Question for all you 4001 C64S owners

[bugman]

I go back and forth on this and still havent made up my mind.. Since we have this particular bass because of the McCartney connection I'm sure many of you can relate to this. The bass is close but not as close as it could have been regarding the shaving of the horns and the finish.. I've seen a number of these brought to the next level in closeness to the look of McCartneys by Chris Capozza . Even though the bass is altered by Rickenbacker it is technically original. I'm OCD enough to want it to look closer but not sure how that would affect its future resale value. What are your thoughts on this? I'd love to have it done but also dont know about putting more money into an already expensive bass. Between shipping it both ways and the charge for the work it isnt cheap but than again the results by Chris are amazing..

[sloop_john_b]

Agreed, Chris’ McCartney conversions are stunning. In general he does really nice work (no first hand experience though).

Regarding resale, it’s a really good question. My gut feeling is that a converted bass would sell for less than an unconverted one, but there are definitely some hardcore Macca fans out there who may pay a premium. For the most part though, if you’re going to those lengths, it should be for your own satisfaction and not with resale value in mind.

[henry5]

Only my opinion but I absolutely hate what Macca did to his bass. He completely ruined the flowing lines, IMO. However if that’s your bag and you can improve on stock, then go for it.

[rickenbrother]

Only my opinion but I absolutely hate what Macca did to his bass. He completely ruined the flowing lines.

I agree...then there's also the horrible (IMHO) paint job over what was a beautiful Fireglo finish.

[henry5]

Only my opinion but I absolutely hate what Macca did to his bass. He completely ruined the flowing lines.

I agree...then there's also the horrible (IMHO) paint job over what was a beautiful Fireglo finish.

Ah, now the earlier psychedelic paintjob I rather like. But that was the first bass I ever recognised the existence of, as a kid.

[rickinroma]

What Macca did to his bass is something that can be questioned, no doubt
At that time it was just an instrument like many others and there was nothing like vintage mania, nostalgy, memorabilia, etc.to respect or that would have discouraged him from modifying such instrument
While introducing an (expensive) instrument that was meant to be an exact copy of what Paul's bass looks like today, I have to say that maybe a wee bit of more attention should have been paid to the actual measures. It is a quite good instrument (although I still believe the V63 is a better instrument in all areas, playability, sound, etc), but the horns (the upper one in particular) are evidently too large/wide/thick compared to Paul's 4001S as it appears today
Was it deliberately made like that in order to avoid rendering the (upper) horn too 'fragile'? I do not think this can be the case
Nevermind