FYI, There is no problem with the binding cutting into your forearm if you use the correct RIC playing position:
![]()
A big, satin marching band jacket works too.
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.
FYI, There is no problem with the binding cutting into your forearm if you use the correct RIC playing position:
![]()
They are expensive because, operating at capacity, the factory sells every single unit they manufacture, before they manufacture it.To all of you RIC lovers and defenders out there. Correct me if I am wrong. Wasn't the orginal thread a question about why are they are Sooooo Expensive? I'm done with this. The reason why they are so expensive is because they have a loyal following who will come to their defense even if thought to be attacked and will pay whatever price they set. People are responding with personal reasons abut their love for RICS and all other kinds of things. This is about the price price. God forbid I should say RICS are passe' and just a niche bass. I happen to like RICs and yes they are overpriced. End of story, I'm otta here. Some angry people in the world today.
The first and last ric I bought was 35 years ago (and yes I still have her) so I'm not really all that up on prices but aren't new Rics roughly comparable pricewise to new Fenders?
What is this thing with Ric basses from the 90's? I have read this on different forums & they say the same thing. I'm lucky that my 4003 is from October 1992
A big, satin marching band jacket works too.
![]()
willsellout said:For me it is the neck. I've owned one and played a couple others and they all had extremely comfortable necks; very thin with a nice shape to them.
ryco said:so glad I picked mine up in '87 for $250.
Love it!! Has had the same set of Rotosound 66s on it since '95. Suh-weet!![]()

The rod issue was because someone was not adjusting this style rod correctly. Loosen the rods, bend and hold the neck, just tighten the nuts snugly. It will stay in place for decades.I have owned several 4001's. The biggest problem for me is: all but one had had the dual trussrods tightened so much that they were tilted so high you couldn't even get a trussrod wrench on them, and people had chisseled out in the headstock to gain more access. I suspect this has a lot to do with tailpiece lift. Also, using round wound strings cuts into the frets like a file! I love the look, sound and feel, but can't deal with these issues! Just my observation!
Except RIC wants to support American workers and keep all of it's business here. If they did not police their trademarks, they would end up like Gibson and Fender, losing all control of their intellectual property.I suggest that RIC needs some forward thinking in it's mgmt. There would be nothing wrong with offering an overseas model with American electronics, and final QC and that signature RIC sound for lets say $600-$800. And they could stop worrying and trolling the internet about license infringement and illegal copies being made.
Did you get your thrill yet?Rickenbacker uses artificial scarcity to keep prices up, to keep their overhead ridiculous, even without retail markups.

Rickenbacker uses artificial scarcity to keep prices up...

willsellout said:For me it is the neck. I've owned one and played a couple others and they all had extremely comfortable necks; very thin with a nice shape to them.
ryco said:so glad I picked mine up in '87 for $250.
Love it!! Has had the same set of Rotosound 66s on it since '95. Suh-weet!![]()
They're as much as the top music man's. Which are a few hundred more than an American fender. They're not just bolt on's, they're nice and hold value better than a fender, they're a better investment.
For me it is the neck. I've owned one and played a couple others and they all had extremely comfortable necks; very thin with a nice shape to them.