Horseshoe mounting plates-Differences

iamthebassman · Post by **iamthebassman** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 12:08 pm

OK, inspired by Peter's study in Toasters, I thought I'd post a question I've wondered about for a while. This is the horseshoe from my 4001CS:

This is a horseshoe I got from Jim Rhoads a few years back:

The mounting plate is more rounded at the corners than the CS. Why the difference?

wints · Post by **wints** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 12:41 pm

Ronn, the CS actually looks like a real 60's horseshoe surround with the longer taper to the surround...

The originals vary from the shorter version that came on the early RM1999's until about May 64,

Then the longer version that the 60's horseshoe surrounds had up until 68...

henny · Post by **henny** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 1:05 pm

What serials are on the White and Green Monsters, Wints?

Chris's is DC127. They anywhere near?

Also - wasn't the White Monster the very bass used for such BeeGees classics as Saturday Night Fever, Tragedy et al?

bottom4 · Post by **bottom4** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 1:10 pm

Here's the HS on my 85 V63

wints · Post by **wints** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 1:42 pm

Most of the 60's hardware was templated by hand I presume, hence the differences you see with all the early stuff. The new hardware has a quality control that you didn't get 40 years ago!
It seems the early horseshoes on the V's are pretty close in relation to the 60's versions as is Ronn's CS. Later on they are not so accurate visually in regard to the horseshoe taper.

Henny, the green bass is DE and the white DH. The basses of Squire, Entwistle, (who probably had a DB serial number) and Roger Waters whose bass I am investigating at present are all the early short taper versions.
The white bass is the used on all the 60's Bee Gees material and appearances, Massachusetts, Words etc...The 70's white bass with inlays/black trim was the bass you were referring to, used on SNF etc.. It was apparently given to a D.J. in the U.K. I was told.

rickfan60 · Post by **rickfan60** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 3:24 pm

No two vintage surrounds are alike, it seems. I think Wints is right in that they were cut by hand. I have shown this a few times here but this is my '63. I should take some new pics as you guys are probably sick of looking at the old ones.

rickfan60 · Post by **rickfan60** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 3:31 pm

BTW My '63 is celebrating a birthday this month. It was made in March of '63.

beatlefan · Post by **beatlefan** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 4:10 pm

No, Ted.....keep posting 'em!!!

I'll never get tired of seeing you and Wint's stuff.....

ken_swearingen · Post by **ken_swearingen** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 6:30 pm

and of course the same old pictures here,my surround looks like andys white one.

jwr2 · Post by **jwr2** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 7:16 pm

here is a 1968 4001 with the original horseshoe pickup and surround ...

http://www.3dentourage.com/425/68-ric-2.htm

jnbass · Post by **jnbass** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 7:48 pm

paul_yan · Post by **paul_yan** » Tue Mar 22, 2005 4:42 am

The earlier reissue surrounds have sharp corners while the later ones have round corners and probably more tappered rear ends. Take the 4001 CS for example, the early ones are sharper than the later ones.

'91 4001 CS

'99 4001 CS

I personally prefer the earlier ones. They just LOOK SHARP!!!

henny · Post by **henny** » Tue Mar 22, 2005 5:00 am

Me too.

iamthebassman · Post by **iamthebassman** » Tue Mar 22, 2005 5:28 am

Paul, the differences in the surrounds in your CS photos are the same as mine. Is one a correct reissue? Or both?

teeder · Post by **teeder** » Tue Mar 22, 2005 6:15 am

Here's my '93 V63.