Please tell me why I should avoid getting a Rickenbacker!

[BrunoBass]

I was interested to see how the prices for new 4003 basses from UK retailers compare to prices from US dealers (minus shipping and import taxes). I looked at the websites of Sweetwater and Sam Ash (US equivalents of say GuitarGuitar or PMT) and both were POA. I have no intention of buying from a US dealer, I'm just intrigued to know what price difference, if any, there is. Anyone know?

[Woodinblack]

I just looked at all the us shops I could think of, they were all POA or email us for special deal, so I guess something is going on at the moment.

[4000]

[quote name='markstuk' timestamp='1497602822' post='3319356']
Sure, although Chris does say both the body and neck were shaved such that there was a significant weight reduction. Let's also not forget the 4kOhm bridge pickup which he states is very low output and trebley compared with the stock pickup. Probably an early example of a Rickenbacker QA fail.. If you like Ricks, that's fine.. However let's not pretend that even when the factory tries to make a standard product, the results are consistent.. Maybe it's character, but if other manufacturers can do it right consistently then I don't understand why Rickenbacker can't.. Apparently they ship the basses from the factory without them being set up (how the hell do you test a bass without doing this?) because "there is not enough time" ...

I get that you like them.
[/quote]

Having spoken to someone who has examined Chris's bass, there was defintiely a weight reduction, though I think Chris's "a quarter of the weight gone" was along the lines of "I've told you a million times". They did say his bass had the thinnest neck of the many vintage ones they'd examined though. Sadly I never got to play the bass, although I met the man a couple of times. FWIW the Rics I've owned have weighed anything from 8 to 10lbs (on average they're about 9) so they do vary anyway, and sonically they're all over the place compared to each other. FWIW his bridge pickup [i]was [/i]stock, for the time. It was an original horseshoe, which some people considered (and some still do) underpowered. Was it exactly the same readings as every other? Doubtful. But you could say the same about PAFs. Of course his bass wasn't the same spec as a modern Ric, because it [i]wasn't[/i] a modern Ric. Neither are mine, and they're not the same as modern Rics either.

I love the fact that they're all different. That's one of the things I love most about them. I [i]want[/i] each one to have it's own character. But I understand that others don't feel the same. FWIW the only thing about the factory set up that annoys me is the fact that they don't cut the nut low enough, arguing that it's up to the buyer to cut as they see fit. For most buyers that's a PIA. Still, unless I walk into the Bass Gallery I find I can never play [i]any[/i] basses in [i]any[/i] shop these days. [i]Everything [/i]that's mass-produced is horribly setup (or not, as the case may be).

I actually don't have an issue with people saying they don't like them or criticising certain aspects of them; they're entitled to their opinion. What I don't like, as I've experienced on forums (including on here) before, is when people start to bend the facts simply because they don't like them. But then I'd be the same with any other brand; I just hate people spreading misinformation.

Edited June 19, 2017 by 4000

[4000]

[quote name='Al Krow' timestamp='1497633688' post='3319710']
Thanks for sharing that, really useful feedback about the kids (aka the mids), treble and lows.



I'm kinda intrigued by your expertise of this brand! I doubt if many of us have "played literally hundreds of Rics" in the way you have. So I'd really like to put you on the spot with 3 Qs (YMMV etc noted!) if I may:
- what is the best Ric you have ever played and why?
- which ones to definitely avoid (and why)?
- if you were to buy a current new model which of the range would you go for (and again why)?
[/quote]

The problem is, I can tell you my experiences, but they might not reflect yours or anyone else's having played the same basses. I don't play like anyone else I know or generate the same tone as anyone else I know (although does anyone?). I once had an early Tokai Jazz Bass and I got a terrible tone out of it. Everybody else who played it sounded wonderful. As I've said before, you need to find what works for [i]you[/i]. It's your hands, your ears. To use my favourite shoe anaology, would you buy a pair of shoes because someone else said they were really comfortable? Or would you try them first to see how they felt to you?

Still, to answer the questions:

The best Ric I've ever played - for me - is my original Feb '72 4001. The day I found it, I picked it up and it just fit. Sonically, the neck, everything. Like when you find the right partner, it was as simple as that. No real science. But as I've said, I sold my '76 4001 - which I'd never really been happy with - to a friend soon after and he much prefers that to my '72. Other people might hate them both. I've certainly had a few people play my main '72 who really haven't liked it at all, which is fine and to be expected.

Ones to avoid? Anything with major structural issues. Otherwise, it's all down to your taste.

Current new model? 4003, but I'd probably have to play it first.

[Al Krow]

@4000 thanks very much for both your responses above.

[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif][i]"I love the fact that they're all different. That's one of the things I love most about them. I [/i][/font][/color][i][i]want[/i][font="helvetica, arial, sans-serif"][color="#282828"] each one to have it's own character. But I understand that others don't feel the same." [/color][/font][/i]

[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]Hmmm.[/font][/color]

[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]I get that each bass having a certain individuality[/font][/color][color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif] does make the thing more personal. However at the price point being asked, you would want and expect each one to be [i]individually excellent[/i] rather than some being excellent and some relatively poor, agreed? I just don't get why inconsistent QC should be a thing for any bass maker at the £2k price point as it then becomes a lottery as to whether the item in stock in a particular store that you've taken time out to pop into or ordered "blind" on the net, is a decent one and similarly even more if you're buying second hand. [/font][/color]

[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]Kinda has the feeling of a 1990s Jag XJ6 rather than a 2015 Jag XFR?[/font][/color]

[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]The 4003 Walnut with neck through would also be my first choice, so good to know you approve [/font][/color]

[4000]

[quote name='Al Krow' timestamp='1497884880' post='3321108']
@4000 thanks very much for both your responses above.

[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif][i]"I love the fact that they're all different. That's one of the things I love most about them. I [/i][/font][/color][i][i]want[/i][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif][color=#282828] each one to have it's own character. But I understand that others don't feel the same." [/color][/font][/i]

[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]Hmmm.[/font][/color]

[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]I get that each bass having a certain individuality[/font][/color][color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif] does make the thing more personal. However at the price point being asked, you would want and expect each one to be [i]individually excellent[/i] rather than some being excellent and some relatively poor, agreed? I just don't get why inconsistent QC should be a thing for any bass maker at the £2k price point as it then becomes a lottery as to whether the item in stock in a particular store that you've taken time out to pop into or ordered "blind" on the net, is a decent one and similarly even more if you're buying second hand. [/font][/color]

[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]Kinda has the feeling of a 1990s Jag XJ6 rather than a 2015 Jag XFR?[/font][/color]

[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]The 4003 Walnut with neck through would also be my first choice, so good to know you approve [/font][/color]
[/quote]


I think you've missed my point though. They may all be excellent, or all be rubbish, or any number of variations in-between, [i]depending on your preference[/i]. I don't believe there's such a thing as a universally brilliant instrument, because everyone has different requirements and preferences. Like I say, I wasn't keen on my '76 but my friend loves it. I wasn't keen on my Wal Custom either but another friend bought it and loves it to this day. Etc etc. In terms of QC, that's a different issue, obviously you don't want one that's falling apart. But in terms of a dozen different instruments, all made to the same standard that simply feel or sound different, you have to choose the one you like. That may not be the one that somebody else likes.

There was a round up of reissue Les Pauls in Guitarist a while back where they said the same thing. Different people preferred different ones. Of course this also comes down to how aware you are of subtle nuances. A friend played my 2nd CS and V63 back to back and couldn't tell the difference, whereas to me they were night and day, although I had no preference for either, they were just different.

To be honest, although Rics do vary quite a lot, I've never played two identical basses side by side of any make. Fenders, Musicman, you name it, there have always been differences. My 2 Warwick Dolphin Pro 1s; the '91 was a really nice bass, my favourite of the Warwicks I've owned, but the '96 I couldn't wait to get rid of.

Anyway, good luck with your search and I hope you find the bass - whatever make or model - that speaks to you.

Oh, and I like XJ6s so I'm the wrong person to speak to about that.

Edited June 19, 2017 by 4000

[Al Krow]

Cheers for that. Ok I think I get where you're coming from! However, I sense that the same make and model Rick will vary considerably more one to another than other basses from the feedback from the rest of our fellow BCers? I appreciate you consider that gives each bass individuality, which for me would work if they are all[i] consistently good[/i] when applying an objective set of criteria - even if we just applied, for example, your criteria of what makes a good bass. But if it is pot luck whether different basses from even the same year and model are going to be liked or disliked by the [i]same[/i] person that kinda feels like a quality control issue to me?

Don't get me wrong, the XJ6 was a great design. You just never quite knew whether you were going to get a dud...

[Bassassin]

The variations in weight, neck profile & pickups on older pre-RIC 4000 series basses is the stuff of legend! However, it's reasonable to assume that modern 4003s will have a lot less difference than older basses. Rickenbacker have been using automated CNC manufacturing for a couple of decades, AFAIK.

[Muzz]

The one I had (and I'll stress that: it was one bass, bought online unseen) was not a great bass: the action was very high (the nut seemed to be cut very high), I couldn't get it anywhere near smooth (and I don't have a very low action - I'm a clunker who hits them hard) - the bridge didn't help with that - and there seemed to be more than one dead spot: if fact the whole bass just didn't ring or sing (acoustically), if that makes sense. I might've persevered for the looks alone had it not been such a lot of money. That price point is into luthier territory, where I've always found standards (and consistency of standards) to be very very high. At current prices, it's even deeper into luthier territory...

I should add I've played some ropey Fenders, too (as well as good ones) of nominally identical models, but again, at half the money it's easier on the head to work with them...

[4000]

[quote name='Al Krow' timestamp='1497896132' post='3321199']
Cheers for that. Ok I think I get where you're coming from! However, I sense that the same make and model Rick will vary considerably more one to another than other basses from the feedback from the rest of our fellow BCers? I appreciate you consider that gives each bass individuality, which for me would work if they are all[i] consistently good[/i] when applying an objective set of criteria - even if we just applied, for example, your criteria of what makes a good bass. But if it is pot luck whether different basses from even the same year and model are going to be liked or disliked by the [i]same[/i] person that kinda feels like a quality control issue to me?

Don't get me wrong, the XJ6 was a great design. You just never quite knew whether you were going to get a dud...
[/quote]

One thing to bear in mind; neck profiles, pot values and all sorts of other details often changed year on year or even several times in 1 year (thinking particularly '73), sometimes overlapping even from month to month, and all these things contribute to them being different from each other. I'm thinking more older basses when I talk about this. As Bassassin says, that shouldn't be so much the case nowadays. I think recent 4003 basses I've played have been pretty consistent, but as my favourite period is very early '73 and earlier I tend to think in terms of the history of the instruments made with an emphasis on the older basses, rather than current ones.

Insofar as the QC thing, like I say, you could give me 2 supposedly identical basses of any make and I'll always prefer one and I would have thought most people would be the same. Also in QC terms, just to show it's not just Rics, I've bought one new Fender in my time. The neck had to be replaced immediately because it wouldn't straighten. My Wal Custom - which I bought used - had had the fingerboard levelled incorrectly from factory. My Warwick Streamer Stage 1, bought new, needed a replacement trussrod from the get go. I've had I think 4 or 5 Status basses, admittedly bought used, and 2 had warped necks. The only dud Ric I've had was a used '73 that so far as I could tell had severe water damage; that went straight back to the shop. But I appreciate others have had different experiences. Oh, one other thing; my 4004 Cheyenne II, sold only because it aggravated a nerve condition, was as well built as any of my Seis and better built than my Wals or Jaydees (in fact the only bass I've ever owned that was slightly better built was my custom Alembic).

[12stringbassist]

I have 4 Ric 4003's and can't think of a reason not to buy one.

However, the original poster should spend a lot of time trying a Ric before buying one.
Prices are now stupid.

As to John Hall, he had me banned from the official Ric forum and I have had long email talks with him about the finish quality of a Midnight Blue bass with the finish bleeding into the binding. I have even spoken to him on the phone. He is a total twerp. He doesn't look after his customers. He makes their lives difficult.

As to the protection of his brand and their designs, he is perfectly right.

[prowla]

[quote name='12stringbassist' timestamp='1497914883' post='3321354']
I have 4 Ric 4003's and can't think of a reason not to buy one.

However, the original poster should spend a lot of time trying a Ric before buying one.
Prices are now stupid.

As to John Hall, he had me banned from the official Ric forum and I have had long email talks with him about the finish quality of a Midnight Blue bass with the finish bleeding into the binding. I have even spoken to him on the phone. He is a total twerp. He doesn't look after his customers. He makes their lives difficult.

As to the protection of his brand and their designs, he is perfectly right.
[/quote]
I have to say that is a very balanced perspective there!

[T-Bay]

Just had this months copy of the bass magazine delivered, there is an advert for Chowny basses and one looks like a rick copy (head is different, but body is rick), how do they get away with that based on JH's approach?

Edited June 21, 2017 by T-Bay

[Woodinblack]

Retrovibe certainly had a talk with JH in the past. Long talks, that I suspect weren't so friendly. Chowny have taken over the retrovibes so I guess they have some of the older ones left.

[Bassassin]

If it's the Vantage that Retrovibe/Chowny sell, then that has an offset body which doesn't infringe JH's registered designs, despite being entirely recognisable.

[Chris2112]

Why would I avoid getting a Rickenbacker? Awful tone unless you're playing through a Sansamp is one thing. The cheap and ugly looks are offputting too, but the strides the company has made over recent years to prevent foreign copies of their basses, constructed 30 years ago, being sold privately is as mean spirited as it gets.

I know some players covet the Ric look, but objectively I find everything else about them quite dire. Aside from looking like a Rickenbacker, which Rics are really good at, they're like a bad Jazz bass and even a half decent Jazz makes them look, sound and feel hopeless.

[Beedster]

Not read the thread above, but will say that after 30-odd years of playing Fenders and at the same time taking far too much heed of the Ric critics, when I finally played one it was a revelation. OK, I was playing flats and achieving a far more Macca tone that that most associate with Rics, but over the years I owned a 4001, two v63s, a 4003FL and a c64, and I still experience pangs of regret at selling the latter two, both of which were among the best instruments I've ever owned (a list that includes several pre-CBS Fenders, 80's Wals, pre-EB 'rays, Modulus Fleas etc). As a percentage, I've played far more dogs by Fender than by Rickenbacker. They're not for everyone for sure, but if I had a pound for every bass player who slags them off on the basis of one poorly set-up example they played in a local guitar shop, I'd be able to buy back my c64

[prowla]

[quote name='Chris2112' timestamp='1498422166' post='3324532']
Why would I avoid getting a Rickenbacker? Awful tone unless you're playing through a Sansamp is one thing. The cheap and ugly looks are offputting too, but the strides the company has made over recent years to prevent foreign copies of their basses, constructed 30 years ago, being sold privately is as mean spirited as it gets.

I know some players covet the Ric look, but objectively I find everything else about them quite dire. Aside from looking like a Rickenbacker, which Rics are really good at, they're like a bad Jazz bass and even a half decent Jazz makes them look, sound and feel hopeless.
[/quote]
I think you need to get off the fence there!

I totally get Ric's approach to the fakers and, being a contrary git, I've just bought a 30 year old Japanese Ric copy!

I think it is good that Ric protect their brand; unlike Fender, where it can be difficult to tell whether an instrument with the logo on its headstock is genuine or not, even for people who have a good idea about them. Buying a Fender is a minefield.

[Al Krow]

Hah! Just spotted this thread / YouTube clip over on the General Discussion forum, which I suspect a number of you have seen already.

http://basschat.co.uk/topic/309576-rickenbacker-bass-gets-outed-for-what-it-is/

What an entertaining little video and I guess I'm glad I got distracted by an Ibanez SR1800 with Nordstrand pups...

[funkyjimbob]

[quote name='Geek99' timestamp='1497432173' post='3318020']

yep me also
[/quote]

Me too

[prowla]

[quote name='Al Krow' timestamp='1502637699' post='3352589']
Hah! Just spotted this thread / YouTube clip over on the General Discussion forum, which I suspect a number of you have seen already.

[url="http://basschat.co.uk/topic/309576-rickenbacker-bass-gets-outed-for-what-it-is/"]http://basschat.co.u...for-what-it-is/[/url]

What an entertaining little video and I guess I'm glad I got distracted by an Ibanez SR1800 with Nordstrand pups...
[/quote]
That old clip is vaguely amusing, but who cares if a grumpy old guitar tech hasn't got the right tool immediately to hand for the once every few years a Ric needs its truss rods adjusting?

There's another one of him doing up an Ibby and the belligerent git calls the customer up and proceeds to rant at him and talk over the top of him.

[Al Krow]

[quote name='prowla' timestamp='1502701410' post='3352899']
That old clip is vaguely amusing, but who cares if a grumpy old guitar tech hasn't got the right tool immediately to hand for the once every few years a Ric needs its truss rods adjusting?

There's another one of him doing up an Ibby and the belligerent git calls the customer up and proceeds to rant at him and talk over the top of him.
[/quote]

Well if he is being rude about Ibbys then that is another matter entirely (particularly if it is one of the newer SR Premium range with wonderful Nordstrand pups)

[Norris]

I don't like JH's attitude but I still bought one. I regretted selling my lovely old 4001 many years ago and bought probably the last one to be sold on the forum before the ban. It's an early 4003 so didn't have the vintage pull pot - a kit from eBay and a few minutes of soldering sorted that. I don't play it often these days, being besotted with my Squier P-bass Special fitted with SD QP set. I won't sell the Rick though as it's a good one. The previous owner had owned and gigged it for 10 years, which I took as a good sign. I did make my own TRC though as a JH protest (see avatar)

Definitely try a few. If you like one and can spare the cash, buy it. Simples

[prowla]

[quote name='hiram.k.hackenbacker' timestamp='1502706062' post='3352942']
Is it an old clip? I know he's done others video's on Ric's, but that was only posted on 31/7/17! Perhaps it's the sentiment that's getting old for you?

In answer to the question posed by the OP of this thread, my answer would be don't avoid it, just buy one.
[/quote]
Hmmm, first time I saw it when it was doing the rounds recently, I was pretty sure I'd seen it before.

Maybe there's another one of a half-sozzled grumpy old git moaning about how fixing Rics has ruined his life...

[mr zed]

As a follow up from this, did the op buy a Ric? If so, what did you go for a 4003 or a 4003S? I currently have an inexplicable desire to buy a Ric and am struggling to decide between the 2 models. Played both yesterday. The 4003 is just classic so the preferred option however the stripped down 4003S is arguably more comfortable in a gig situation. To be fair, I was sat down so need to return and put them on a strap.