Rickenbacker Bass Pickup

[RedHouse]

Picky picky. Sometimes good enough is good enough. We are talking about a Rick bass not some 50's era Les Paul here. Chances are your gut instinct would get you a far better sounding pickup from what I've been hearing.

Good enough for you maybe.

[David King]

Brad if you know the numbers, by all means spill the beans for us.
It's hard to justify unwrapping a coil to count turns on a $30 rewind job especially with 44AWG. No?

[David Schwab]

Not to Hijack this thread but hey David and Electricdaveyboy,

Could you guys give me the dimensions of the backing plate? David's looks like the aluminum one and Electricdaveyboy's looks like the black plastic (bakelite?) one.

I need the dimensions and screw/thread sizes of the pickup and coil mounting screws.
(see attached pic)

OK, here's mine.

I scanned it just so you can see how very crude it is. They really didn't spend much time making the thing! You can still see the band saw marks.

The dimensions are 5.23" X 1.25" X .193". The two mounting holes are 4.945" apart.

I have to figure the whole sizes and the thread pitch for the mounting holes.

The black plastic ones I've seen seemed to be ABS. Bill Barolini mounted my Hi-A on a plastic one he got from someone and had me send him my aluminum one in exchange.

[David Schwab]

It's hard to justify unwrapping a coil to count turns on a $30 rewind job especially with 44AWG. No?

You can't unwrap it. It's been potted with lacquer or varnish or something. I was checking out my first Rick's pickup, and broke it, so I got the Hi-A to replace it.

You are undercharging for rewinds. $50 seems to be the going rate.

[RedHouse]

Brad if you know the numbers, by all means spill the beans for us.
It's hard to justify unwrapping a coil to count turns on a $30 rewind job especially with 44AWG. No?

If you read from the top of the thread you will see "the numbers"

I know you're a slam-bam-ship-it kind of guy, but many here amoung us prefer to know what we're dealing with, many like myself keep detailed notes and use them for future winding projects and ideas. Call it personal reference material.

I have one coming in soon too so let's put our heads together and figure this out. How long is the bobbin? 8.2K of 44 isn't very much wire, maybe 5000 turns? I'd say 10K would be better but I don't know that. I might try 43awg if there's room for it on the bobbin.

You'd say "10k would be better but I don't know that" and "might try 43awg if there's room for it on the bobbin" if you're winding for other people it makes sense to either do, or, start from a known profile on a pickup instead of taking a wild stabs at things, but to each his own I guees it's matter of personal style and craftsmanship.

[automan]

So how did you rewind it without taking any measurements? just throw some wire on and call it good?

No seriously, was it just a lead wire repair or did you rewind it?

It was a rewind. By measurements, I mean I didn't measure pole spacing, pole diameter, etc. I matched resistance.

[David King]

Brad,
That condescending tone seems unlike you. I'll admit to being a hack but I try to do the best I can with what god gave me.

I thought were were trying to establish some reliable numbers here but I'm not seeing very clearly where those numbers are pointing yet. If you know how to measure turns on an open pickup without unwinding it I'd be happy to pay for that knowledge.

[soundmasterg]

The earlier high gain pickups that RIC did on the 4001 starting around 1969 were weaker than today's stuff....usually around 7.5k to 9.5k or so. The early 70's stuff was similar, and as the decade went on, they got hotter. By the late 80's, they were more like 12k-14k, which is where the modern 4003 pickups are. This would not just be bridge pickups like the one pictured but neck pickups also. Their earlier basses had a 1/2 inch spacing for the neck pickup from the end of the fingerboard to the pickup, while the more recent ones have a 1 inch spacing. Personally I think the 1/2" spacing sounds better with the weaker pickups and the 1 inch spacing sounds better with the hotter pickups, but YMMV. The earlier basses had a toaster pickup in the neck position with alnico rod magnets and these sound quite a bit different than the high gain pickups. The earlier basses also had a horseshoe pickup in the bridge position that sounds totally different than the later high gain stuff. The modern high gain pickups have adjustable polepieces, and these are supposed to sound more chimey than the button top high gains, though I don't know this from experience. If you ask Rickenbacker they will say they have always used 44 gauge wire on their pickups, most likely Formvar, but some people have the opinion that some vintage RIC pickups were 43 or 42 gauge. I tend to believe that there were some that were other gauges myself, but don't know firsthand. I had Possum rewind for me a toaster pickup with 43 gauge as hot as he could do, and its around 9.5k. We used 44 PE, (because thats what I had) and I have not tried it yet. With 44 gauge PE as hot as you can get it, it is around 12.5k on the same type of bobbin. Incidentally, ALL of the RIC pickups have the same footprint and have the same basic bobbin size with the exception of the horseshoe pickup, the bridge high gain pickup, and some 70's dual coil pickups, so they can be subbed in and out at will mostly.

There always seem to be some people in any crowd that are haters on RIC guitars. Possum isn't fond of them for instance. He and I tease each other all the time about it too. I like their guitars and basses myself, and can never understand why people can't accept them for what they are and use them as such instead of trying to make them into a P-bass or Les Paul or whatnot. If you want a P-bass sound, get a P-bass! The RIC basses are very versatile and do sound quite good, if you listen with your ears instead of your eyes, or whatever the popular opinion is at the moment. Personally I like them with flatwound strings instead of roundwounds, but I can get a good sound either way. They can sound more aggressive than any Fender with roundwounds on them...listen to Freewill by Rush for an example. Yet they can also give you a nice, warm, full sound with flatwounds.....listen to the Beatles Come Together or most of their later era stuff for examples. I personally can't stand a P-bass played high up the neck unless it is one of the early P-basses with the single coil pickup. They sound like they are out of their pocket there whereas the RIC sounds great...punchy and focused. As far as their guitars, again a different animal than a Fender or Gibson, but thats ok. They can be made to sound great. Listen to REM, Tom Petty, Beatles, Radiohead, the Smiths, The Jam, U2, etc. That said, RIC as a company does do some odd things sometimes for sure, but it works for them. They're the only one of the good old American guitar makers that still makes everything in the USA and have a two year waiting list.

Anyway, if anyone wants more info on the RIC basses, join the Rickenbacker Resource forum, go to the bass section, and check out the posts. There is one thread in particular that goes into a lot of detail on the anatomy of the basses. Rickenbacker Forum, Guitar and Bass Register

Greg

[David Schwab]

if you listen with your ears instead of your eyes...

Well they look better than a Fender!

Yet they can also give you a nice, warm, full sound with flatwounds.....listen to the Beatles Come Together or most of their later era stuff for examples.

I think "Baby You're a Rich Man" is probably one of the best bass tones on any recording, ever. The old Rickenbacker/Maxima flatwounds were great strings.

I personally can't stand a P-bass played high up the neck unless it is one of the early P-basses with the single coil pickup. They sound like they are out of their pocket there whereas the RIC sounds great...punchy and focused.

Being an old prog rock player, I would agree, however Ray Shulman of Gentle Giant got a great tone from his P bass, as did John Wetton with King Crimson. So they are brighter than some people seem to think.

I find their guitars rather unplayable though, due to the overly narrow necks. Almost as bad as a Mosrite!

[12Bass]

Yep.... Wetton's P tone on Red was righteous! Big fan of Lee/Squire/McCartney's Ric tones as well.

[RedHouse]

Brad,
That condescending tone seems unlike you. I'll admit to being a hack but I try to do the best I can with what god gave me.

I thought were were trying to establish some reliable numbers here but I'm not seeing very clearly where those numbers are pointing yet. If you know how to measure turns on an open pickup without unwinding it I'd be happy to pay for that knowledge.

You must have me confused with someone else, I asked for dimensions from David S. and electricdaveboy.

Thanks David S. for the dimensions too BTW.

[mkat]

I like their guitars and basses myself, and can never understand why people can't accept them for what they are and use them as such instead of trying to make them into a P-bass or Les Paul or whatnot. If you want a P-bass sound, get a P-bass! The RIC basses are very versatile and do sound quite good, if you listen with your ears instead of your eyes, or whatever the popular opinion is at the moment.

Well, I'm flabbergasted LOL. There are plenty of reasons not to like a 4001. It has a unique sound that's for sure, but not all ears can use the tones given a style of music. I've been playing bass, writing, arranging and recording music for years - I also have ears that hear and listen funnily enough

They can sound more aggressive than any Fender with roundwounds on them...listen to Freewill by Rush for an example. Yet they can also give you a nice, warm, full sound with flatwounds.....listen to the Beatles Come Together or most of their later era stuff for examples. I personally can't stand a P-bass played high up the neck unless it is one of the early P-basses with the single coil pickup. They sound like they are out of their pocket there whereas the RIC sounds great...punchy and focused.

I really like the Ric 4001 sound on record, but I could never get close to the sound or a sound that you claim is punchy and so on with various rigs live. I learned roughly 80% of all Rush material (bass lines) up to Moving Pictures and really liked Geddy Lee's tone (even though I don't think he used the 4001 on all those recordings). BTW, I had a pretty fat sound in the higher register on my '67 pbass using round wound strings, so no issues there for me. So, IMO my 4001 was no comparison to my '67 pbass, with a set of stock single coils, with respect to tone and punch . I tried like hell to make the 4001 sound usable and it just didn't happen for me, the reason is that the pbass sound had the fundamental qualities that my ears wanted to hear. This is not a bad reflection of the 4001's, just that they're not for me. So, now you know why at least one player doesn't like them.

[David Schwab]

I really like the Ric 4001 sound on record, but I could never get close to the sound or a sound that you claim is punchy and so on with various rigs live.

I never got mine to sound like Chris Squier's bass. One key was it needed to be more distorted than I was was using at the time.

One thing I want to point out was back in the 70's, just about every bass you saw was a Fender Precision. Also all new basses, even Ricks, came with flatwounds. So the roundwound tone became associated partly with Ricks, and that was also a revolution of sorts, since even when I started playing bass wasn't as up front as it is today. You could get a bright tone from a P bass, but that wasn't as common as using a Rick for that tone, and playing with a pick. So this is why you saw so many prog bassist playing Ricks. They didn't want the "Fender Bass" tone. The fact that the Jazz bass is now far more popular is part of that trend towards a brighter tone.

Now I eventually changed my Ricks so much that they didn't really sound like Ricks any more. They still had that vibe, but got more low end etc. I think the design works well with the flats they came with, but can be a bit thin with roundwounds. At least with the older pickups.

Having said that, I'm restoring my Ricks to stock condition since they are not my main basses anymore, so I don't need them to do everything, just what they do best.

But they can be used or all kinds of music, as long as you don't need them to sound exactly like another bass.

[12Bass]

... I think the design works well with the flats they came with, but can be a bit thin with roundwounds. At least with the older pickups.

Once the bass-cut capacitor was removed (installed a switch), my 1982 4001 became much thicker sounding; it has more balls than all of my other basses (including Rapture 5 with Q-tuner)! I think that the neutering of the bridge pickup is a major reason why many think Rickenbackers sound thin. Not sure how it compares with earlier/later models.

Used it for a while in a bluesy rock project, and one traditionalist said it soundest almost as good as a Fender...

[David Schwab]

Once the bass-cut capacitor was removed (installed a switch), my 1982 4001 became much thicker sounding; it has more balls than all of my other basses (including Rapture 5 with Q-tuner)! I think that the neutering of the bridge pickup is a major reason why many think Rickenbackers sound thin. Not sure how it compares with earlier/later models.

Used it for a while in a bluesy rock project, and one traditionalist said it soundest almost as good as a Fender...

Yeah, that's true. The bridge pickup was useless soloed. I did that mod back in the 70's before I had replaced the pickups, and it got a nice fat tone. But then it didn't get the familiar Rick tone, so I wired up the treble tone control to mix the lows back in.

Also the later neck pickups were fuller sounding than the toasters.