simon1964

Pm'd on the chorus

[quote name='Beedster' timestamp='1334174572' post='1612166'] Si, I have both aluminium and brass Hipshot bridges and vastly prefer the brass despite its Olympian mass, which were you after mate? Chris [/quote] PM'd you!

Chris - if you do end up splitting for parts, I'd be interested in the Hipshot Bridge. Simon

Am I the only person getting an add at the top of this thread for those Retrovibe Ric copies? Anyway, I'm off to change my avatar...

[quote name='peterjam' timestamp='1334134558' post='1611233'] While I bow to no-one in my admiration of Rickenbacker players - Chris Squire, Geddy Lee, Cliff Burton, Bruce Foxton - I have the feeling that Rickenbacker are trading on past glories. Either that or they're following the Apple line, "my way or the highway". Most well-known players ended up 'modifying' their basses - Geddy Lee fitted Badass bridges to his Rics, Chris Squire wired his in stereo and Cliff Burton fitted a Seymour Duncan pickup in place of the foam mute. Rickenbacker basses were so radical when they first came out, but they've been overtaken by players needs and technology. I could understand if you were getting an out-of-the-ordinary bass for the amount of money, (new or second-hand), but I've seen a number of instances of poor build quality to believe this to be the case [url="http://bassthatricbuilt.web.officelive.com/default.aspx"]http://bassthatricbu...om/default.aspx[/url] You can pick up a custom-built bass from an independent luthier for between £1500 and £2000, so why would you buy a bass with a foam mute and a metal plate over the strings? It's a shame that people move to entrenched positions when something like this comes to light but, as I said at the start, I think Rickenbacker are living in the past in relation to their basses. [/quote] I don't particularly have an entrenched view. I own a Shuker as well as a Ric, so take your point entirely regarding what you can spend your money on. But Rickenbacker have produced updated models - eg the 4004, with more modern bridge and pickups, but those models have always been less popular. Ric are succesful precisely because they are trading on their past, and sell what is undoubtedly a quirky, old fashioned, but iconic, product. Comparing a Ric with a custom built modern bass is like comparing a Morgan with a BMW - they are entirely different products targetting entirely different niches of the market. And because Rickenbacker have such a small niche, I can see why they look to protect their products so aggressively. That having been said, I don't represent the Rickenbacker police, and quite agree Mr Hall doesn't do himself any favours at times

[quote name='mrdreadful' timestamp='1334133918' post='1611223'] The thing is though, the existing product would still be exclusive... call the budget line "Hallisanob by Rickenbacker" or something, make some minor cosmetic changes (no neck binding, for example) suddenly it's not a 'proper' Rick and people will still pay top dollar for the 'proper' ones, because that kind of thing actually matters to people. Gibson have demonstrated that it's possible to make reasonable sub-£500 instruments in the US (albeit ones with the usual Gibson QC problems but that's not the point) so it's not like they even have to outsource manufacturing to the Far Eastern factories John Hall despises so much because how [i]dare[/i] they have different cultures and laws to America? [/quote] I understand your point, but Rickenbacker have always adopted a very different marketing strategy to Gibson and Fender. Those two have always mass produced in far greater numbers than Rickenbacker. Ric's startegy has always been to produce small numbers of guitars in order to keep demand (artificially?) high - that's why its so hard to find Rickenbackers in stock, and why they (arguably) sell for more than they are actually worth! If they had taken on Gibson and Fender in the mass produced market, they would probably have disappeared and / or have been taken over decades ago (as has happened with Guild, Epiphone, Gretsch etc).

[quote name='mrdreadful' timestamp='1334130933' post='1611163'] If RIC stopped being so precious about their 'hand made American' basses and introduced a decent, mass-produced budget line that bore the 'sacred' Rickenbacker name they would make an absolute killing and take away a lot of the reason why newer copies exist. [/quote] On the other hand, they would also water down the perceived exclusivity of their product. Arguably, that's exactly what Warwick have done with their Rockbass line. I'm not particularly defending Rickenbacker, but they do have a unique niche / marketing strategy, and I can see where they're coming from in protecting that as aggresively as they do. Its also interesting to compare Rickenbacker copy threads, with the regular threads on here bashing Behringer for producing cheap Boss rip-offs...

[quote name='Pinball' timestamp='1332334214' post='1586754'] Out of curiosity I tried a new one in a shop yestarday. I think it had a shaped rather than flat front to the body though. I tried a couple of different models and it was my favourite. Felt and sounded excellent. [/quote] The current range includes a "carved top" model, which has a carved maple top. It might be one of those you tried. Anyway, these are cracking basses. I've owned both four and five string versions, and they are astonishlingly good value.