A Rickenbacker bass gets outed

Personally I found it slow and whiny (before I gave up). Ric's are quirky instruments and that's what makes them what they are. It is what it is.
 
And if anyone has a vintage Ric they don't want, feel free to ship it to me and I'll be happy to give it a home! 

Ric guitars and basses look great, the styling and finish is a design icon, they sound great and are beautifully and skillfully put together.

But ergonomically, like with Gretsch, they're... let's just call it "unique".

The guy, however, has great points about how poorly Rics are designed and serviced. They have (typically) poor electronics, poor soldering, meh construction (at least QA lacks), lame adjustment methods, and they vary wildly as they're largely still hand-built, I believe. However, for a USA built product, what you get is really what you'd expect from Chinese builds from other companies. I love my Ric, but their value is only in the tone. Compared to all the other basses I own the Rick is the least solid and reliable. But I still love it!!

Rickenbacker guitars/basses are heritage classic instruments.
The designs haven't been updated (much) since the 50s/60s.
That ensures their classic sound/nature... and that's why folks buy them.
 
The flip-side: There have been advancements/improvements made over all those years.
 
The Rick sound is the sum of its construction/components.
If you bring the specs up to more modern standards, the sound would change.
Making changes to "heritage" style instruments is a turn-off to many folks.
ie: Gibson took a lot of flack trying to enhance/improve the Les Paul (another heritage instrument).
It's very much a catch-22... because folks like those classic instruments (warts-and-all) for what they are.
Change it too much... and suddenly you lose that classic appeal.
 
Unlike many instruments, Rickenbacker guitars/basses maintain their value.
I sold my JetGlow 4003 (about a year later) for exactly what I paid for it.
With that kind of demand, you can see why Rickenbacker isn't in a hurry to change it.
 
Sterling Ball (owner of MusicMan) is outspoken about not wanting to be pigeon-holed into solely producing "classic" instruments.  They're trying to innovate with instruments like the Big Al.  While a great instrument, the Big Al's angular body is something many folks don't find aesthetically appealing.  The Neodymium pickups, four-band preamp, active/passive switching, and construction are all stellar.  For better/worse, the classic Stingray is much more popular.
 
 

There's also Paul McCartney... who's Rick bass sound is at the other end of the tonal spectrum.
A 4001 or 4003 with flats sounds nothing like Chris Squire.  

I agree Jim, they hold their value. In fact, I bought mine new in 2002 for $950. I'm sure I could probably get more than that for it now. As far as changing Ric's over the years, they have stayed much the same in overall design, with small changes. I can tell you that quality has overall improved. I owned a 1963, model 330 when I was a teenager and the current 330's are much nicer and better built. Similarly, I find the current 4003's to be equal to or greater in quality to my 2002. They added a push pull knob to the newer models as well, to give an additional treble boost, if that treble tone is your thing.

Paul D. Boyer has written a book on the history of the Rickenbacker Bass which is excellent.

I also happen to be one of those guys that doesn't like the changes that Gibson is making to the Les Paul.

I've never had intonation issues with my Rick. I don't even tune it.