As I found out from other members, it's actually a pocket for the neck.
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 stigma
- Thread starter Somnambulance
- Start date
As I found out from other members, it's actually a pocket for the neck.
I understand that. But still... it is a crappy job of it. I have seen a lot of set-necks done correctly. This isn't one of them.
Understood. But with some companies, nothing goes to waste!
They obviously didn't "waste" much time trying to do a good job of it. Wouldn't want labor cost to cut into profit!
The older basses were essentially hand made, so there is a lot of variety in the routes for pickups, TRC, etc., some of it pretty crude, particularly when such a high level of finish is achieved at all the exposed surfaces. The newer 4003 models are all CNC machined, so the routes are pretty clean, though still oddly oversized for the pickup clearance required. The neck pickup in particular was a weak point as it hogged out a big chunk of the through neck beam. I don't know if that's been toned down on the 4003 models.
It's kind of a shame that the RRF forum has devolved into an echo chamber of acolytes comparing their latest acquisitions. It's a superb technical resource, but they are not interested in any heretical notions or even the mildest constructive criticism of the venerated Holy Object. Hall used to post on there, and the sycophancy got a little too blatant for my blood. Apparently somebody offended him by pointing out QC problems, so he took his toys and ran home. I still post on tech issues occasionally, but keep my opinions to myself.
Last edited:
People just like to complain, apparently.
I don't really care what a bass looks like under the pickguard, to be honest. It's not going to be visible when I'm playing it, so I have very little reason to give a damn as long as it's structurally okay. As far as I'm concerned, the parts that are going to be under pickguards or control plates should be done enough that they're not going to cause structural problems, but aside from that, finishing them and making them look as perfect as the parts that will actually be seen when the bass is in playing condition... is a waste of time.
I would not call it a waste of time but attention to detail
... if Fender, EBMM and many other builder care ( probably all them) why not RIckenbacker?
It is very true that many people do not care if something is of good quality beyond what is seen on the surface and we are all free to choose.
Rickenbackers design captures a certain aesthetic. They definitely have a cool look.
A pickguard can hid lots of sins.
I was doing some brickwork on my house with a friend who is a mason. Probably a Mason as well. This guy wrote the book, and is pretty old to boot. Anyway, as I was laying mortar across the courses and squishing the bricks in place, lots of mortar in my area would squish out and fall between the bricks and the sheathing of the house. He looks at me and says "we call that shoddy workmanship". I say "but no one will ever see it". His reply "But you will always know it's there".
I'm not sure the workmanship of a bass made before half of us were born is good for much comparison.
Also, with regard to the 4004 I'm not sure how ironic it's sales figures are. The 4001 and thereby the 4003 has an iconic look and a lower price tag. Both are compelling positive factors when it comes to appeal.
Also, with regard to the 4004 I'm not sure how ironic it's sales figures are. The 4001 and thereby the 4003 has an iconic look and a lower price tag. Both are compelling positive factors when it comes to appeal.
I would not call it a waste of time but attention to detail
A pickguard can hid lots of sins.
I was doing some brickwork on my house with a friend who is a mason. Probably a Mason as well. This guy wrote the book, and is pretty old to boot. Anyway, as I was laying mortar across the courses and squishing the bricks in place, lots of mortar in my area would squish out and fall between the bricks and the sheathing of the house. He looks at me and says "we call that shoddy workmanship". I say "but no one will ever see it". His reply "But you will always know it's there".
As I said in my post, as long as everything is structurally sound, why should I care? The parts of the bass under the pickguard and the control plates need to be done enough to be functional, but making them shine like the rest, to me, is wasted effort. You are at that point wasting your time, and the customer's.
But I grew up in a 100 year old house. The basements on those are usually meant to be functional, not pretty. They're not usually very "finished" in the same manner as the parts of the house people usually actually live in. There aren't interior walls, just the frame of the house and the exterior walls.
That's what, to me, the parts of an instrument that are going to be under control plates and pickguards are like. I suppose it's nice, maybe, if they are as beautiful as the rest of the instrument... but I also think it's maybe a little dumb, unless you're going to spend a ton of time rooting around in there.
Also, I wouldn't say that Fender care that much what it looks like under the pickguard, judging by the gigantic routes found under them on some Jazz Basses. And that's a pickguard people are much more likely to take off than the one on a Rickenbacker (for the same reason people take Jazz pickguards off more often than P-bass ones).
I just don't get the "OMG, THERE IS A MINOR COSMETIC FLAW ON A PART OF THE BASS THAT ISN'T EVER VISIBLE UNLESS SOMEONE IS WORKING ON IT! CLEARLY IT'S A PIECE OF FIREWOOD!" attitude people on Talkbass have. It's so anal retentive and nitpicky.
Then again, some people care what their car's engine looks like. I don't, and don't understand why they do. I want the non-visible parts of anything I use to be functional, and as long as there's nothing wrong with them functionally, I can't see why I'd care what they looked like. It seems almost OCD to me.
The 4001 and 4003 are what everyone is familiar with and think of when they think "Rickenbacker bass."
Hence why people are still complaining about them despite there being a perfectly good alternative that addresses those complaints.
Not that there are no issues with Rickenbackers, as there definitely are, just like with any other brand, but I think it's a bit silly to continue complaining about the binding, for instance, when there's a model without it.
I'm not so sure about the 100 year old basement analogy either. Surely there must be a better defensive argument to be made for cutting corners.
I don't believe that it could be to keep cost down since other manufacturers are able to build better quality at a similar or lower price point.
Just saying.
I don't believe that it could be to keep cost down since other manufacturers are able to build better quality at a similar or lower price point.
Just saying.
my mate just bought a second-hand ric unseen - walking on thin ice, i know - but it was perfect after having the neck set up.
the problem is, it didn't come with the special little tool that you need, and he had to pay an exorbitant fee to the company for one. "no, that's just rics" he says.
can't help but think that some ric fans are a bit like those people who stay with bad spouses. he only hits me because he loves me!
the problem is, it didn't come with the special little tool that you need, and he had to pay an exorbitant fee to the company for one. "no, that's just rics" he says.
can't help but think that some ric fans are a bit like those people who stay with bad spouses. he only hits me because he loves me!
Last edited:
I don't see why such analogies don't work for you.
The parts of a thing that are going to be visible when it is being used, sure, I want those to look nice. The parts that are only going to be visible when opening that thing up for maintenance, or parts that are mainly for storing something, I just want to be functional. I don't care if they look nice as long as they work. If I was using a clear pickguard, maybe the way things look under the pickguard would be an issue. I don't, so they're not. As long as there is space for everything that goes there, and things work and are in no danger of failing, functionally, I don't care what a part of a thing that I'm only going to see once in a very long while looks like. The inside of my bass cab doesn't look great either. But it works just fine.
That explains it, growing up I always wanted a Ric, so I bought a new 1991 4003 Blood red with black pickguard
and hardware, I played it for about a year but couldn't get past the low output of the bass (they didnt make
the monster wattage amps we have available today, i played a Sunn Coliseum 300) and sold it in favor of
an '83 G&L L2000E fretless that was a true tone monster. I didn't realize until now that I was expecting too
much from that bass as far as output goes, I just that it was kind of a lemon since you can't really crank
things up to live performance levels in store. Btw has anyone else seen this color combo? I've never seen
another like it so I'm guessing it was somewhat rare! I sold it to a friend in '93 but he's since passed away
so I've no real hope of locating this particular instrument, but I tell ya it looked pretty sharp!
and hardware, I played it for about a year but couldn't get past the low output of the bass (they didnt make
the monster wattage amps we have available today, i played a Sunn Coliseum 300) and sold it in favor of
an '83 G&L L2000E fretless that was a true tone monster. I didn't realize until now that I was expecting too
much from that bass as far as output goes, I just that it was kind of a lemon since you can't really crank
things up to live performance levels in store. Btw has anyone else seen this color combo? I've never seen
another like it so I'm guessing it was somewhat rare! I sold it to a friend in '93 but he's since passed away
so I've no real hope of locating this particular instrument, but I tell ya it looked pretty sharp!
"Red," a solid fire-engine red, was a stock color for Rickenbacker from 1985 to 1998, and came standard with black trim and hardware. I wouldn't call it "rare," but it is fairly hard to find. What's really "rare" is the 4003SPC "Redneck" which featured a red-painted maple fingerboard. Only 125 were made back in 1987-88, a few of them eight-stringers. More on this in the book.
Yeah probably had something wrong with that one. My Rick has tons of output and are you sure about that date. 1991 I'm pretty sure I remember some pretty big amps were available at that time.
