Post your Rickenbackers!

[TheBasicBassist]

Some nice pics in here:

http://www.talkbass.com/forum/showthread.php?t=404001&highlight=rickenbacker+club

my old ric was the same exact one..i miss it alot..

 

[experimental bassist]

Those bolt on neck Rics came out way after Paul had his 4001. They came out in the late 70's and were designed by Forest White, who used to work for Fender.

The 4000 had a set neck, and I seem to recall seeing one with a neck plate, but I might be mistaken. I know the Univox version had a bolt on neck.

Good point and thanks for clarifying. I didn't know that about Forest White.

And yes, IIRC the 4000s and 4001s were neck through from the beginning.

What I was alluding to was that the 4001/3 popularity has completely overwhelmed all other RIC basses, "bolt ons" or not and regardless of their chronology, and of course I was *blaming* Macca for influencing Squire and GL, etc etc, all of them of course influenced millions.

When most people think RIC bass, they think 4001/3

For example, I think the 4004 series is incredible and has some worthwhile improvements over the 4003, but I wonder if that series will eventually fade into obscurity, again in the shadow of it's more popular older sister, the 4001/3?

To help clarify my point, below is a 4001/3 (on the left). Compare it to 4004 (on the right). I'm just saying...











Invalid Link Removed

 

[user362432]

Hi. I need a little help.

I run across online store (with really bad pic, but attractive price). Mapleglo, supposedly Ric, with no white binding? That's all I can see. I did a little research and only model I can come up is 4003SB. Now, I have to get in the car and go to see it... Am I correct about model number (1982 only?????). Is there anything else I should know before I go to see it. I had 4001 Jetglo long time ago. I can spot Jetglo. But Mapleglo was out of my sight. Also, I might get it and just resell it to get Jetglo. I hate "naked Ric".... Any help about this particular find????

It does not have "dots"??????

 

[Chronicle]

That would be a 4003S. Some 4003's came with no binding. Just make sure it's a Rick

 

[experimental bassist]

Hi. I need a little help.

I run across online store (with really bad pic, but attractive price). Mapleglo, supposedly Ric, with no white binding? That's all I can see. I did a little research and only model I can come up is 4003SB. Now, I have to get in the car and go to see it... Am I correct about model number (1982 only?????). Is there anything else I should know before I go to see it. I had 4001 Jetglo long time ago. I can spot Jetglo. But Mapleglo was out of my sight. Also, I might get it and just resell it to get Jetglo. I hate "naked Ric".... Any help about this particular find????

A 4001s would have no binding and dots on the fretboard. Could you see if it had triangle inlays or not?

 

[user362432]

A 4001s would have no binding and dots on the fretboard. Could you see if it had triangle inlays or not?

I can see "triangles"????

 

[user362432]

That would be a 4003S. Some 4003's came with no binding. Just make sure it's a Rick

I think 4003S has a dots.. This one does not have???

 

[Chronicle]

To my understanding, both 4001's and 4003's had S models.

 

[Ric5]

To my understanding, both 4001's and 4003's had S models.

yes that is correct ...

 

[user362432]

Here is the pic:

 

[user362432]

Also, that pickguard is cut (that might be some modification remain)...

 

[Chronicle]

Interesting....it has the line down the middle...I'm not 100% sure though.

 

[CayceG]

Mah baby!

 

[Jared92]

Mah baby!

Headstock looks wrong? yes it does.

 

[Jaymi]

Those are the "bulbous" headstocks of more recent years...the3 one you have is the smaller headstock Jared...

 

[user362432]

Interesting....it has the line down the middle...I'm not 100% sure though.

I believe it's copy. That line in the middle is not supposed to be there....

 

[Korladis]

I believe it's copy. That line in the middle is not supposed to be there....

Actually, all 70's 4001's have the stripe down the middle.

What makes it suspicious, to me, is the presence of triangle inlays and the lack of binding, taken together. The 4001 had both triangle inlays and binding, while the 4001S had no binding, and had dot inlays.

 

[Chronicle]

I believe it's copy. That line in the middle is not supposed to be there....

4001's had the lines.

 

[Chronicle]

Actually, all 70's 4001's have the stripe down the middle.

What makes it suspicious, to me, is the presence of triangle inlays and the lack of binding, taken together. The 4001 had both triangle inlays and binding, while the 4001S had no binding, and had dot inlays.

I had a feeling my Rick-sense was tingling.

 

[experimental bassist]

Actually, all 70's 4001's have the stripe down the middle.

+1

:::edit: upon further research seems stripe appeared c.1972 /edit:::

What makes it suspicious, to me, is the presence of triangle inlays and the lack of binding, taken together. The 4001 had both triangle inlays and binding, while the 4001S had no binding, and had dot inlays.

+1 again and yes, I'm over that one.