they sound full, they're generally very well crafted and solid. The way they play though...oh boy...Rickenbackers are the only basses I've ever played that literally impede on my ability to play bass because of the way they feel. I wish they were for me, but they're just not. I've met quite a few guys with similar opinions.
*He still has it by the way. Worded that first sentence wrong.
*He still has it by the way. Worded that first sentence wrong.
Ric5
Inactive
- Jan 29, 2008
- 29,772
- 30,452
- Disclosures
- I like 5, 8, 10, and 12 string basses
Never seen or tried a real 4004, they even more rare then a 4003. Does the 4004 sound the same as the 4003? For my part even though the 4004 are nice looking basses, they lack this classical Ric look. But who knows, I might change my mind if I see or try a real one!
The stock 4004 does not sound much like a 4003. But you can drop in Rickenbacker single coil pickups and rewire it with stacked pots ... then it pretty much sounds like a 4001/4003.
Here's my 1993 4004L. The pickups have been replaced. I also put in a 4 band Audere preamp, and I made it a 5 string bass.
Here's a 4004cii. It has stacked pots, single coil pickups, and it also has been made into a 5 string bass.
