Stag Posted March 30, 2011 Author Share Posted March 30, 2011 Indeed, Im trying out a suitably coloured 4001 this weekend but I have a suspicion im going to end up buying the 4003 instead... colour cant be the only reason to spend that amount on a bass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevebasshead Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 Just to clarify about the roundwound/flatwound thing. 4001's were designed to be used with the predominant string [b]tension[/b] of the day, flatwounds back then being both predominant and relatively low tension. Roundwounds when they were introduced had a relatively higher tension, although nowadays there is no such easy-option distinction. So that, combined with luthiers and owners who didn't understand the method needed to adjust a 4001 neck brought about the myth that 4001's couldn't handle roundwounds and caused neck issues (typically the fingerboard separating from the neck.) In truth the issue wasn't the string type, simply the amount of tension the neck could take. That, of course varied from bass to bass as wood itself is variable. Bear in mind that Chris Squire's 4001 ('64 iirc) which has a ridiculously thin neck front to rear has handled roundwounds for decades Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SS73 Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 I've never seen a 4001 finger board separate from the neck because of too much tension, it was a perfectly capable neck design and as far as I know my 72 ( these have the thinnest necks ) has had 45/105 round's all it's life. As you say bad adjustment is the problem and once the nuts have canted/bent back far enough they won't adjust and it's down to the laws of levers and any attempt to tighten will just force the finger board away Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4000 Posted March 31, 2011 Share Posted March 31, 2011 [quote name='RhysP' post='1181002' date='Mar 29 2011, 04:43 PM']The full width inlays are a step backwards aesthetically - the smaller ones look MUCH better IMO. Having owned both I think the full width crushed pearl inlays on my checkerboard bound 4001 looked tacky as f***.[/quote] I, and many other hardcore Ric fans, beg to differ. The full width crushed pearl is one of my favourite Ric features. To be honest once I discovered them the small inlays just looked a bit crap to me. Same with the post '74-ish to early '80s "fat horn" shape....all just personal taste of course. FWIW, 4001s vary hugely, as I've stated many times. A '72 (even taking into account differences between individual instruments) will be nothing much like a '79. Different neck, pickups, body contouring, different detailing. The same goes for 4003s. You could play 4003s from various years and the necks (as an example) would go from frighteningly thin to P Bass chunky. So comparing a 4001 and a 4003 (unless you're comparing 2 specific instruments), other than saying 4003s tend to have hotter pickups (with different pot values) and a different truss rod system, is a bit difficult. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stag Posted March 31, 2011 Author Share Posted March 31, 2011 Does the neck "bump" that you get on 4001's at the 1st fret appear on 4003's? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4000 Posted March 31, 2011 Share Posted March 31, 2011 (edited) [quote name='gelfin' post='1181646' date='Mar 29 2011, 11:17 PM']I would echo the comments above TRY before you buy. I have a 4003 which to me is utterly superb. I recently aquired a 4001 for a friends son and was very impressed with it. Tried the latest offering in PMT Bristol and thought the neck felt awful. Oh and I have a CS Ltd edition which I think is awsome too, although the neck isn't as slim as my 4003. [/quote] What year is your CS from? The later ones have much thicker necks, like my 1998 V63. The Rics I've owned: 1980 4001 Jetglo (stolen) 1976 4001 Azureglo (sold) 1972 4001 Fireglo (my favourite, still owned) 1996 4001 CS (sold) 1999 4003s8 (sold) 1991 4001V63 (lost in transit, never received) 1998 4001V63 (sold) 1973 4000 (sold) 1991 4001 CS (sold) 1973 4001 Mapleglo to Azureglo conversion (sold) 1971 4001 21 fretter (sold) 1972 4001 Azureglo (my 2nd favourite, just bought) Edited March 31, 2011 by 4000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4000 Posted March 31, 2011 Share Posted March 31, 2011 [quote name='Stag' post='1183147' date='Mar 31 2011, 11:33 AM']Does the neck "bump" that you get on 4001's at the 1st fret appear on 4003's?[/quote] Do you mean the rear volute? It varies quite a bit over the years IME. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4000 Posted March 31, 2011 Share Posted March 31, 2011 [quote name='Stag' post='1180000' date='Mar 28 2011, 08:48 PM']The weight is great, and so is the balance. The PU cover on the bridge PU now has a nice cutaway into it so you can lower the action as much as you like, which you couldnt on 4001's due to the pesky PU cover.[/quote] If by this you mean the treble pickup surround on your 4001 doesn't have a cutaway to enable you to lower the strings sufficiently, this is something that varies from bass to bass, never mind year to year. All my Rics have had the cutaway, but some don't. Personally my least favourite 4001s are anything after mid '73 up until they changed to the 4003. For many people I suspect a 4003 is a better prospect because of the hotter pickups and "improved" (i.e. easier to adjust if nothing else) truss rod system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stag Posted March 31, 2011 Author Share Posted March 31, 2011 yep, I did mean the volute... and yep I did mean the pickup surround! Good translation skills! My 4001 has a fairly large volute. I dont think I felt it anywhere near as pronounced on the new 4003. I dont think the 4001 im looking at has the cutaway. The 4003 does.... :-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4000 Posted March 31, 2011 Share Posted March 31, 2011 (edited) No cutaway is a no-no for me as I like a fag-paper action. Of course you can always replace the surround with one with a cutaway. I haven't much experience of recent 4003s (only played a couple briefly) but I believe the volute is minimal. Sounds to me like you want the 4003. You could always get it refinished later.... One thing to bear in mind is many 4001s can sound a bit weedy because they have a capacitor on the back pickup that effectively cuts the bass from that pickup. The 4003 (up until the introduction of the push pot which allows you to have either) doesn't have this, so a typical 4003 will immediately sound thicker than a typical 4001. Having said that, my main '72 sounds better with the cap in. Of course you can bypass the cap on a 4001 which (as on my old 76) can change the sound dramatically. However the pot values on 4001s also differ and as previously stated the pickups on 4003s are typically hotter anyway. I prefer the toaster (1/2" neck position) and early screw-topped high gain treble pickup combo tonally, but YMMV. Depends how much hollow clank you want. Edited March 31, 2011 by 4000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gelfin Posted March 31, 2011 Share Posted March 31, 2011 [quote name='4000' date='Mar 31 2011, 11:36 AM' post='1183151'] What year is your CS from? The later ones have much thicker necks, like my 1998 V63. The CS is number 768 22nd January 1999. Although the neck is thicker than my 4003 I wouldn't say it was very much thicker though. Took me years to find one in mint condition. Eventually got it from the US about 6 years ago for £1200 plus shipping and the dreaded improt duty tax etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SS73 Posted March 31, 2011 Share Posted March 31, 2011 [quote name='4000' post='1183162' date='Mar 31 2011, 11:47 AM']If by this you mean the treble pickup surround on your 4001 doesn't have a cutaway to enable you to lower the strings sufficiently, this is something that varies from bass to bass, never mind year to year. All my Rics have had the cutaway, but some don't. Personally my least favourite 4001s are anything after mid '73 up until they changed to the 4003. For many people I suspect a 4003 is a better prospect because of the hotter pickups and "improved" (i.e. easier to adjust if nothing else) truss rod system.[/quote] All 4001's after the transition in 73 lost the cutaway surround, when they got larger and thicker in all areas, the neck also was raised out of the body, check a pre 73 and see that the underside of the fretboard is on the level of the body and after they went up by about an 1/8'', so the cutout was not needed. For some reason the 4003's got the cut away back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4000 Posted March 31, 2011 Share Posted March 31, 2011 [quote name='gelfin' post='1183210' date='Mar 31 2011, 12:25 PM']The CS is number 768 22nd January 1999. Although the neck is thicker than my 4003 I wouldn't say it was very much thicker though. Took me years to find one in mint condition. Eventually got it from the US about 6 years ago for £1200 plus shipping and the dreaded improt duty tax etc.[/quote] Thanks. I meant they have much thicker necks than the early ones (CS/V63) which are almost like the old RMs. My '91 had one of the thinnest necks I've ever played, a lot thinner than any 4003 I've ever laid hands on. In fact the only thing that may have had it beat was the 21 fretter, which was incredibly thin. I think you got a bargain there! I sold my '91 (far, far from mint and with no case) for about £1600 and I've seen 'em mint for up to £3000. Sadly I've found that the tones don't work that well for me compared to the vintage ones. Here are my 2x'72s; I've only recently received the Azure and it needs a couple of things fixing ( a piece of binding for a start) but it's a blinding bass; took me 17 years to find an original Azure '72 and it cost me comfortably more than your CS! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4000 Posted March 31, 2011 Share Posted March 31, 2011 (edited) [quote name='SS73' post='1183306' date='Mar 31 2011, 01:42 PM']All 4001's after the transition in 73 lost the cutaway surround, when they got larger and thicker in all areas, the neck also was raised out of the body, check a pre 73 and see that the underside of the fretboard is on the level of the body and after they went up by about an 1/8'', so the cutout was not needed. For some reason the 4003's got the cut away back.[/quote] I'm sure you're right, I can't remember. I've only got pre-73s to check, and haven't had a post '73 4001 for many years (and no longer intend to either as I prefer the others)......I know I was recently put off a transitional '73 for that very reason, which worked out very well in the end because along came my Azure. EDIT: I've just checked pics of my old '73 4000 and though it had the smaller contours it did indeed have a non-cutaway surround. FWIW I could get the action on that lower than any other bass I've ever had, including the boutiques. For a long time I played it with an action of 1mm at the 12th fret E. I've also just checked pics of the '73 PW conversion and that definitely had the cutaway (serial ME; the 4000, which was a set-neck for those who didn't know, was serial MK). Edited March 31, 2011 by 4000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevebasshead Posted March 31, 2011 Share Posted March 31, 2011 [quote name='SS73' post='1183306' date='Mar 31 2011, 01:42 PM']All 4001's after the transition in 73 lost the cutaway surround, when they got larger and thicker in all areas, the neck also was raised out of the body, check a pre 73 and see that the underside of the fretboard is on the level of the body and after they went up by about an 1/8'', so the cutout was not needed. For some reason the 4003's got the cut away back.[/quote] [quote name='4000' post='1183423' date='Mar 31 2011, 03:14 PM']I'm sure you're right, I can't remember. I've only got pre-73s to check, and haven't had a post '73 4001 for many years (and no longer intend to either as I prefer the others)......I know I was recently put off a transitional '73 for that very reason, which worked out very well in the end because along came my Azure. EDIT: I've just checked pics of my old '73 4000 and though it had the smaller contours it did indeed have a non-cutaway surround. FWIW I could get the action on that lower than any other bass I've ever had, including the boutiques. For a long time I played it with an action of 1mm at the 12th fret E.[/quote] My '74 had the non-cutaway surround when it arrived but either I'm way too heavy handed or it's proof that there's no guarantee of what to expect from any year of Ric manufacter as I couldn't get the action low enough without the strings clacking off the surround. So it now wears the cutaway surround from my now-horseshoe'd '02 4003 and is quite wonderful to play. Low action and a lovely slim neck front to rear, although probably nowhere near as slim as they can be. To the OP's question though, if you've found a brand new 4003 you love the feel and sound of, buy it You could wait a long, long, long time to find a 4001 that's both the colour you want (comparatively rare) and that feels as good to you to play. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bassmachine2112 Posted March 31, 2011 Share Posted March 31, 2011 hi,I,ve got a 99 jg 4003 and it,s a blinder. I have fitted a hipshot bridge which has been a very good move,black scratchplate and now a vintage tone switch which gives another dimension to the 4003. Overall I would go for a 4003 and the vintage tone circuit which you can get from rickysounds for £16 and a bit of soldering or a later one with it fitted as standard. I,m very happy with mine and had no issues whatsoever with this bass and the build quality is second to none and the most stable bass I have more so than my rock solid musicman. The best bit is every time you open the case and there it is waiting for you.I still get a tingle after all these years and how do you put a price on that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4000 Posted March 31, 2011 Share Posted March 31, 2011 [quote name='stevebasshead' post='1183447' date='Mar 31 2011, 03:36 PM']My '74 had the non-cutaway surround when it arrived but either I'm way too heavy handed or it's proof that there's no guarantee of what to expect from any year of Ric manufacter as I couldn't get the action low enough without the strings clacking off the surround. So it now wears the cutaway surround from my now-horseshoe'd '02 4003 and is quite wonderful to play. Low action and a lovely slim neck front to rear, although probably nowhere near as slim as they can be. To the OP's question though, if you've found a brand new 4003 you love the feel and sound of, buy it You could wait a long, long, long time to find a 4001 that's both the colour you want (comparatively rare) and that feels as good to you to play.[/quote] My '72 necks (which I prefer) feel both wider and flatter than post-'72 4001s, which tend to feel narrower and rounder, although they do vary. I've even played a couple of 73s with huge necks. +1 to Steve's other comment. A while back I briefly played a new 4003 that felt fantastic but sold quickly. I later tried another new 4003 and didn't like it at all! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stag Posted April 3, 2011 Author Share Posted April 3, 2011 Just as an update to this, the decision has been made over the weekend, a weekend spent playing a good number of Rics from over the years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4000 Posted April 4, 2011 Share Posted April 4, 2011 Cool! Look forward to seeing the result. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stag Posted April 4, 2011 Author Share Posted April 4, 2011 (edited) I have it now, but I cant put it down... lol... ill post some pics later. Its a new one so its nothing vintage or rare (unless you count the waiting list and the distinct lack of stock in most shops)... but it plays like butter and I love it dearly already! Edited April 4, 2011 by Stag Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SS73 Posted April 4, 2011 Share Posted April 4, 2011 Excellent news, but what colour did you opt for, or do we have to wait Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stag Posted April 4, 2011 Author Share Posted April 4, 2011 ummm... when I put it down ill do some pics! hehe! All will be revealed... its a beauty, was in the shop I bought it from for a whole day before I picked it up Incidentally, last time the same shop has Rics turn up they've gone within a day - lol - one lasted 30 minutes of being in the window haha! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stag Posted April 5, 2011 Author Share Posted April 5, 2011 Sorry no pics yet, and Spurs being in the Champs Lge tonight means its unlikely tonight - will try and do it tomorrow! Was thinking, I might just do a review of it, and a (belated) review of my 4001 as well. Seems no one has reviewed Rics, so could be handy? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bassmachine2112 Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 Here,s a quick review- The dogs danglers,otherwise known as The Bass Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stag Posted April 7, 2011 Author Share Posted April 7, 2011 If anyone is following this still then please feel free to have a look at [url="http://basschat.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=130851&pid=1192205&st=0&#entry1192205"]http://basschat.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=...p;#entry1192205[/url] and check out my review for a few differences that can be picked up between the two. :-) cheers! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.