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.
Rickenbacker quality control issues?!
- Thread starter cb4
- Start date
Ha! That sounds familar! Back in the Day, it was possible to find more than one Ric in stores that carried them, I pawed through a stack of 6-7 before settling on the one with the thinnest neck ive ever played, before or after. I was literally in love with that bass, but truth be told, it was never particularly stable, and needed constant truss rod adjustment. The variation bass to bass on the 4001 was really noticeable. Ever since Ric started using CNC, they are pretty consistent, at least as far as neck and body dimensions. The version of the bass that eliminated the most common gripes was probably the 4004.....but nobody bought them! For modern production, the Un-bound, oil-finished 4003sw walnut body is probably the most inherently hassle free. Its also slightly lighter, which is nice too.
Yet, the way you talk, it seems that those old style truss rods are still being used. They're not, and haven't been used for 40 years. Interesting that these old style truss rods, in these older Rics, are still around today, as people are still bringing them in for service. Perhaps they're not as horrible as people seem to think.
Turnaround
Commercial User
I was responding to a comment about a bent truss rod in a Ric. I’m not at all suggesting that Rickenbaker has not made improvements. But those older hairpin truss rods are horrible and have caused some owners to do horrible things to their basses to try to deal with them.
Yeah, exactly. It's incredible that people are still complaining about a 40 year old, discontinued feature. But like I said earlier, this is Talk Bass, and haters are going to hate.
Turnaround
Commercial User
Don't exaggerate - the hairpin went out of production in 1984. That's 38 years. And there are lots of Rics around from that era.
You're just going well out of your way to Bash Rickenbacker. Even the Hair Pins were very dependable for 99% of owners. Again: Most Damage was cause by improper technique while adjusting.
From the outside looking in (I've never owned any Rickenbackers), it's amazing to me that many owners will talk about the occasional QC issues, the wonky bridge,. electronics, truss rod issues, and hard-nosed warranty and support ,( and this is all from this thread, much less other similar threads here in TB), and yet they have a big following and stay back-ordered.
Remarkable. And honestly, unfathomable to me.
Remarkable. And honestly, unfathomable to me.
Turnaround
Commercial User
You may not like to hear it, but I am just recounting what I have found in decades of servicing Rics. These are not opinions they are what I have experienced.
Regardless of whether the hairpin truss rods were damaged by improper adjusting technique or not, they were bent. I cannot remember a Ric with a hairpin that I worked on that didn't have bent rods. And I've worked on lots of them.
It’s a thread about ric QC issues, with the following the company has it was bound to happen
I like all my Rics, which span 6 decades of production:
The above group is missing my '88 jetglo (I bought it barebones and put the missing parts on it); this one needs a bit of fret work.
I did have a 2019 5-string, but I didn't bond with that one (the neck was too big for me) and the person who sold it to me bought it back. (Notice it has a Schaller 3D bridge too.)
None of them have issues which I would attribute to design, manufacture, or QA.
One or two have mods and I also like the Hipshot drop-D tuners (which are drop-in replacements).
So, with regards to the thread title, what issues are there?
As with any product, if you buy new and it has issues, just return it under warranty for a refund or repair.
- '64 4001S, overpainted white when I bought it in '77.
- '72 4001, which had mods over the years but is now pretty-much back to stock (bar the pickguard, which I do have).
- '78, bought modded, but reverted to stock.
- 2010 jetglo & 2010 mapleglo; these are the basses I pick up to play.
- 2013 with a Kahler bridge, just because I wanted to; the barebones body/neck was from the Butcher of NJ. It has got a more rounded neck profile, but that's OK since it's got the whammy.
- 2012 4004 Laredo; for some reason a previous owner had put a Zero-Mod thumbrest on it; I have a hankering to have it refin'd in a subtle two-tone blue/black. These evolved the 4003 to address pretty much all of the perceived issues and had: Schaller 3D bridge, surface mounted pickups (no big routing), humbuckers, no binding (smooth edges), but all the people who moaned about the 4003 just carried on buying that anyway.
The above group is missing my '88 jetglo (I bought it barebones and put the missing parts on it); this one needs a bit of fret work.
I did have a 2019 5-string, but I didn't bond with that one (the neck was too big for me) and the person who sold it to me bought it back. (Notice it has a Schaller 3D bridge too.)
None of them have issues which I would attribute to design, manufacture, or QA.
One or two have mods and I also like the Hipshot drop-D tuners (which are drop-in replacements).
So, with regards to the thread title, what issues are there?
- There is some tail-lift on a couple of them, which I would attribute to materials, but is not a major issue IMHO (just get another tailpiece or a V2 bridge/tailpiece unit).
- One had a truss-rod replaced, but that's actually a plus of the design, as you can just pop them out and put a new one in.
- One had a Seymour Duncan pickup in it for a while, as it was noisy live, but it's now reverted to stock.
- As mentioned, one needs a bit of fret work, but that's just fair wear & tear.
- Also as mentioned, I didn't get on with the 5-string's neck, but that's personal preference rather than a defect.
As with any product, if you buy new and it has issues, just return it under warranty for a refund or repair.
I'm not sure how you could run a stereo signal without a stereo cable, nor how you could run it to 2 amps without splitting it; however, they do give you a mono out as well.
(Actually they did one version of one of the guitars with 2x mono jacks, but then folks would be complaining that you have to run two cables instead!)
I tend to think of Rics as being like Lotus cars - they clatter and clank around, but my god they are fun!
I perhaps could have been clearer on that. “Additional” as in you’ll have to purchase the box separately in order to access the feature.
The guitar had two parallel mono outputs, they were not individual outputs for each pickup. Here's the one I used to own:
April '98 360V64
No special box needed just a stereo cable (TRS at the instrument end) that has two output jacks (one for each pickup) at the amplifier end.
Admittedly, we have become overly-wary of unknown sources, especially techs / luthiers touted as well-known / trusted / respected...mea culpa. As a consumer, I'd be satisfied with the plausible explanation provided it was accompanied by measurements or some other means of illumination. Added value if the intervening party has seen dozens of the make / model in question.
Riis
Actually, I do like what you're saying. In fact Just find me one that has Bent rods and Yet is still fully serviceable. Basically, that is what you consider "Junk" and not worthy of fixing or playing. I will buy it from you.
You don't need to purchase a box; I ran a stereo -> 2x mono cable back in the 70s, before I even knew they did a box.
Wot 'e sed.
Nowadays I can run a TRS-TRS cable to my pedalboard and split the paths at my input patch panel.
