What's wrong with the Rickenbacker 4003?

[rmayer]

I had a 4001 back in the mid 70s, I believe. The neck was a bit wide, I preferred Jazz Bass necks, but it looked great (white and that great rosewood board) and had that "Ric Sound". Didn't like the binding and the sharp edges. Since then, I've tried to buy one many times, but it seems with the 4003 basses the necks are even chunkier, and they all seem to be over 9 pounds. I like much lighter basses. I would probably buy a 4003s without the binding, and it even has a more contoured body. Also, I'd probably swap out the bridge immediately so that would solve the intonation problems.
I know the 4003W basses in Walnut are sometimes lighter, but I'm not a fan of maple fretboards. So, if Rickenbacker ever builds a 4003s with a chambered or otherwise lighter (around 8-8 1/4 ln) body, I'm there.

 

[truand85]

There aren't many Rickenbackers on the racks even in larger cities, but certainly not around where I live. I've long been interested in them, though.

My dad played a Rickenbacker years ago, I suppose a 4001. He said he once played it at a recording session, and the engineer liked the sound so much, he asked my Dad to bring it back to another session. Apparently he just wanted to borrow the bass itself, not my Dad to play it... :-/

Five years ago, I walked into a music store out of town, and on the rack were two basses I was interested in: a limited edition Fender P/J, and a Rickenbacker 4003. I excitedly tried the Fender first, and was pleased, but not as amazed as I expected. Then I tried the Rickenbacker, and was astounded. This sounded so good! So clear and punchy. It was unlike anything I had played before. I thought about buying it right then and there, but didn't.

I was recently at another store that had a 4003 on the rack, and tried it out, again comparing to a Fender. Again, the Rickenbacker sounded markedly better to me. I might would have this time bought that one off the rack, but they only had black finish, and I wanted to get one in natural maple, like my Dad had.

I found one at another store, ordered it, and have been enjoying it greatly the past few days.

So getting down to the question -- now that I'm doing some actual research about specific questions about Rickenbackers (e.g., how to adjust the pickup height, how to tweak the truss rod, etc.), I am seeing lots and lots of people complaining about them. Either claiming quality control issues (seems perfectly well-made to me!), or claiming that they just don't sound good (sounds great to me!), or claiming they feel weird in their hands (a little different, but no complaints from me there either).

Am I missing something? Should I in fact not be liking this 4003 as much as I do? Do I have some blind spot?

What's wrong with the Rickenbacker 4003?

Ricks seem to be very hit or miss. The usual suggestion for them is usually try before you buy, seems to be a lot of lemons.

 

[Wilmingtonian]

You've discovered that Rickenbacker isn't a cult, but hating on them is.

 

[SleepyShark]

I played a Rick 4003 almost exclusively for about 10 years.

I also made a thread a couple months back about parting ways with it.

During that 10 year period, I really loved it. One of the coolest sounds and designs in the bass world, and people know me as “the dude with the cool bass” locally; but I realized I had adjusted my playing style to deal with its “unique” ergonomic situation and was never really comfortable on it. Which stinks, because the sound was killer.

I had the treble pickup bezel cover + thumb rest, zero mod thumb rest over the the neck pickup, the works. It probably had the most vibrant Fireglo I had ever seen as well. Unfortunately I also grew to hate the bridge after owning a couple more sensibly designed ones, the dual truss rod system was unnecessarily obnoxious, among other downsides. I’ll echo that the company is not fun to deal with. So much so that my guitar tech/luthier begrudgingly agrees to work on Ricks on a case by case basis, as sourcing OEM parts for warranty repairs is apparently a huge hassle.

You likely don’t see them in stores because they sell rather quickly. Many people view them as either a dream bass, or an essential part of an ideal bass collection.

To the people calling this a pile-on thread: I don’t agree. Nearly every comment here is giving praise where it’s due while sharing what they don’t like about the 4003. We can praise aspects of an instrument or manufacturer without making them immune to criticism.

 

[Hounddog409]

There aren't many Rickenbackers on the racks even in larger cities, but certainly not around where I live. I've long been interested in them, though.

My dad played a Rickenbacker years ago, I suppose a 4001. He said he once played it at a recording session, and the engineer liked the sound so much, he asked my Dad to bring it back to another session. Apparently he just wanted to borrow the bass itself, not my Dad to play it... :-/

Five years ago, I walked into a music store out of town, and on the rack were two basses I was interested in: a limited edition Fender P/J, and a Rickenbacker 4003. I excitedly tried the Fender first, and was pleased, but not as amazed as I expected. Then I tried the Rickenbacker, and was astounded. This sounded so good! So clear and punchy. It was unlike anything I had played before. I thought about buying it right then and there, but didn't.

I was recently at another store that had a 4003 on the rack, and tried it out, again comparing to a Fender. Again, the Rickenbacker sounded markedly better to me. I might would have this time bought that one off the rack, but they only had black finish, and I wanted to get one in natural maple, like my Dad had.

I found one at another store, ordered it, and have been enjoying it greatly the past few days.

So getting down to the question -- now that I'm doing some actual research about specific questions about Rickenbackers (e.g., how to adjust the pickup height, how to tweak the truss rod, etc.), I am seeing lots and lots of people complaining about them. Either claiming quality control issues (seems perfectly well-made to me!), or claiming that they just don't sound good (sounds great to me!), or claiming they feel weird in their hands (a little different, but no complaints from me there either).

Am I missing something? Should I in fact not be liking this 4003 as much as I do? Do I have some blind spot?

What's wrong with the Rickenbacker 4003?

There is nothing wrong with the RIC

 

[Cave Puppy]

It's the ergonomics that give me problems with a Ric. I've had three and after playing one for a few moments my fretting hand and arm are in bits. I wish that didn't happen because nothing else sounds like a Ric. That doesn't happen to me with any other basses that I've had. I've also had issues with the old style bridge and how the treble pickup is placed and routed. All personal issues. As others as stated, there is nothing wrong with a Ric. If a Ric is what you want, go for it. Sadly, they aren't for me.

 

[iiipopes]

The OP's question is no different than:
"I like to [date, hang out with, etc.] [particular person or a person with particular attributes, whether intellectual, physical, spiritual, etc]. Others prefer ________________________. What's wrong with [first listed]?" Or,
"I like to drive/ride in __________________________. Others prefer ____________________________. What's wrong with [first listed]?"
And so on. Nothing. Diversity is what life is all about. Vive la difference!

 

[creaturegods]

Seems like they'll make a signature model for just about anybody these days ...
I've never even heard of this Rick Enbacher guy. Probably some studio musician.

 

[dalkowski]

If you like it who cares what anyone else thinks

This X infinity.

 

[cataract]

Yeah there’s nothing else out there that sounds quite like a 4003. That thru-body maple neck + choice of pickups is next level good IMO. The only complaint I had about mine was the clunky bridge (easily replaced w/ the Hipshot variant!) and slightly too chunky neck in the first position. But I plan one getting on again, someday.

 

[Andy Marshman]

I used to call it an ugly duckling. Years later I bought one and thought it was a beautiful instrument. It's a quality piece of gear.

 

[iiipopes]

Yeah there’s nothing else out there that sounds quite like a 4003. That thru-body maple neck + choice of pickups is next level good IMO. The only complaint I had about mine was the clunky bridge (easily replaced w/ the Hipshot variant!) and slightly too chunky neck in the first position. But I plan one getting on again, someday.

New 4003 basses have a little bit wider (1 11/16 rather than the old 1 5/8) but a little thinner neck, and a new bridge more like the Hipshot is now standard.

 

[jdjk7]

There aren't many Rickenbackers on the racks even in larger cities, but certainly not around where I live. I've long been interested in them, though.

My dad played a Rickenbacker years ago, I suppose a 4001. He said he once played it at a recording session, and the engineer liked the sound so much, he asked my Dad to bring it back to another session. Apparently he just wanted to borrow the bass itself, not my Dad to play it... :-/

Five years ago, I walked into a music store out of town, and on the rack were two basses I was interested in: a limited edition Fender P/J, and a Rickenbacker 4003. I excitedly tried the Fender first, and was pleased, but not as amazed as I expected. Then I tried the Rickenbacker, and was astounded. This sounded so good! So clear and punchy. It was unlike anything I had played before. I thought about buying it right then and there, but didn't.

I was recently at another store that had a 4003 on the rack, and tried it out, again comparing to a Fender. Again, the Rickenbacker sounded markedly better to me. I might would have this time bought that one off the rack, but they only had black finish, and I wanted to get one in natural maple, like my Dad had.

I found one at another store, ordered it, and have been enjoying it greatly the past few days.

So getting down to the question -- now that I'm doing some actual research about specific questions about Rickenbackers (e.g., how to adjust the pickup height, how to tweak the truss rod, etc.), I am seeing lots and lots of people complaining about them. Either claiming quality control issues (seems perfectly well-made to me!), or claiming that they just don't sound good (sounds great to me!), or claiming they feel weird in their hands (a little different, but no complaints from me there either).

Am I missing something? Should I in fact not be liking this 4003 as much as I do? Do I have some blind spot?

What's wrong with the Rickenbacker 4003?

Rics have been known to have QA issues not befitting of their cost.

For my own personal taste, I would prefer a 4003 with body binding but no neck binding. Not ever likely to happen, but to me it just makes sense.

 

[ClassicJazz]

Bottom line, Rick's QC is absolutely worthless. I bought a brand new 4003SW. Beautiful walnut bass. BUT....the absolute worst fretwork I have ever experienced!! Sharp protruding fret ends on both sides of the neck, so bad you could cut yourself....badly! Seriously! ***! I called Rickenbacker which useless. Long story short, since it was a great looking bass, I decided to keep it. I had to re-dress ALL the fret ends to make it playable.

Now here's the real joke, I recently bought a $177 Harley Benton bass. No comparison in regards to the frets, out of the box the fret work on the Harley Benton was nearly perfect. Every fret end was properly dressed and there were no sharp fret ends.

Some comment that Rick are not made by Fender. Well maybe they should take lessons from Fender on how to properly build and QC a bass. I've owned more Fenders then I can count and never ever had one with fretwork as bad as that 4003SW I bought. And that includes a couple of Squier basses.

 

[Deleted member 271037]

As long as you love the bass...

I have owned two. The first 4003 I purchased new in 1983. I had one and only one complaint about it. Soft fret wire. After about 5 years, the frets, especially the lower frets (1-7) where we typically play, had divots in them. I've not seen this much fret wear in any other bass I owned. Otherwise I LOVED that bass and have regretted selling it ever since.

Fast forward to 2017. I bought a 4003S. It lasted about 2 years and was then sold.

1. Primary reason - the tone, or lack of it. Over the years Ric has made design changes to the pickups that have robbed them of the tone that Ric is known for. IMHO and IME, a modern Ric will never sound like a vintage 4001, even with the "vintage" push/pull knob capacitor engaged
2. Second reason - and this is not really a show stopper, is the ergonomics. The baseball bat thick neck, especially near the first few frets. The thick neck that is only necessary because they choose to have two truss rods instead of one with stabilizer rods

I will admit that some of the design changes over the years have actually been improvements. Many of the complaints about the early 4001/4003s have been addressed. Regarding the tone, There are companies that make replacement pickups for Rics that sound more vintage, but for me personally - why should I pay $200 or $300 additional to get a Ric to actually sound like a Ric?

Hopefully you will enjoy yours for many years to come.

Yeah, some of the design changes have not necessarily been for the better. Especially when it comes to the electronics. It's even more obvious with the 12-string guitars IMO. The new ones just don't sound "right" to me. But even with Ricks from the same era I find the tone to be very inconsistent. Some of them sound GREAT. Others are completely dead sounding.

The neck profile has also varied a LOT over the years which is one of many reasons I always recommend testing a Rick before buying. Playing a 4003 and loving it does NOT mean you will automatically love a different 4003.

Some changes have definitely been for the better though, like FINALLY improving the bridge to a design that won't develop tail lift (even though RIC and their most rabid fans have denied the existence of this problem for decades...).

The soft fretwire Ricks came with "back in the day" is also a thing of the past. Current Ricks have much better fretwire. I'm conviced that the soft fretwire they used on older Ricks is the main reason for Roto's reputation for eating frets. Rotos + Rick is a classic tone so many Ricks owners have used Rotos. In reality ANY strings will eat the frets on vintage Ricks.

Ricks can be very cool instruments but in my experience they are also by far the most inconsistent of the "classic" basses. Hence the extremely different opinions on them.

 

[rashrader]

There’s absolutely nothing objectively wrong with the 4003. How could there be? Next question….

 

[fhm555]

Imagine how boring life would be if we all liked the same bass.
I don’t think much of whiners, especially those who slag something they have no personal experience with, but the world keeps turning and whiners keep whining. I’ve just learned to tune them out.

 

[farace]

My first bass was a ‘78 4001 that I bought in June 1980. Several years later I also bought a ‘72 Fender Telecaster Bass because it was such a contrast in sound. In November 1989, both were stolen. Only the Tele was recovered, and it remained my main bass for many years despite its many faults. And faults there were; as much as people might complain about Ric QC, they never made anything as sloppy as an early-‘70s Fender. Loose neck pockets, heavy, and that designed-in-Hell three-bolt neck attachment with tilt adjuster was completely unstable. (Tilt adjusters can work, as evidenced by my ‘66 Ampeg AUB-1, which is very stable.) And the Tele’s truss rod needed adjustment anytime a cloud went by. You could almost predict the weather with it. I used that for years until I got ahold of a very nice 1982 Fender Vintage ‘57 Precision. Lighter and more vibrant than the Tele.

Fast forward some years to 2015, and while looking through eBay to see if my long-gone 4001 might turn up (I still watch for it), I saw a very pretty brand-new Fireglo 4003 and it happened to be at a nearby dealer. I went and checked it out and it felt like coming home. Now, I know that Ric ergonomics don’t work for everybody, but I’m not everybody, and for me personally the ergonomics work far better than any Fender I’ve ever played. One of the things I like about Rics is that there is very little neck taper. Long story short, that 4003 came home with me, and the Precision now feels coarse in comparison. It stays in the closet, sadly. Then, less than a week later, I was looking through Craigslist and I see an ad from someone hoping to trade his ‘83 4003 for a Fender Tele Bass. We met and made the trade, and I haven’t missed that Tele once. This ‘83 has amazing action, and was one of the last years to have the old-fashioned hairpin truss rods, which I have come to prefer. I adjusted the neck once, and have not had to touch it since.

Then, a couple of years ago I bought a ‘92 4003 fretless. It’s now my main bass. I swapped in a toaster in the neck and it’s perfect for me.

For the record, too, I’ve only had polite, pleasant experiences with Ric customer service, even when my ‘15 needed a refinish under warranty, and one time John Hall himself went digging through files trying to find me a schematic for an ‘84 TR-14 amplifier, to no avail. I’m not saying that others’ stories are false, just that the legend of bad CS at Ric is certainly not a universal truth.

I could go on, but the point is, Ric ownership for me has been and remains a pleasant experience. I get tempted from time to time by other instruments. For instance, the local marketplace has an inexpensive Fender Aerodyne Jazz with a stripped truss rod and I get tempted, since the fingerboard would have to come off anyway, to put an unlined ebony board on it. And then I ask myself, “why?” The Ric is working for me, and gives me no cause for complaint.

 

[FLStudiobassist]

Bottom line, Rick's QC is absolutely worthless. I bought a brand new 4003SW. Beautiful walnut bass. BUT....the absolute worst fretwork I have ever experienced!! Sharp protruding fret ends on both sides of the neck, so bad you could cut yourself....badly! Seriously! ***! I called Rickenbacker which useless. Long story short, since it was a great looking bass, I decided to keep it. I had to re-dress ALL the fret ends to make it playable.

Now here's the real joke, I recently bought a $177 Harley Benton bass. No comparison in regards to the frets, out of the box the fret work on the Harley Benton was nearly perfect. Every fret end was properly dressed and there were no sharp fret ends.

Some comment that Rick are not made by Fender. Well maybe they should take lessons from Fender on how to properly build and QC a bass. I've owned more Fenders then I can count and never ever had one with fretwork as bad as that 4003SW I bought. And that includes a couple of Squier basses.

I walked into two or three separate guitar stores and played a good 4-5 Rics in total while I was in there. Same experience; ridiculously sharp fret ends and for me, horrible balance. There was one that balanced somewhat decently with my body but even then I could never figure out where to put my right hand. Why any guitar builder would put that size of a bridge and those types of covers between the bridge and the neck is beyond me.

 

[cataract]

New 4003 basses have a little bit wider (1 11/16 rather than the old 1 5/8) but a little thinner neck, and a new bridge more like the Hipshot is now standard.

Yeah a pal of mine has an early 80s 4003 and the neck feels like a Jazz bass.. very nice! After playing his, I couldn’t enjoy playing mine, lol. I think mine was either a 2012 or 2014, super chunky. But sounded amazing. Interested in putting hands on a newer neck w/ unlacquered fretboard.