First of all, your line at the end of the 5-string article is brilliant: "If the first 4003S/5 succeeded at being a Rickenbacker but failed at being a 5-string bass, maybe the second version succeeded at being a 5-string bass but failed at being a Rickenbacker."
I managed The Bass Centre in L.A. (the first bass-only store in the country) from when we opened in 1986 until I left in mid-1993. We arguably sold more 5-string basses than anyone else in the country for several years, of which with the exception of the MusicMan Sting Ray 5, most were boutique brands like Tobias, F-Bass, Wal, Pedulla, Ken Smith, Fodera, Alembic, etc. We were also a Rickenbacker dealer, so during this time we also stocked the 4003S/5. Unfortunately, as you'd mentioned, both the neck spacing was too narrow and the B-string was not solid enough to be a viable 5-string contender to gain any real traction.
During this time we also stocked a 4003S/8 (we sold quote a few 8 & 12-string basses during this time as well.) One thing that was a drag was that the octave strings rattled against the primary strings, indicating that the octave string saddles weren't cut correctly. We immediately returned it to the factory to be addressed (I don't know if this was a common issue with this model or not.) Unfortunately, it was returned about a month later and it was still the same. It did end up selling as it was, but it was the last time we ordered one.
Wait, isn't the Danelectro UB-2 tuned the same as a Bass VI or a 4005/6? The lower four strings are tuned to the same octave as a standard bass guitar, not above it.
First off, thanks so much for all of these informational pages you put out so often. I have learned so much about Rickenbacker in the short time I have been receiving your articles by email. This one was especially interesting, as I happen to have a 6-string bass guitar myself (sorry, not a Rickenbacker). What caught me off guard, however, was the line "Rickenbacker even got into the 6-string game in 1966 with the 4005/6 (click to learn more), although theirs featured a standard 33 1/4” scale and was tuned an octave lower than the Danelectro and Fender." While I cannot speak for the Fender, my Danelectro U-2 is tuned an octave lower than a standard guitar, with the lower 4 strings being the same as a standard 4-string bass. If it is in fact true that the 4005/6 "was tuned an octave lower than the Danelectro and Fender", that would put its fretboard an octave below that of my Dano and the lowest E at the threshold of human hearing, and based on the picture of that instrument, the strings hardly look capable of such a pitch. Based on this, it seems that the Rickenbacker is probably tuned E1-e3 (where standard guitar would be E2-e4). Could you verify this to me and see if that is true?
The prototype for the Rick 4003S/5 bass was reported to be a model built in 1982 with an enlarged (think 8-string) headstock and neck binding. Example here: https://www.ronsvintage.com/bass/rickenbacker-1982-model-4003s-5
Andy -
First of all, your line at the end of the 5-string article is brilliant: "If the first 4003S/5 succeeded at being a Rickenbacker but failed at being a 5-string bass, maybe the second version succeeded at being a 5-string bass but failed at being a Rickenbacker."
I managed The Bass Centre in L.A. (the first bass-only store in the country) from when we opened in 1986 until I left in mid-1993. We arguably sold more 5-string basses than anyone else in the country for several years, of which with the exception of the MusicMan Sting Ray 5, most were boutique brands like Tobias, F-Bass, Wal, Pedulla, Ken Smith, Fodera, Alembic, etc. We were also a Rickenbacker dealer, so during this time we also stocked the 4003S/5. Unfortunately, as you'd mentioned, both the neck spacing was too narrow and the B-string was not solid enough to be a viable 5-string contender to gain any real traction.
During this time we also stocked a 4003S/8 (we sold quote a few 8 & 12-string basses during this time as well.) One thing that was a drag was that the octave strings rattled against the primary strings, indicating that the octave string saddles weren't cut correctly. We immediately returned it to the factory to be addressed (I don't know if this was a common issue with this model or not.) Unfortunately, it was returned about a month later and it was still the same. It did end up selling as it was, but it was the last time we ordered one.
Keep up the good work.
I tried a 5 string out (Carvin, with a great asymmetrical neck like a Tobias) for a year, and concluded 5 strings were just not my thing.
If they were, I’d absolutely want to try out one of the newer model Rick5s. So many things about the sleeker design are very appealing to me.
(Schaller bridge,S body style, even the look of the Dorito pickups.)
I remember a lot of negative commentary about the look of those pickups,
but I also recall that most people seemed to like the sound of them, even though they were as noisy as the higains in the 4003.
Thanks again for an interesting and informative article!
Wait, isn't the Danelectro UB-2 tuned the same as a Bass VI or a 4005/6? The lower four strings are tuned to the same octave as a standard bass guitar, not above it.
Brain fart, fixed. Thanks and apologies!
Funny, we were thinking the same thing at the same time. You just said it a lot more clearly and concisely than I did.
First off, thanks so much for all of these informational pages you put out so often. I have learned so much about Rickenbacker in the short time I have been receiving your articles by email. This one was especially interesting, as I happen to have a 6-string bass guitar myself (sorry, not a Rickenbacker). What caught me off guard, however, was the line "Rickenbacker even got into the 6-string game in 1966 with the 4005/6 (click to learn more), although theirs featured a standard 33 1/4” scale and was tuned an octave lower than the Danelectro and Fender." While I cannot speak for the Fender, my Danelectro U-2 is tuned an octave lower than a standard guitar, with the lower 4 strings being the same as a standard 4-string bass. If it is in fact true that the 4005/6 "was tuned an octave lower than the Danelectro and Fender", that would put its fretboard an octave below that of my Dano and the lowest E at the threshold of human hearing, and based on the picture of that instrument, the strings hardly look capable of such a pitch. Based on this, it seems that the Rickenbacker is probably tuned E1-e3 (where standard guitar would be E2-e4). Could you verify this to me and see if that is true?
That right there kids is what you call a brain fart. You are of course correct, and I have updated accordingly.
A crazy selection of fine axes