Rickenbacker basses - differences between models?

[Paul S]

Having completely ignored them up until now I am curious about Rickenbacker basses.  The closest I came was owning a Jolana copy which kinda looked like one but that was where the resemblance ended.  I have absolutely no idea what the various numbers signify or what the differences are between them.  Are some always heavier than others?  Do some models always have thicker necks?  Are they active or passive?  Do/can they all sound the same?  Does '...glo' simply refer to a colour?    Do they need all the metalwork over the pickups - in fact do they all have this?  I have no idea.

If at all possible can folks resists posting about the copyright enforcement issues, I think I have a handle on that now  It is more, I hope, about what the various models have to offer. 

Muchas gracias  

[Jus Lukin]

-

Edited March 4, 2022 by Jus Lukin

[ezbass]

The walnut bodied ones are lighter than the maple. Glo is just a Ric word for ‘burst AFAIK, except Jetglo which is all black (go figure). They’re passive and the newer ones have a capacitor on a push/pull to give a vintage Ric tone.

[grenadillabama]

Jetglow means "jet black". I have a jetglow 4003 and the white binding looks great, I must say ! -like the white binding on a black (ebony) Les Paul Custom. My other 4003 is "fireglow" . That means sunburst with red or orange stain in the middle like 3-color 'burst on a Fender.

[Paul S]

OK, that is the colour sorted.

What is the difference between a 4001, a 4003 and a 4004.  Was there ever a 4001?  I meant 4002!

Edited December 15, 2019 by Paul S
dimwittery

[Storky]

1 hour ago, Paul S said:

OK, that is the colour sorted.

What is the difference between a 4001, a 4003 and a 4004.  Was there ever a 4001?

In a nutshell the 4001 was the earlier version of the (current) 4003. It was similar, but the model evolved over the years and at some point the name changed.

4003 is the main version with the shark tooth inlays, bound body and neck. It is also wired for duel outputs, so you can have one pick up out of one amp and the other out of another.

There is also the 4003s which is similar, but does not have the binding, inlays or stereo outputs. This originally was a UK only model and was used by a certain Mr McCartney.

The 4004 is a modern version. It doesn’t have the scratch plate, binding or stereo and has a different bridge, and pickups in slightly different positions. It is a much more minimalist design but is still the same basic outline. These are not as common as the classic 4003 and 4003s.

Recently there has been a 5 string model introduced with a different bridge, but still based around the same outline.

[Paul S]

Thanks for that.  My deliberate mistake was asking if there was ever a 4001, when i meant a 4002 but i guess yo have answered that as you don't mention one.

[4000]

I Yes there was a 4002. It was a high-end model with an ebony fingerboard, Birdseye maple body and low impedance pickups in different positions to the 4001/4003. 

So, in a nutshell - although some of this will be covered above - you have:

4000 - single pickup, unbound, dot inlays. Through-neck up until ‘73, when it became a set-neck. 

4001S - twin pickup version of the above. First through-neck, then set-neck, now latterly through-neck again. 

4001 - twin pickup deluxe version of the above, so with body and neck binding, triangular inlays, stereo facility (although a few S models also had this).

4003 - replaced the 4001, in both S and Deluxe. Different truss rod system (note, on the 4001 you do not adjust the neck like on most other basses - you have to release the holding nuts, move the neck into position by hand, and then tighten the nuts to hold it in place. This is where loads of people wreck the truss rods or pop the fingerboard, by adjusting the rods like on other basses. However the 4003 system can be adjusted like most other basses). 

4002 - boutique (and rare) take on the 4001.

4004 - various versions, e.g. Laredo and Cheyenne 1&2, but essentially an unbound, scratchplate-less, twin humbucker equipped take on the 4000 series basses. Addressed all the issues people complain about on the 4001/4003 but wasn’t popular. 

4005 - big-bodied semi-Acoustic. 

4008/4003s8 - both 8 strings.

3000 series - different bass entirely to the above.

4001v63, later replaced by C series. Modern take on the ‘60s 4001s. 

4001CS - Chris Squire Signature.

Numerous limited runs of 4000 series specials, Blackstar, Tuxedo etc. 

Rickenbacker 4003 - Al Cisneros signature.

And probably others I haven’t mentioned, like the twin necks and 5 strings. And as stated in the other thread, necks, pickups, pot values, exact body dimensions and details etc etc etc have varied hugely over the years. If you can’t be bothered trawling Rick Resource, get Paul Boyer’s book, otherwise we could be here for years. 😉

I honestly do not get where the weight thing comes from. Even the heaviest 4001/4003 won’t be over 10lbs, and typically - and I’ve played at the very least several hundred - they’re around 9lbs. Some, like mine, are lighter. They’re more consistent weight-wise than Fenders. 

Oh, and it’s “Jetglo”, “Fireglo” etc. There is no W on the end. 

If you don’t get the book or trawl RRF, take what’s provided and Google; there is simply far too much information for one thread. Heck, the whole of the RRF covers all the differences!

 

Edited December 15, 2019 by 4000

[BlueMoon]

Did they make fretless versions in all of the above models listed? Coated fingerboards?

[4000]

Off the top of my head they made fretless 4001 & 4003 basses, which would have had lacquered boards. I think there were a couple of 4002s; again I think they had ebony boards. Don’t think I’ve seen a fretless 4004. No idea about 4005 or 3000-series basses. I don’t remember ever seeing a fretless 4005. 

[Paul S]

41 minutes ago, 4000 said:

I Yes there was a 4002./snip/ Heck, the whole of the RRF covers all the differences!

 

Thank you!  That probably covers it all in enough detail.  If I were in the market for one - and I am still not sure - the simple answer would be try and try until you find one you like.

Next question - do any of the fakers actually sound like the real thing?

[4000]

Yes, often, with the 70s Jap ones. Not so much the modern ones I’ve played. BC member Bassassassin is your man for info on copies. 

[Paul S]

I'll invite him to the party - @Bassassin what would you say was the Rick copy to be Rick copies?

[4000]

Re necks, the necks of 4001 basses up until early 73, although again they vary, typically have a wider/flatter feel than later ones, which is my preference. The more recent 4003 basses have a similar profile but are a bit chunkier. There’s basically everything from pencil thin, flattened profile, through rounder profile, up to almost P bass sized.

Oh, and 4003 pickups, which again vary depending on period, are typically hotter than 4001 pickups. And then there are toasters (my favourite neck pickups) and the famous ‘60s horseshoe, which is a thread in itself. And the 4001 had a capacitor in line which cut the bottom on the treble pickup. This was removed on the 4003 until the push/pull, which enabled you to have it in or out. Many people remove the capacitor from their 4001 basses, which beefs up the treble pickup.

Edited December 15, 2019 by 4000

[4000]

7 minutes ago, Meddle said:

Rickenbacker are consistently inconsistent. It is almost impossible to say either "Rickenbacker always did this" or "Rickenbacker never did this". You will find that one weird 4001 from 1979 that has some sort of weird trait or feature never seen before or since.

Rickenbacker necks vary a lot as well. My 4003 is from mid 2009. Somewhere in summer 2009 they started using two-piece central planks, which allowed them to skinny down the necks. My bass has a single plank, and therefore a chunky neck. My bass is also subtly folding around the neck pickup route under string tension! 

Rickenbackers are passive, though some have been modified to be active. Alembic built a Rickenbacker pickup set, as did Bartolini, with the intention of running these pickups with a preamp. More typically you see Dimarzio pickups dropped into '70s Rickenbacker basses that have seen the modder's knife. 

Rickenbacker did advertise some '80s basses as 'semi-active' for a brief spell. These had the pots and switch mounted to a PCB (as well as the output jack, which would worry me if you saw the construction), but this was marketing faff. They did make some sort of special 4003 quite recently with a matte black finish and the bridge pickup banged right down at the bridge, and this had a built in overdrive. Not sure if that meets the minimum criteria for 'active'. 

 

The pickup covers aren't mandatory. They were included from the earliest 4000 basses. In the early basses the covers served an important purpose. The original 'horseshoe' bridge pickup was derived from a lap steel pickup with magnetically charged 'shoes' covering the strings. If you removed these shoes then the pickup would stop working.

These were replaced with the now standard 'Higain' pickup in the late '60s. This is a much more conventional single coil pickup, but it retains the chrome surround and convoluted height adjustment setup of the horseshoe pickup. A lot of wood is routed out of the bass to accommodate this pickup, even though the basic guts of it (and premise of it) is a fairly normal pickup coil sitting on top of a magnet. 

The 'glo suffix is Rickenbacker marketing speak for any colour. Mapleglo is a natural finish, revealing the maple wood of the body and neck. Jetglo is a black finish (think Whitby jet) and Burgundyglo is the rich, claret colour that changes over the years from almost black to a deep red colour. The 'glo suffix is also used by fans to describe colours that don't grace the Rickenbacker catalog. As such Burgundyglo sometimes becomes 'Eggplantglo' depending on the shade. Glueglo is a subtly pejorative term to describe examples of early '70s mapleglo-finished basses where the glue holding the binding to the body has seeped into the surrounding wood and discoloured it.

 

 

If you don't like any of the above then the 4004 bass is a good option! It simplifies the pickup and electronic setup, Has no unnecessary routing into the body and has a modern Schaller bridge. 

Don’t forget there are many different versions of the highgain. Even looking at the basses I’ve owned from ‘71 and ‘72, every one has had a subtly different pickup (although all were screw tops).

[4000]

Here are some I own/have owned:

My current 2:

 

[4000]

My old 4004:

 

[4000]

My old 21 fretter (v.rare):

 

 

[4000]

My old ‘91 4001CS (I had a ‘96 too), my old ‘73 4000 and my main ‘72:

 

[4000]

‘73 Paul Wilczynski refin:

[4000]

‘73 4000 again, ‘91 CS, ‘72 4001, ‘76 4001. There have been many others, but I can’t be bothered rooting out the photos. 

[4000]

I know. 😉

[4000]

13 minutes ago, Meddle said:

I quite like the early green-bobbin Higain pickups. The modern overwound, under-magnetised pickups are the worst in my opinion. Paired with 300k pots you get a fairly dull tone.

I’ve found it really depends on the bass and the tone you’re after. I’ve played some great sounding recent basses, some poor sounding old ones, and vice versa. The back pickup on my 21 fretter (which was a green screwtop) was really, really weedy; as I play very lightly it was too weak for me. My current two, and the ‘73 4000, are/were the best. But I will say my 4004 sounded fantastic too. I only got rid because I found the unbound body aggravated a nerve issue. The ‘73 4000 (as opposed to a through-neck ‘72 4000 I had) was the most aggressive sounding bass - of any make - that I’ve played. The first time I used it at a rehearsal was on a song where I came in part way through. When I came in, the band stopped playing because they couldn’t believe the racket.😁

[Maude]

4 hours ago, Paul S said:

Next question - do any of the fakers actually sound like the real thing?

If the body and neck is built from same materials and to the same specs as Rickenbacker, and electrics and hardware is Rickenbacker, or an exact copy, then yes, they will sound like a Rick. 

Luthier built 4005 copy built to Rick specs. 🙂

[Jus Lukin]

-

Edited March 4, 2022 by Jus Lukin