Jeff Rath's 4- to 5-string conversions

[uwe]

As the owner of a real Ric 5-string (4003S/5): No matter what you do (string gauge, pup positioning), the not quite long-scale length of a Ric neck is not made for an authoritative B string. It has real issues keeping up with the other strings and sounds quite different to them too. Plus the lower tension gives it a rubbery feel. What you get is a 4 string with an extra string that sounds deeper, but also very different, no Ric clank there at all.

I'm happy to hear though that my 5er must have gone up in value then. 

[ilan]

As the owner of a real Ric 5-string (4003S/5): No matter what you do (string gauge, pup positioning), the not quite long-scale length of a Ric neck is not made for an authoritative B string.

If I had an S/5 I'd string it with a high C.

[Rob]

If I had an S/5 I'd string it with a high C.

Think I would as well.

[uwe]

Been there, done that.  The result is a weak E string and the C string doesn't do too well either. Those five pole pups are imbalanced. Probably the reason why they gave up on them.

[bobyoung]

He keeps drilling them.

Some like his initiative since RIC doesn't offer 5-string basses. Me, I think many people will be really sorry in the future for what used to be such nice basses. This is going to be like all the vintage Strats drilled and routed for Floyd Rose trems and humbuckers, IMHO.

What's your opinion?

I have always thought there's going to be a glut (well small glut maybe) of converted 5 string Ricks gathering dust in closets in a few years. Besides he put the extra tuner on the wrong side of the headstock. I can't post what I really feel about them but I can say that my feelings do contain a word that is commonly used to describe a meat cutters job.  And yes, he is still drilling them, haha!

[Paul Boyer]

While I'm not a five-string fan, I think Jeff does a fine job and provides a service that few others will. I don't think he butchers the basses at all, and he has a policy of never converting a true relic or collectable. You can see that the only mod to the original chassis is the fifth tuner, placed in between the original D and G tuners. He get's his own bridges made to fit the original tailpiece, or in the case of the 4004 models, he gets aftermarket bridge/tail units that look similar to the originals. He does have to modify the typical Rick tail to accommodate the five-string layout, and he can also do alternate pickup/electronic setups.

[Alanko]

My point still stands that it is a little odd to purchase a new Rick, immediately perform non-reversible mods (regardless of quality of work) and then try and recoup the original cost of the instrument, presumably making a loss on the custom hardware created for the job. And all for an instrument with a design that doesn't lend itself to reproducing a low B especially effectively anyway.

Everybody needs a hobby I suppose. 

[bobyoung]

While I'm not a five-string fan, I think Jeff does a fine job and provides a service that few others will. I don't think he butchers the basses at all, and he has a policy of never converting a true relic or collectable. You can see that the only mod to the original chassis is the fifth tuner, placed in between the original D and G tuners. He get's his own bridges made to fit the original tailpiece, or in the case of the 4004 models, he gets aftermarket bridge/tail units that look similar to the originals. He does have to modify the typical Rick tail to accommodate the five-string layout, and he can also do alternate pickup/electronic setups.

Well today's run of the mill Rick could maybe be tomorrow's collectors item. They're not very attractive with the extra tuner on the wrong side of the headstock and I don't like the way he solicits business either, for ex, just now on another forum in a thread about a Rick bass, out of the clear blue sky saying nothing about the thread content he just posted a picture of a new Rick he bought saying that it's going to be a 5 string soon. I mean he's free to do what he wants with a bass he buys but I mean come on. I just saw a nice old Ruby(?) translucent 4001 bass on ebay but it's got a Schaller bridge on it, I'm sure whoever put that on years ago didn't think he was butchering the bass either. I just replied to his post and wrote Spam, haha!

[Dave W]

Jeff is free to modify as he sees fit, of course, but I have to agree with Bob that you never know what will become collectible. Think of all the 70s Fenders that were considered so substandard in their time that they spawned the whole vintage guitar movement, and look at what they go for today.

I'm also reminded of a local luthier who gouged out the bridge area of a number of early Les Pauls to install heavy bridges for more sustain, back when that was the rage. Wound up costing some owners tens of thousands of dollars when LP values went through the roof. You never can tell.

[ilan]

I'm also reminded of a local luthier who gouged out the bridge area of a number of early Les Pauls to install heavy bridges for more sustain, back when that was the rage. Wound up costing some owners tens of thousands of dollars when LP values went through the roof. You never can tell.

What about the tons of pre-CBS Strats routed for Floyd Rose bridges in the 80's. Thousands were modified, but where are they now? You hardly ever see them. I assume many got new bodies with aged finishes and then sold as all original.

[Alanko]

Or Les Pauls robbed of their PAFs and drilled out for coil tap switches...

One thing we can blame the Internet for is helping create a better league of counterfeiter. It seems that in the '70s, guys like Dick Knight could re-top a '68 Les Paul (or '50s goldtop), refinish it some totally inaccurate burst colour and write a 1959 serial number on the headstock with a Sharpie marker and famous guitarists would pay for the results! Scott Gorham rocked a dodgy conversion burst in the '70s, and Rick Nielsen has sported a couple of dodgy bursts more recently.

Some of those pre-CBS Fenders may now be sporting solid finishes. 

The Chinese fakers also build Les Pauls with horribly incorrect details, and there are hundreds of threads online outlining where they went wrong. I wonder if any Chinese builder has ever had a look at any of them?!?!

I've watched the 'Chinabacker' builders slowly improve their fake 4003 basses. A lot of them started out with the bridge pickup far closer to the bridge (like on old Hondo copies, oddly enough) but a few have slowly moved the pickup closer to the correct position. I saw recently that a UK-based player had a RM1999 copy made up by a Chinese builder, with lost of trial and error thrown in. He basically trained a Chinese plant to make the right thing. You even get fake Chris Squire basses these days!



As for predicting collectability of instruments, J. Mascis, Kurt Cobain et al were using Fender's offsets because they were unloved and cheap to buy back then. Things have changed there! Jack White made previously uncool, unloved catalogue guitars popular... nobody really saw that coming either.

[nofi]

david lindely had something to say about about making odd guitars cool way back in the day.


not great video but you get the point

[nofi]

not complete without this one.

[bobyoung]

Lindley had a couple (same one?) of good rocking drummers in those bands.