4000

But it's only based on no substance [i]in your opinion[/i]. Quite obviously there are others who don't share your opinion. Did you read what I put about the likely cost of having one built by an established luthier? Of course if we're not careful we also get into a value/price of art argument. Because to me a musical instrument is not simply a functional thing, it is (or should be) a piece of playable art. As I said before, it's about aesthetics (subjective), tone (subjective), feel (subjective) etc. If this isn't the case for you then fine, you buy what you want, I'll buy what I want and I would advise anybody else to buy what they want. Or would you want to limit my or their choice?

[quote name='Mr. Foxen' timestamp='1335112812' post='1625923'] It took away my choice to buy some very excellent japanese basses, and others, best part of 100 pages of posts worth for a start, that's one thread. As well as the option of showing pictures of such things on this forum. You don't get much more real than that. The objection is in not being able to choose a product with all of the upsides and not the downsides, of which there are many, which have been addressed by a number of manufacturers. Actual prevention of improvements is actually happening. In real life. [/quote] Ah, so that's what this is about. FWIW I don't see the point in Ric pursuing old copies and private sellers of such but I don't have a problem with them stopping anybody making & selling copies now. I haven't personally played any copies that have had "all of the upsides and not the downsides" (maybe either you've been lucky or I've been unlucky) and would be interested to see these manufacturers improvements if you could show them. FWIW if I want an "improved" Ric (in my terms, because of the features I like) I start looking at pre-'73s which generally have all the features I want, then I just look for one that suits me. As for prevention of improvements, if you mean they're stopping people taking their designs, then yes, they are, and I have no problem with it. If you're talking about improvements such as the Hipshot, to my knowledge they're still available. Then of course there are the "improvements" I suggested earlier (rewinds etc), none of which are prevented from happening. You can still fit other tuners, bridges (Badass etc), pickups ; no one is stopping you doing that. I guess it kind of all depends on how authentic you want your "improvements" to be (which is a bit counter-productive in the first place). "Improvements" are also, as stated previously, subjective. Then again, there's always the 4004....again. I just hope this objection isn't based on the fact that you can get an old copy for, say, half the price (or less?) of a used Ric and you're simply unwilling or unable to pay full whack. Also FWIW, I'm sure if you really want one, you'll still be able to get hold of one. I'm sure anyone who has seen your posts and has one they want to sell could PM you. Or make one yourself. Just don't ever try to sell it. In fact, don't even look at it (in the words, thereabouts, of Nigel Tufnell).

My Sei is much louder than my Rics, but that's what the input level control on my amp is for.

[quote name='Mr. Foxen' timestamp='1335036777' post='1625140'] [/quote] Given the thousands of different basses out there and the almost limitless permutations of a custom build I'm surprised you find that's taking away your choice. The choice is to buy a Ric or buy something else. I don't see a problem with that. FWIW, if you don't like the current bridges but want the same look seek out an earlier aluminium one. If you don't like the rods make some replacements. If you don't like the pickups get them rewound. Etc etc. Or, as stated before, try and find one that suits you from the off. If you're still not happy then why are you wasting time even thinking about them?

[quote name='Mr. Foxen' timestamp='1334934711' post='1623746'] Or, could by lots of different, easily adapted shoes, for the same price as one really specialist, and with a fair chance of not being very good due to poor quality control pair of shoes, that is admittedly of a certain retro style. Price point is a big deal, and should buy more than a branding excercise. If branding is the only substance to an item, I will openly decry it every time. Openly attacking consumer choice is a bad thing. [/quote] But they're not openly attacking consumer choice. If you don't like them, buy something else. If you don't feel they're good value for money, move on, as I said before. Also, my favourite Ric is my favourite bass that I've ever played. I've played thousands of basses. So how is the branding "the only substance to an item" in that instance? One thing though, about the cost. Years ago ('80s) I asked a luthier for a quote rebinding a late 70s Ric with checkered binding like the earlier models . I was quoted £300 plus [i]just for the rebinding of the body[/i]. I did the same with the inlays (I wanted full-width crushed pearl) and was quoted more or less the same. Even taking into account that they're having to replace something that's already there, I suspect that if I approached a luthier for a through-neck bass built to the exact same spec as a vintage Ric (assuming I was allowed to ) I'm sure the cost would be pretty considerable. Of course if you had the skill and means to do it yourself (therefore not charging for your time) then that's different, but the majority of people haven't. Personally I'm more baffled by the fact that Fender can charge so much for what is essentially 2 pieces of wood bolted together with one pickup and simple wiring, no binding (a pretty time-consuming job - ask any luthier)and arguably the most simple inlays it's possible to fit, which is not to knock the P Bass, just how much they can cost.

[quote name='Mr. Foxen' timestamp='1334933105' post='1623715'] That is all of the point of having your own bass. I'd be happy with a general opinion if everyone else wants to buy a bass for me. Spending over a grand on something suited to someone else doesn't sound like a sensible plan. [/quote] But you seem to be missing the point that something that suits someone else may suit you too. I'm not the only person who likes my favourite book, my favourite film, my favourite food. FWIW there are all sorts of basses that I like, but no one bass could ever be all those basses to me. Because in some instances I want a bass that sounds, plays, or looks different then in the previous instance, for whatever reason; practical, aesthetic, whatever. I've had basses built for me that were exactly as I wanted them, but only within a certain context. If you're happy to have one pair of shoes custom made and wear them in every instance for the rest of your life then fine, but I'm not.

[quote name='Mr. Foxen' timestamp='1334931639' post='1623679'] Kinda of comparing a bridge that costs as much as a whole bass equipped with a BBOT though with one. That's the major thing, about the price point, when it starts tail lifting, as little appreciable difference the gap at the back makes, I know its there, and is a flaw that is going to get worse over time. [/quote] Actually, even in instances where slight tail lift may happen, that isn't always the case. I've seen loads of basses with a small gap at the back where they haven't moved any further in 30 years.

[quote name='Mr. Foxen' timestamp='1334930692' post='1623658'] Would you replace those with the ones that do tail lift though? That choice is what means you can get the better one. [/quote] Out of 10 basses I've had with tailpieces "that tail lift", not one has actually had tail lift, so for me it's a none issue really. I'd be happy to buy a Ric with a stock, modern bridge if the bass worked for me. My basses simply have the bridges that were fitted to them when they were made. Yes, a better one in the individual's opinion, not necessarily a better one per se. I'd change out the neck pickups on any 4001/4003 for a 1/2" toaster if it wasn't already fitted, although I'd far prefer to buy the right bass in the first place. Others I know prefer the high gains. Which is better? Neither, all just preference. I've tried an SD in my 2nd CS. Didn't like it at all. Of course it's nice to have the option, if that's the point you're trying to make.

[quote name='Musky' timestamp='1334856220' post='1622505'] I think all the parts mentioned above aren't actually copies - they just fit in the place of the original RIC part. [/quote] That was kind of my point. But what they do is replace the original part and "do a better job" (or not, as your preference will dictate).

[quote name='Mr. Foxen' timestamp='1334858425' post='1622544'] Think there was some messing about with the curve/angle at the edges, so side by side they are different, but obviously Hipshot aimed to look as similar as they can. There mere fact they have replacement parts shows the need for them. you know there is something wrong when they stop people doing better instead of doing better themselves. [/quote] But the Hipshot isn't better IMO. Just like the Schaller bridge I put on my early 70s P Bass which functioned better but made it sound worse IMO (Scott Thunes says the same about the time he fitted a Badass - IIRC - to his P; he took it straight off again). Some of these changes can have an affect on tone and can be detrimental. FWIW I also have it on good authority (never tried one myself) that the Hipshot doesn't go as low as the Ric bridge which could be a issue. I've also heard of instances where the Hipshot rattles. Some people will always feel the need to replace something because it doesn't give them what they want. Take a P bass. how many replacement pickups are there out there? Yet it appears no one is indisputably better than the rest. Because at the end of the day it comes down to preference. Also, where you might feel the need to modify one P, you might not feel the need to modify another, or where one person feels the need to modify, another may not. With regards to Donny's point, this is probably the case. John Hall has stated previously that (contrary to what people keep saying about them not wanting to make changes) there ARE things he would change about the 4000 series but that the customers wouldn't accept them. Personally I think the extras screws don't look as clean aesthetically, but then both my Rics have the earlier aluminium tailpiece which doesn't lift, so I don't need them.

[quote name='Mr. Foxen' timestamp='1334838638' post='1622120'] Can get bodies and necks, that does it. The point in that go back to the defences of RICs actions and attitude being because they are a small family run company. Can't have cake an eat it. Hipshot had to redesign the bridge to look less like the original because of RIC legal action. They've made similar threats to various other aftermarket parts makers, anything that retains the look regardless of improved function. Hence the pickups made looking different. Equivalent to stopping P bass pickups having the dominoes look. [/quote] I don't personally see this as a problem. If they were my designs I wouldn't want other people to copy them either. Anyway, if the designs/parts are so crap, why would anybody want copies of the same?

[quote name='Mr. Foxen' timestamp='1334835670' post='1622042'] Thing is, they supposedly aren't a large scale manufacturer, they are pulling the 'family owned business' and exclusivity thing. I'm still pressing to cut brand out of the judgement of basses, but the Fender style/attitude makes issues much easier to correct since they let aftermarket parts makers do their thing. [/quote] You can get aftermarket parts for Rics. Hipshot, Badass, SD, Bartolini, etc.

[quote name='Cairobill' timestamp='1334725453' post='1620238'] It is a well known fact that rickenbackers can be a) dreadful or b ) spectacular on a seemingly random basis. A while back I went to Denmark street to spend a chunk of advance on a new bass. I lined up 10 4003s and rejected them all. They felt bad, looked cheap and sounded worse. Wind on to the present day and I've just recorded the majority of an album with my stock 1978 4001 that is simply an utterly perfect bass. My point is that any dork knows that quality is variable BUT that doesn't mean that all Rickenbacker basses are useless pieces of junk and their owners are deluded fools. Clearly, when they are good they can be very special basses or they wouldn't be so popular. It's not just a case of brand snobbery. Its very simple, if you want to own a rickenbacker, try before you buy. This anti rickenbacker pogrom is irritating and comes across to me as the inverse of weird rick fanboys (or for that matter sterling ball lapdogs) who praise their adopted brand without question and attack those who criticise it. Really, it's not news to anyone that rickenbacker quality control is inconsistent. It just does not mean that all rickenbacker basses are sh*t. Far from it. [/quote] This. There seems to be an implication that all Rics are crap and badly built. I've owned some expensive basses; Wal, Sei (5), Alembic (2), Status (4), Jaydee (2) along with 2 early Warwicks (both great BTW) and the only one that has been noticeably better built than any of my Rics was my 2nd Alembic. The build quality on the Wal was worse, despite their price; the fretboard hadn't been levelled properly at build ( I bought it used but it hadn't been refretted) and it actually needed the fingerboard levelling and then refretting. Maybe I've been lucky. Or maybe I've just avoided the dogs, as I would try and do with any make of bass (although a few have still snuck through, mainly from Fender and Status). As I've said before, I've never had tail lift. The only truss rod issue I've had was when a luthier who wasn't familiar with Rics knackered a set and I had to replace them. Many of them do work (I've owned quite a few). If people don't like certain aspects of their design or construction, then fine. I don't like certain aspects of the design or construction of many basses. They're not perfect for everything or everyone and they're not perfect in every way. No instrument is. As a case in point, I'm currently using my Sei bass in preference to my Rics in my current band. Why? Because the sound works better in this context. If I went back to my old band I'd go back to the Rics because they work better in that context. If I went to something else I might want a Fender. Or a different custom. Who knows? The arguments for changing them seems to ignore the fact that some people may like Rics exactly as they are (and also always seem to ignore the 4004 which addresses many of the issues people complain about - bridge etc - and yet remain fairly unpopular, which must prove something). What would I change about my 2 favourite Rics? Nothing. There are things I'd change about many other Rics (same as there are things I'd change about pretty much anything out there), but essentially if I want something different I'll buy a different bass. If I don't like what a Ric is in the first place, why would I buy it? More to the point, why would I complain about it? In addition, I don't believe guitars are just about functionality. They are about aesthetic, about sound, about ergonomics, all of which will be different things to different people. They are also, irrationally, about association. However as it's also probably irrational to prefer one colour over another I can live with that. One other thing; do I buy them because of the brand name? No. Do I buy them because I like how they look, sound and feel? Yes, but I'm still selective about which individual instruments I buy; they have to be right for me. Many aren't. Some are. End of.

[quote name='vax2002' timestamp='1334692688' post='1619950'] On Ricks, bridges still bend up and fingerboards lift if you use heavy roundwounds on 4003, on 4001, it was a dead cert. Also on a Fender if your neck has a bow, you can get a key and tighten it up, on a Rick touch the nuts on the Rod at your peril. I do think Rickenbackers are a decent bass, bit of a one trick pony and a dog to play comfortably standing up, but the absolute ridiculous price for them is beyond a joke, as most find out, a quick look at e.bay will soon tell you that. What has happened as well is they have stopped doing what Rickenbacker normally do, make different colours one year. In the past you had black binding 4003, blood red, real midnight blue, natural with black binding, white with back binding and the gorgeous black with black binding. What on earth has gone wrong at the factory for them to just stick to making one set of colours with one option on hardware and binding, so now if you do buy a Rick, you have to have what the guy in the next band has and so on. hardly exclusive when they churn out all the same day in day out. The brand has had a good revival, but it is over now, even JH knows this hence why he is on the offensive again, looking for people to blame for the downturn. All I say, is go back to doing what you did best, making unusual and beautiful basses that can not be copied and they wont be copied, but continue churning out the same old same old and you are asking for them to be copied. Its too easy, they never change. [/quote] On my last Fender the neck wouldn't straighten from new and had to be replaced. Having to take the neck off to adjust the truss rod is a dreadful design flaw. The new Ric rods are easy to adjust and the old ones work fine if you know what to do with them (which goes for most things). I know loads of people who use 45s on old 4001s with no ill effects (have done it myself in the past). Etc etc, ad infinitum. Sure, some fail. Some of any brand fail.

[quote name='Mr. Foxen' timestamp='1334691773' post='1619929'] Again, development. When Fender basses came out, the disposable neck was the idea, they are engineered for mass production, all the routes on one side, modular construction, all minimal handling, hence being able to buy current equivalents for £60 or so. Now if you are into paying for a name on a headstock, that's a whole different thing. Nothing to do with engineering. Take this designed to be made for £60 bass, use it till it develops a flaw, replace flawed part, fine. Pay a bit more, get a less flawed part. Now, the part I think is stupid, is where someone spends maybe £1400 on a bass, and assumes it will develop an issue requiring correction, and accepts that, because it has a name written on it. And if wood is the flawed material, using wood is an engineering flaw. Acceptable on a £60 wood bass. Pay £1400, you can have a graphite neck without the issue. Have they changed the design to consider the known preventable flaw, if so, why retain the means to correct it? Edit: Also, as far as I recall they are still single action truss rods (although I've only come across one with the truss rod out) an single action truss rods are the source of the S bend issue. double action truss rods are the solution, but are at a much higher unit cost. [/quote] If wood is flawed (which obviously it is in a sense in that it's unpredictable) then all wooden-necked basses are flawed. FWIW graphite isn't perfectly stable either. I had a Status with a twisted neck. In fact my 40 year old Rics are the only basses I've ever had where I never have to adjust the necks.

[quote name='Mr. Foxen' timestamp='1334684654' post='1619782'] But Fenders are infinitely more customiseable than a Rick, because Fender don't threaten legal action against anyone who makes a upgrade part for them. Fender buy the upgrade parts and put them on their basses (like the lines with Badass II on, dimarzio pickups in etc). That's a really big deal. Do BMW do custom now? Not a comparable thing, BMW is say Warwick, factory standards, to a quality level. Price out a entirely custom made car, not even custom options on a car (like a Fender with a Badass and Dimarzio), a full on "I want it this shape and this engine, and this metal" and then you have a comparison at the price point. [/quote] My point was (as I'm sure you're aware) that a custom bass, however good it is, is not a Ric, and if you really want a Ric (or insert the name of any other brand you really want) then a custom bass, unless it's an [i]exact[/i] copy (in which case I want checkered binding, toaster, crushed pearl full width inlays, Feb '72 profile neck, and a plexi TRC that says Rickenbacker on it), will not suffice. I know, I've had several boutique customs. I use them for different things. If you really want a Fodera, a Shuker won't do. If you really want a Hondo then a vintage stacknob J won't work! With regards to price, a Ric is what, £1700-ish new? A custom Sei to my spec would be going on £3k. A custom Alembic to my spec would now be upwards of £8k. I haven't liked any Shukers I've tried. I'm not keen on Overwaters, but they're also more expensive. Personally I'd say you're looking at stuff like ACG, Shuker, Rim, if you like what they do. All great basses but simply not the same type of thing at all. Apples and oranges. John, never had a Ricky twin neck. I believe the guy who bought my 21 fretter has one though.

Personally I've always ended up trying to find an instrument that gives me what I want in the first place.

[quote name='chrismuzz' timestamp='1334673902' post='1619506'] +1 Mr Shuker is a 1 man operation, and I've never heard of anybody being sold a faulty instrument by him. [/quote] I know small luthiers who have tried to expand have said that they've started to lose control over quality (Jaydee in the '80s springs to mind), so I suspect there's a point of no return.

[quote name='Mr. Foxen' timestamp='1334669874' post='1619424'] Twin truss rods isn't a win, it is down to poor engineering. [/quote] Yet 2 of my 3 favourite types of basses have twin truss rods (Alembic being the other).

[quote name='BassBus' timestamp='1334678124' post='1619623'] I didn't start this thread to bash Rics but I think I'm now beginning to see what it is people like about them. They are starting to sound like quite a personalized bass. You need to add in your own touches like choice of string, amp and speaker. It's maybe that business of overpowering the speaker that gives it a good sound. Maybe it's the Fenders, Musicmans, and Warwicks of this world that need a bashing. Personally I don't get why everyone loves Fenders so much. I had a bass setup recently and the luthier wasn't half giving Fenders a bashing. Is it not better that a bass can be what you what it to be instead of just giving you what the designer/builder wants you to have? [/quote] Ah, but this is so subjective. Some people (including many world class players) simply have all their needs fulfilled by a Fender (or insert brand of your choice) in ways that other basses don't. You mentioned Status before; I've had four, and none of them gave me what I wanted. Not because there's anything wrong with them, but because I've required something else than what they give. They simply haven't suited me (so far; I live in hope). FWIW, answering Mr Foxen's point, you [i]can[/i] get a custom built bass for similar money to a Ric, but what if what you ultimately want is a Ric? It's like saying you can buy a new BMW for the cost of an E-Type when you actually want an E-type. Have my Seis been better than my favourite Rics? They've been much better at being Seis, but much worse at being Rics. I don't really get why people worry about it all. If it doesn't work for you, move on.

[quote name='musophilr' timestamp='1334677742' post='1619609'] Isn't the problem with Rickenbackers that they don't sound like a Jazz? [/quote] Genius.

[quote name='Mylkinut' timestamp='1334673728' post='1619504'] This. I've owned mine for about a year and whilst I've never completely loved it, I really don't understand why they get so much flak. Actually, maybe I just don't get why people who don't like them get so particularly worked up over not liking them. It's common for a particular bass to have vocal fanboys, but why do Ricks have such vocal anti-fanboys? For instance, plenty of people don't like Warwicks - myself included - but threads about them don't regularly turn into a Warwick-bashing sesh. [/quote] This irritates me whatever the instrument is, Ric or otherwise.

[quote name='GregBass' timestamp='1334645681' post='1618920'] I find it strange that you guys keep saying this. I have had two Ricks - I still have one, in fact - and they are the best made basses I have ever had. They certainly kick my Fender and Warwicks into the long grass in terms of build quality!! [/quote] Have never understood this either and I've owned 13 or 14. The most problems I've had were with Fenders (2 necks needed replacing from new) and my Wal (which had apparently had the fingerboard incorrectly levelled at build). Oh, and I've always had problems with the elctronics on all my used Statuses, but then they were used so I wouldn't expect them to be perfect. I think most brands have their share of duffers, it's just how many you stumble across personally.

[quote name='shizznit' timestamp='1334650060' post='1618981'] I can see the appeal. Rickies have a very distinctive tone, just as P and J basses, MM's...and so on. Not my bag at all. I think my basses are lush, but a few of my bass playing buddies can't stand playing them, so beauty is very much in the eye of the beholder. [/quote] And yet all of the above can be made to sound far less distinctive, although it's difficult to get away from the basic timbre of the instrument. The second point is the real issue. All you can do is pick something you like. Stop worrying about whether or not you should like it and ignore what anyone else thinks.