Rickenbacker basses - differences between models?

[Bassassin]

5 hours ago, Paul S said:

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

Hard to pick one as the best - the Japanese copies were all well-made instruments and some were frighteningly accurate, to the extent that they sometimes turn up in circulation as originals.

If I was to pick one, I'd say you wouldn't go too far wrong with a Shaftesbury - these are exceptionally well-made and are more robust than some of the others. Aesthetically very accurate aside from the single truss rod and the tuners, which are the small cast-button types used on many 70s MIJ basses. What's good is that these are probably the most common through-neck Fakers on the UK market, and turn up pretty regularly if you know where to look.

I don't think I'll be breaking any BC Rick Defence Protocols by posting this link:

https://www.facebook.com/groups/78514186083

FB group for Fakers, been around for years now and they're bought & sold with impunity there. Not sure why JH leaves the group alone, possibly doesn't feel he can chuck his weight and empty legal threats around in Mr Zuckerberg's gaff. I dunno...

Worth mentioning that the current crop of Chinese Fakers are very, very inaccurate - they're really only Rick-shaped basses. All the hardware & electronics are wrong, as are the neck proportions. Most MIJ Fakers copied the 33 1/4" scale and all have the correct narrow string spacing, whereas the modern versions are all 34" and have much broader, Fender-esque spacing.

[onehandclapping]

My custom made 64 4001s/1999...Dale Fortune

[4000]

6 hours ago, onehandclapping said:

My custom made 64 4001s/1999...Dale Fortune

Yum!

[Skybone]

The current specs for the 4000 series came into play around 2006, when the headstock gained the Walnut "wings", and the neck became a bit thicker than the previous incarnation. The fretboard inlays also became full width again, after being slightly narrower than the fretboard since the early 80's.

Also, the current "Vintage" circuit only became a standard fitting from 2006 models. Pre 2006 didn't have it, though some were retro-fitted with it.

Edited December 16, 2019 by Skybone

[4000]

1 hour ago, Skybone said:

The current specs for the 4000 series came into play around 2006, when the headstock gained the Walnut "wings", and the neck became a bit thicker than the previous incarnation. The fretboard inlays also became full width again, after being slightly narrower than the fretboard since the early 80's.

Also, the current "Vintage" circuit only became a standard fitting from 2006 models. Pre 2006 didn't have it, though some were retro-fitted with it.

I’m pretty sure the necks slimmed down again - relatively speaking - relatively recently. The recent ones I’ve played have been nothing like the size of the ones I played several years ago, or even my ‘98 V63. They’re more like a chunkier version of my ‘72s. 

[Stub Mandrel]

Tufty says "Avoid the 4003, it tends to clog my chipper!"

[Skybone]

It's only because he's left all the hardware on... daft bugger

[BlueMoon]

11 hours ago, Stub Mandrel said:

Tufty says "Avoid the 4003, it tends to clog my chipper!"

Were you a Tufty club member as well?

[Stub Mandrel]

1 hour ago, BlueMoon said:

Were you a Tufty club member as well?

I won a Tufty Hanky!

[Skybone]

17 hours ago, 4000 said:

I’m pretty sure the necks slimmed down again - relatively speaking - relatively recently. The recent ones I’ve played have been nothing like the size of the ones I played several years ago, or even my ‘98 V63. They’re more like a chunkier version of my ‘72s. 

My old 2005 model had a relatively slim neck compared to the newer version 4003's I've played.

[bnt]

I'm sure I remember reading that the 4001CS was slimmer and lighter than standard, since it was a replica of Chris Squire's own bass that had been sanded down and refinished several times over the years. I'm interested in that sound, but not at that price ..!

[ead]

2 hours ago, Stub Mandrel said:

I won a Tufty Hanky!

Respect is due.

[BigRedX]

4 hours ago, BlueMoon said:

Were you a Tufty club member as well?

When I was a teenager being a Tufty Club member was shorthand for being a NF skinhead.

[Rich]

17 hours ago, Stub Mandrel said:

clog my chipper

 

Is that a euphemism?

[MrCrane]

1 hour ago, Rich said:

Is that a euphemism?

If I wasn't of a certain age, I might think the same about the term "Tufty Club"

[4000]

5 hours ago, bnt said:

I'm sure I remember reading that the 4001CS was slimmer and lighter than standard, since it was a replica of Chris Squire's own bass that had been sanded down and refinished several times over the years. I'm interested in that sound, but not at that price ..!

Actually it’s not, sorry. I’ve had 2, played maybe 3 or 4? One of them (my ‘96) was possibly the heaviest Ric out of the many hundreds I’ve played. The other (a ‘91, see pics in previous posts) was about 9 and a half pounds. In fact if you read the interviews with Chris, he says that despite them weighing and measuring his bass (which was indeed sanded and slimmed down), the CS models are not really anything like it, other than cosmetically. Apart from the Vermillion fingerboard and headstock wings, the paint job and the scratchplate, they simply follow the spec of the equivalent V63. So around ‘96-‘98 (forget the exact year) the headstock was shortened on both models (less vintage correct) and the neck was thickened. The earlier ones have nice slim necks, but Paul Wilcynski, who refinished my ‘73 4001 shown previously, has held Chris’s bass and he says the neck is by far the thinnest Ric neck he’s ever seen, and he’s worked on a lot of Rics, including vintage ones and reissues (including CSs). 

The electronics on the CS were the same as the relative V63 too, so at the time had relatively hot pickups and low pot values (nothing like Chris’s - his treble pickup, which is a genuine horseshoe and not the technically dissimilar reissue- apparently barely worked),  making them generally quite dark sounding, although there will be exceptions, as always. A guy I know from Rick Resource has the first one into the country and that’s a really nice one. He’s also had a few RMs (i.e. original ‘60s ones) and he says his stands up.

One of the reasons Chris had his wired in stereo(the other being to use effects on one pickup and not the other) was to bring the output of his treble pickup up. 

http://www.rickresource.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=20

Some people say they can’t tell the difference sonically between the V63 and CS, but the 2 CSs I had were the most similar sounding Rics I’ve played, and sounded more honky and less open than the various V63s I’ve owned/played. I do (or rather did as they’re fading fast) have ears that frighten sound engineers though, or so some of them have told me! Sonically - certainly from the perspective of the bass itself and not the player, effects, amps etc - you’d possibly get nearer Chris’s sound with a C Series, or better still, go vintage. Although if you got a CS and put a lower output scatter wound toaster in the neck, put a real vintage horseshoe in the bridge, and changed the wiring loom (or at least the pots), then you might not be far off. Although there is that super thin neck and body...... 😉

Oh, one last thing about the CSs, in my experience; they look gorgeous, but the paint discolours/ falls off if you so much as look at it. Cue Nigel Tufnell. 😂

[drTStingray]

Great info in this thread guys - just a pity there aren't a few more around to contribute. 

[ead]

I've just owned one 4003 so don't feel that qualified to offer any opinions

[Beedster]

I’ve owned five, and to this day I’m unsure why I sold two of them, C64 and a 4003FL. All I have to add to this thread is that there is a lot of nonsense talked about the ric sound, the 4003s are easily as versatile as any twin PUP passive bass, and can do dub just as well as they can do clank. A 4003 with heavy flats, played with a pic through a B15 is about as iconic a bass tone as youll get - powerful rounded bass, slightly subdued mids and sweet highs - it’s like a fine wine

[Bassman Sam]

I had a 1969 4001 FL in the '70's. Sounded great with Round wounds but they buggered the fretboard. A Rick sound with added Maaaw.  

[Beedster]

3 minutes ago, Bassman Sam said:

I had a 1969 4001 FL in the '70's. Sounded great with Round wounds but they buggered the fretboard. A Rick sound with added Maaaw.  

The finish on the FL boards could be better  IMO

[Bassman Sam]

1 minute ago, Beedster said:

The finish on the FL boards could be better  IMO

True Beedster. Only took 2 years of rounds to cause serious string marks on the board. Sold it for a 75 P bass. 

[Paul S]

Daft question - with the dual output, I get that you can do different things with the two outputs if you want but are they the same or is the output split in some way? 

[Jus Lukin]

-

Edited March 4, 2022 by Jus Lukin

[Paul S]

I see (said the blind man) - you don't use both for stereo...