Spector v Rickenbacker

[4000]

24 minutes ago, Roger2611 said:

The only thing I can add in regard of a Rick is make sure you play it both standing and sitting before you buy one, when I brought the one I have recently sold I didn't heed that advice, I sat on the sellers sofa and really enjoyed playing it, when I can to gigging it I thought it was going to chop my arm off, at the end of the day I just found it too uncomfortable for the way I play, sure you can change the way you play to make it comfortable but I am happy with how I play and don't need to make adjustments for any other basses

You should absolutely always choose a bass that you find comfortable. I tend to that think whatever instrument you learn on has implications for what you may or may not find comfortable. I learned to play on a Ric so don’t have any problems in that respect ( & mine balance fine; I’ve had a couple with bigger headstocks which were a little neck-heavy, but no more than most Fenders I‘ve had) whereas for me a Fender Jazz is about as uncomfortable as an instrument gets (and all the Jazzes I‘ve owned have nosedived, bar one which weighed a ton). Obviously YMMV.

Edited December 12, 2017 by 4000

[Billy Apple]

3 hours ago, martthebass said:

It's unfortunate that the 'Ricky' hate clouds the debate.....understandable on the basis of the objectionable owner but if we compare just the basses and not their 'baggage'.  However, I think these 2 basses are very different animals coming from different design points and eras. 

The Spector and Ric are similar basses sharing an identical platform, as in laminate Maple neck-thru, Maple wings, twin pups, parallel neck with a variable profile. The Spector is what Ric could've evolved the 4000 series into had they had the mind to do it.

[prowla]

Why the either/or?

There is no "one ring to rule them all".

Have one of each.

I personally find the Ric the most natural bass to play of any I've tried.

As far as versatility goes, I would say that the Ric doesn't lend itself to slap'n'pop.

That's my preference; if other folks think otherwise, then that's their preference.

[jazzmanb]

18 hours ago, Skybone said:

I've never played a Spector, and tbh, but I have played a few Ric's, and owned a 4003 for a few years (had to sell it thanks to the recession ☹ ).

Anyway, Ric's are versatile, have plenty of bottom end, and since the mid 90's, have been pretty consistent quality wise (the one's I've played anyway). From 2006 they all come with the Vintage Circuit on board. Yes, some people find them awkward to play and can't get on with the ergonomics of them. You do have to adjust your playing style slightly to get the most from them, and most hate the bridge pickup cover. I like them, and would love another. If you don't want to give any money to the company, buy a second hand one.

Have you considered a 4004? More modern looks, humbuckers, Schaller bridge, more rounded edges front & back. Worth tracking down.

Definitely try one before you think about buying one.

Agree,i like to gig with different Basses as each takes a different approach and just keeps it interesting for me.I had a battered 4001,cream and black like early Lemmy,frets were flat and action the highest of my bunch but i loved pulling it out for half a set or whatever.Loved the slim body and neck.To get it mint and properley done would have cost too much for me but i'd def buy another

[Dood]

22 hours ago, fretmeister said:

There's always the Doug Wimbish model for a jazz neck option, and the Ian Hill is smaller front to back.

I've had the utter pleasure of playing Doug's actual Spector and yes, it definitely does have a Jazz neck profile (as do the signature models yup) and OMG what an instrument! 

[martthebass]

On 12/12/2017 at 19:25, Billy Apple said:

The Spector and Ric are similar basses sharing an identical platform, as in laminate Maple neck-thru, Maple wings, twin pups, parallel neck with a variable profile. The Spector is what Ric could've evolved the 4000 series into had they had the mind to do it.

Why would they do that when they can sell all the 4003s they can make? 

 

[Billy Apple]

3 minutes ago, martthebass said:

Why would they do that when they can sell all the 4003s they can make? 

 

That wasn't my point. My point was you said they are from 'different design points' and they are not. If you read my comment I said 'If they had a mind to' and they clearly do not.

 

[martthebass]

47 minutes ago, Billy Apple said:

That wasn't my point. My point was you said they are from 'different design points' and they are not. If you read my comment I said 'If they had a mind to' and they clearly do not.

 

I got your point.....I was picking up on your ‘evolution’ point, in your opinion, the Spector is a more evolved product, in RICs it probably isn’t. They also have design similarities in that they both have strings and tuning thingies.

[Billy Apple]

17 minutes ago, martthebass said:

They also have design similarities in that they both have strings and tuning thingies.

Yes. And  maple laminate neck-through with maple wings and two pups,

I know you don't want to hear it, but they share the same platform. There is Ric, and Spector, which is basically a Super-Ric ;-)

Edited December 13, 2017 by Billy Apple

[prowla]

16 minutes ago, Billy Apple said:

Yes. And  maple laminate neck-through with maple wings and two pups,

I know you don't want to hear it, but they share the same platform. There is Ric, and Spector, which is basically a Super-Ric ;-)

Baloney - the Spectors are just Warwick copies. ;-)

[martthebass]

8 hours ago, Billy Apple said:

Yes. And  maple laminate neck-through with maple wings and two pups,

I know you don't want to hear it, but they share the same platform. There is Ric, and Spector, which is basically a Super-Ric ;-)

Always has to have the last word......you never change lol!

and they are completely different

[SpondonBassed]

I've never played a Rick.  It's likely that I never will with everything I've read.

Despite the bad press that they get, I still think they look stunning in performance.  Iconic was the word used above and I agree.  It is easy to see why they turn up in music videos so often.

[4000]

13 hours ago, Billy Apple said:

Yes. And  maple laminate neck-through with maple wings and two pups,

I know you don't want to hear it, but they share the same platform. There is Ric, and Spector, which is basically a Super-Ric ;-)

They may both be essentially maple neck-throughs with 2 pickups but there the similarity ends. Utterly different feel, sound and look.

The super Ric would be the 4004. ;-)

[TheGreek]

13 hours ago, prowla said:

Baloney - the Spectors are just Warwick copies. ;-)

Fixed it for you...

the Warwicks are just Spector copies

[TheGreek]

Here you go, Prowla:

Design similarity to Spector NS-Basses[edit]

It was well documented that the first versions of the Streamer were near exact copies of the NS-Bass. The Spector NS-Bass was designed by Ned Steinberger for Stuart Spector in 1977, five years before Warwick was formed.

In the May 2012 article titled "Meet Your Maker: Hans Peter Wilfer of Warwick", an interview with Warwick founder and CEO in Bass Player, the following history is given explaining Wilfer's decision to make copies of the highly sought-after Spector NS-Bass: "'We didn’t see any reason to build Fender copycats, which players could get easily and cheaply from Asia, so we decided to focus only on high-end, innovative instruments.' In the mid ’80s, the Spector NS was tracking well in the U.S., but these basses proved hard to come by in Europe. H.P. saw that problem as a potential solution for the direction of his company and took up the task of designing his own version of this popular, ergonomically friendly instrument. That venture resulted in Warwick’s first widely successful instrument: the Streamer Stage I."^[2]

At the annual Musikmesse Show (Frankfurt, Germany) in 1985, Stuart Spector became aware that a new German-based company was producing exact copies of his now famous NS-Bass. Spector, along with Ned Steinberger, confronted Hans Wilfer and he agreed to pay a licensing fee to both Spector Guitars and Ned Steinberger in return for being able to continue to produce the Streamer without legal action.^[3]

Shortly after this agreement was reached, Spector was sold to Kramer Guitars. The new owners had no interest in pursuing Warwick to enforce the licensing agreement and Warwick continued to make the Streamer without any consequence.

In 1990, Kramer became insolvent and filed for bankruptcy. In the wake of their financial failure, Stuart Spector formed Stuart Spector Design, LTD. in 1992. In 1997 after a lengthy court battle, Stuart Spector was awarded the trademark and copyrights to Spector and threatened to sue Warwick to enforce the 1985 license agreement.^[3]

The pending litigation was eventually dropped because Warwick had changed the Streamer design and it was no longer an exact copy of the NS-Bass. In time, Warwick has evolved the design of the Streamer while Spector has sought to preserve the classic elements of the NS-Bass. Since 1984 very little has changed regarding the design, electronics and hardware of the Spector NS-Bass, whereas the Warwick Streamer has evolved into its own unique guitar and can no longer be considered a "copy" of the Spector,^{[according to whom?]}although it still has some of the general shape of the original.

[Jus Lukin]

-

Edited February 25, 2022 by Jus Lukin

[cetera]

2 minutes ago, Jus Lukin said:

I assumed Prowla was joking, personally! 

Me too.....

 

[prowla]

3 hours ago, cetera said:

Me too.....

 

Me too!

[bris]

Okey dokey

I have numerous Rickys over the ears my fave being a 1992 4003s which i stupidly sold, i have a year old 4003s in Midnight Blue and to me it,s not a patch on my old one. The weight of the 92 was like playing with a truck on it weighed a ton, but thats how i liked it at the time, when you gigged with it, you knew you had gigged with it. I have tried many many basses over the years, Musicmans, Ovations, Overwater, Shergold, Yamaha,Gibson etc etc...even a Fender Precision Lite which was the dogs nads, and then i came across Spectors, i have a thing for thru necks, just think they feel more solid, so i purchased a brand new Korean Legend Custom........and since then have not looked back, that bass cost me £238 off ebay, and it knocked everything into touch, to such an extent that my main is now a Euro 4 xl, and its higher end brother a Forte helium Usa, which is just beyond words in quality and sound. I have always loved the Ricky sound but for build quality and unbeleivable guts it has to be a Spector.

[4000]

5 hours ago, TheGreek said:

Fixed it for you...

the Warwicks are just Spector copies

 

On a serious note, I've played maybe ten or so high end US Spectors and I'd have an early Thumb over any of them in a heartbeat. 

[Skybone]

11 hours ago, SpondonBassed said:

I've never played a Rick.  It's likely that I never will with everything I've read.

Despite the bad press that they get, I still think they look stunning in performance.  Iconic was the word used above and I agree.  It is easy to see why they turn up in music videos so often.

Don't believe everything you read on the internet.

If you get the opportunity to try one (or more than one), try it and then make up your mind.

I'd always liked them, but put trying one off for years. I did try one that was seriously beaten up early in my playing 'career', as it was all I could afford at the time. It was good, but the condition put me off (turns out it was an early 70's checker bound 4001). Many years later, and many basses later, I tried out a 4003 simply because it was there. I was blown away and bought it, kept it for 5 or 6 years. I regret selling it, but needs must.

[leftyyorky]

There seems to be a lot of hate for Ricks, ok there not everyones cup of tea (I personally cant stand precisions, especially the "wonderful" 1951 or whatever it is that Sting plays, saw him live, the bass had as much personality as a paper cup!) and yet I love my Jazz and its only a Squier! I have a 2000 Rickenbacker 4003 lefty and to me its awesome. I dont have a problem with the body shape/ergonomics , but I played an Ibanez faker for about 18 years. 

My point is , in my opinion, my Rick is very versatile, loads of all frequencies,  bags of sustain, great neck and frets, and when played in stereo really comes alive. I do however have one criticism, a hand assembled bass, made in the good old US of A (irony) has right handed pots wired in reverse which I find disgusting , especially at the price range they are in.

I've never tried a Spector though, maybe I should!

Btw the irony about the USA is that I cant understand the big patriotism stuff, lots of great instruments are made in other countries,Japan, Germany, Korea, and even Indonesia (my Squier) so I dont think the USA has a monopoly on good instruments, and I  wish Rickenbacker corporation would take there blinkers off and go down the Fender/ Gibson route and produce more affordable instruments by outsourcing.

[cetera]

15 hours ago, leftyyorky said:

Btw the irony about the USA is that I cant understand the big patriotism stuff, lots of great instruments are made in other countries,Japan, Germany, Korea, and even Indonesia (my Squier) so I dont think the USA has a monopoly on good instruments, and I  wish Rickenbacker corporation would take there blinkers off and go down the Fender/ Gibson route and produce more affordable instruments by outsourcing.

Yep, imagine the sales Rickenbacker could make with a cheaper Euro or high quality Far-Eastern version of their classic design, as Spector have done with their Czech and Korean models.....
Definitely a missed opportunity!
I prefer my Japanese made Fender & Tokai P's & J's over any US made ones I've tried..... and the Euro Spector is a fantastically built/sounding instrument at half the price of a full US custom shop.

Edited December 22, 2017 by cetera

[Jus Lukin]

-

Edited February 25, 2022 by Jus Lukin

[mcnach]

On 12/12/2017 at 09:30, Bassforradio said:

Hey there!

I have a Spector EuroLX4 and I love it, but I have always wanted a Rickenbacker (pref a 4001). I think they're great looking and all my favourite players have used them as their primary instrument.

My question is, overall, which is the better bass?

The better bass is the one that you like the feel/sound of best. Both are probably decent instruments at least, so it comes to personal preference in the end.