4000

[quote name='ash' timestamp='1422727042' post='2676177'] As promised a couple of pics of my 4000 note the set neck only produced for a short time. [/quote] All 4000s from mid-'72 or early '73 onwards had set necks until they were discontinued years later. The really rare ones are the through-necks from early '72 and earlier. The set-necks seem to have a sound of their own though IME.

I had a '73 4000 set-neck that I stupidly sold. It remains the most aggressive-sounding bass I've ever played, and the action could go ludicrously low, even for me (ask Martin Petersen about me and low action ). Very versatile too, in the same way that a P is; one volume, one tone, good to go for pretty much everything. Great slap bass too, if that's your thing.

[quote name='CamdenRob' timestamp='1422878974' post='2677756'] To be entirly honest I couldnt give a monkeys what they made theirs basses sound like, its inconsequential... I like how mine sounds when I'm playing it Also rics aren't terrible basses... they just sound terrible when I play them.. totally the opposite of the sound I want from a bass. [/quote] Well considering you said "THE Ric tone - which I personally can't stand", I thought it seemed pretty specific. Thanks for the clarification. FWIW that's how I feel about Jazzes and, to a lesser extent, Stingrays. Other people can sound great on them. Me, not so much. I like the sound of Wals in isolation - I've had 2 - but have never managed to get one to work in a band situation. Their sound is just not what I'm hearing. Again, that's with me playing them; Leigh Gorman has one of my all-time favourite sounds, although a bit up front for most situations outside Bow Wow Wow.

[quote name='CamdenRob' timestamp='1413203244' post='2575763'] The thing is.. your ideal bass tone is subjective, so whilst it may be possible to find a bass that 'Rules them all' for your own personal tastes to others it wil be anathema... I still think you could get near any core tone if you owned a J, a P, a Ray and a fretless, but it depends what your looking for. I love the tone of a Wal, that's the pinnacle for me, for others it will be the ric tone... which I personally can't stand. [/quote] Would that be the Squire tone, the Macca tone or the many points in between? ;-) I've had various customs and a good number of high-end basses and my favourite bass ever is indeed a Ric (albeit a singular one). A word of warning re customs; I've had around 5 Sei basses, 2 of which were made for me, and my favourites were ones that were made for someone else. FWIW, I'd also put my Korean Squier P up against anything I've ever owned as an all-rounder, and that cost me under £150.

[quote name='karlfer' timestamp='1422371589' post='2671781'] Interesting. Mine is a 2012, wide-ish neck but not as wide as many 4001/3's that I have had. Slim profile back to front. The whole Rick sound to me is a bit of a misnomer. When you put in studio work, effects pedals, strings, technique, amp/amps there is a lot that goes into making that Rick sound. Even with a couple of early 70's Ricks I struggled to get a sound like Squires. Mebbe it's just that I'm sh*te. This 4004 will do anything from JPJ to 'Arry with just tweeks of the rotaries. That'll do me. [/quote] Well Squire's sound is only one example of a Ric sound, but generally you'll struggle to get that exact sound out of anything after '72, and to be honest you'd be struggling even then. A very light bass with the thinnest neck ever, with a 1/2" toaster and a genuine horseshoe and different value pots (and Chris Squire playing it) is not likely to sound the same as a typical mid '70s or later bass. Different neck instruction, different pickups, pots, weight, you name it. Even my 2 '72s, with essentially the same pickups, pots and weight as each other, don't sound too alike.

[quote name='Cosmo Valdemar' timestamp='1422374832' post='2671840'] Without a doubt. But there is that core tone I have in my head, that trebly clank, that the 4004 couldn't quite grasp. Mine seemed to have a mouch warmer, rounder sound to it. Probably makes it a lot more versatile, but a little less niche. [/quote] I had one too, a 2012 or 13 (can't quite remember - 13 I think). Lovely bass, one of the best I've had, but unfortunately had to sell due to the fact I couldn't get on with the unbound body; it really hurt my arm (yeah, I know). The neck on mine was much bigger than those on my '72s, though not as big as the earlier ones. As for the clank, I found it depended very much on what you played it through. I had mucho clank through some amps, not through others. It was inherently less clanky than the other 15 or so Rics I've had.

[quote name='Cosmo Valdemar' timestamp='1422362864' post='2671579'] Perhaps my thread title was a bit OTT... "Rickenbacker reissue old bass (very similiar to current standard)" probably would have been more appropriate. [/quote] I sympathise. As I stated before, I'm a bit gobsmacked that people on here aren't aware of the history.....or the nature of the fans. But then, thinking about it, I'm not that surprised at all....

[quote name='Geek99' timestamp='1422362532' post='2671573'] look, I know I'm not a huge rickernbacker [i]fan [/i]as such, even though I dont actually [i]mind [/i]them as such; but they lok exactly like all teh other rickenbackers I've seen. They even less different than a new crop of fenders are Bit disappointed really [/quote] It's not supposed to be a brand new model. It's a reissue of a previous model. Something you have to bear in mind is that most people who buy Rics want what they want; basically the 4003 (formerly 4001). Of those, some like the bound Deluxe, some like the unbound S, some like both. Historically the introduction of a new model has been met with tumbleweed from the fans; the 4004 took years to catch on even at the level it is now, which is nothing like as popular as the 4003, even though it supposedly addresses many of the problems the less-than-faithful have with the 4003. One thing John Hall has said though is that he won't be bringing back the 4005. He doesn't like 'em. ;-)

[quote name='Cosmo Valdemar' timestamp='1422299708' post='2670917'] It's a classic look. Of course this new one is a standard 4003 with a few minor changes, rather than a true 1999 reissue, but I imagine that would have been considerably more expensive. [/quote] It's only a few replacement parts - including a hugely expensive and difficult to obtain genuine horseshoe - away. ;-) FWIW, the '60s RM / S was to the '60s Deluxe what this S is to the current Deluxe. The current 4003 is as different to the '60s 4001 as this is to a '60s RM / S; a '60s RM / S was only a '60s 4001 with a few minor changes.

BTW, they're going for £1499 pretty much everywhere.

I find it terrifying that some people appear to be unaware that there ever were dot-necked, unbound 'S' model Rics previously (Macca, Chris Squire, Entwistle, Pete Quaife, Maurice Gibb, Lemmy, Rutherford and Waters being famous users). I feel so old and marginalised.;-)

After playing loads of higher end SS amps over the past few years in a (failed) attempt to find something I like, I recently tried an Ashdown CTM15. I loved it! But then I appear to have mixed tastes re SS vs valve; I've never liked Ampeg valve, always loved Trace SS, generally really liked Marshall Superbass, hated my Marshall 2001, never got on with Markbass/Epifani/GB etc etc, preferred my Ashdown ABM to my Trace Twin Valve; it seems to more dependent on the amp itself, the cab, and what I'm putting through it. Can't wait to try some more CTMs or LBs though.

[quote name='Norm' timestamp='1421149044' post='2657580'] Was a big Lizzy fan back in the day. Went to the 10th anniversary Vibe for Philo in Dublin (the Point i think?) with my mate who is still a huge Lizzy fan. We visited his grave, left the inevitable black rose (well as dark red as we could get!) & then went out to his old house where his mum now lives. My mate wanted to go & pay his respects but I didn't want to intrude, so I stayed in the car. Lynotts mum Philomena came out to the car (in the rain) to get me in for a cup of tea as she was pleased to see & chat to anybody who made the effort to come out there! She made us & a japanese couple who where there very welcome, gave us a tour of the tribute/shrine room dedicated to Phil. Saw his precision & ibanez at very close quarters & loads of memorabilia. Philomena gave us all a big hug farewell & we all had a few tears. A lovely person of great warmth & dignity on what must have been a difficult day. Then onto the gig in the evening after a good few porters to see Limehouse Lizzy, Eric Bell Band & a reformed version of Thin Lizzy with Gorham, Downey, Wharton, Mendoza & Sykes. A glass was raised this year whilst listening to my faves Johnny the fox & emerald! He was a big influence on me as a singing bass player. RIP Philo. [/quote] Fabulous story; brought a tear to my eye. There are 2 reasons I play the bass and started as a songwriting frontman/bassist (although I dumped the frontman bit many years ago as I was crap at it!). One is Lemmy and the other is Phil. There is one reason I'm in a band at all, and that's Phil & Lizzy. I remember seeing Lizzy live on the tv in about '79 or so and that was it. Can't believe he would have been 65. Still miss him terribly.

P for me....on all their best tunes. ;-)

[quote name='spacey' timestamp='1409821061' post='2543579'] They were amps that sounded great on their own but walk down the room and very little audible bass got down the room unless you turned them up to loud. What sounds good on stage on its own, never sounds good out front in a band for some reason. The less EQ and knobs amps have the better the band sound to me. Look at things like Mark bass, plug it in, turn it up and they sound the knees without messing with anything. Slightly wooly valve tone from the off , but in a band situation it fills the sound right out, just wish I could afford one. Tried a TC bg500 and it sounded very trace to me, great on stage, pants out front. [/quote] I guess it all depends what you're putting into it and trying to get out of it. I know how to use Markbass but have never managed to get it sounding good for what I want. Back in the day I used to backline frequently with Trace and was always clear as a bell - and powerful - in the room. I always eq heavily though and mainly play with a pick; think a slightly more mellow Jon Camp. I'd sooner eq heavily to get the sound I want (Trace) than simply be unable to get a sound I want at all (most other stuff).

[quote name='grenadilla' timestamp='1401193221' post='2460957'] Were the original Trace Elliot cabinets made of MDF ? That stuff is heavier than plywood. They may use a poplar-birch blend plywood now. Does anyone know for certain? Is it 3/4" or thinner ? How does it compare to the Ashdown ABM cabinets ? I like Ashdown. [/quote] The original Trace cab I had (black painted, no covering) was very much wood. i think the next lot (early mark King) were too. I think they went to MDF later on.

[quote name='TheGreek' timestamp='1401108609' post='2460091'] I loved mine, excellent bits of kit which made the right noises but as you say "heavy"...if somebody could produce the same range of tones in a lightweight package they'd get my money. [/quote] Ditto. I've never found any gear I like half as much as my old Trace gear, just can't use it anymore because of the weight.

[quote name='MoonBassAlpha' timestamp='1417376951' post='2619762'] My exact feelings too! I thought it was just me. I think half of what he does is ok, the other is bullshit. [/quote] I never got Vernon (although really liked the band) until I saw them live. His playing, whilst not particularly tasteful or musical IMO, was very [i]physical[/i]. It really hit you over the head in a way no-one else I've ever seen has. FWIW they were incredible live (and yes I saw them with Muzz).

I've said it before but I've always vastly preferred the sound of the various Celestions I've used to any of the Eminence I've used. What the actual difference is, I've no idea.

Fatness and deep lows aren't the same IMO. Take a P Bass, it's about low mids, i.e. fatness, not real depth. Rics go deeper but aren't as fat. I never found even 2 x GS112s went deep compared to other cabs I owned, but they did go fat in a woolly, muddled way (YMMV). Some of that perception will depend on the bass that's going through it and the hands playing it. A different player or a different bass may achieve totally different results. I found the cabs dull and muddled at the bottom but glassy and brittle at the top with no midrange punch or articulation to speak of, at least for what I want. Like you say, there seemed to be no unity across the frequencies, just a disconnected top and bottom. Anyway, I think we've drifted off topic...

GS112s didn't have enough cut? Crikey, I had to turn the tweeters completely off, they sounded like someone throwing bottles at a greenhouse with me through them. The cabs had no real depth to me (low mids maybe, lows no) no articulation with the tweeters off and no bark at all. My Barefaced Compact worked far, far better for me, although still was ultimately lacking in punch and bark.

I know this is daft but I always get a bit weird around Aguilar due to the GS112 cabs I had, which turned out to be everything I didn't want. I'd like to be converted. The trick would be matching it with the correct cab as I don't like tweeters.

[quote name='VTypeV4' timestamp='1418144629' post='2627335'] Me too (wonder if it was my old one?) but IMO, I have to say I prefer the T/V.. [/quote] I've seen a T/V combo for sale and keep thinking I'd love to buy it. Only thing is, my back it utterly screwed - I have several prolapsed discs , which is the reason I sold my 4x8 (my mate still has that I think and I had it from new) and the Trace and Ashdown gear that followed it. I suspect it would sound gorgeous in my acoustic (all but me) band but I really have to be sensible about the weight. I played one once and I'd agree it was better then the V Type 4x8 I had, which sounded great with some guitars but not with others.