4005 embarrassment

jps · Post by **jps** » Wed Jun 22, 2005 2:14 am

If Chris gets shot, I get the 4005s!

charlyg · Post by **charlyg** » Wed Jun 22, 2005 2:16 am

Jeffrey,I think there is a 12 step program that may help you with your 4005 addiction!

jps · Post by **jps** » Wed Jun 22, 2005 2:22 am

Drool on this!

charlyg · Post by **charlyg** » Wed Jun 22, 2005 2:31 am

That's just wrong! On so many levels!

edski · Post by **edski** » Wed Jun 22, 2005 2:49 am

One man's wrong is another man's right. Or is it left?

Very nice 4005 collections...

basse · Post by **basse** » Wed Jun 22, 2005 3:07 am

Actually, I took my '66 into the local music store and just tried a whole bunch of different strings. I found 2 different sets that fit into the e slot fairly easily. One was a set of Rotosounds and unfortunately I forget what the other one was. Since strings are all wound in different ways with different diameters Ill bet you can find a set that fits without making the slot wider.

admin · Post by **admin** » Wed Jun 22, 2005 3:26 am

Chris: Which Model 4005 do you prefer to play and why?

dswp · Post by **dswp** » Wed Jun 22, 2005 9:11 am

Chris;

Is the binding missing from your WB's sound hole? Is that the way it came?

jps · Post by **jps** » Wed Jun 22, 2005 10:54 am

Yes, that is the way they were/are. It seems the standard 4005 with the checker binding on the back gets the soundhole binding and the double bound ones do not. Perhaps there is a quota on how much binding can go on one!

beatlefan · Post by **beatlefan** » Wed Jun 22, 2005 3:40 pm

Peter -

I REALLY like playing the standard one, with the setup that Jeff Scott put on it....it plays just awesome...nice low action with NO buzzing....
I have Pyramid flats on it , 45-105's

The WB has Fender rounds on it...I like 'em both, but the WB needs a few more little adjustments to be a NICE player like the standard....

Love the sound of both....

Yep, Dave...It took me a while to realize about the sound hole....while looking at Jeff's, I originally thought something was wrong with it, not being bound....lol

dswp · Post by **dswp** » Thu Jun 23, 2005 11:11 am

Here's the 4005

beatlefan · Post by **beatlefan** » Thu Jun 23, 2005 3:02 pm

Sweeeet!!

Have any other pics of it to share?

ken_swearingen · Post by **ken_swearingen** » Thu Jun 23, 2005 9:39 pm

Dave let me guess the line up[67,4005][68,69,4001][72,4001][86,shadow][80s 4003].The 68,69 throws me off cause it has large headstock but looks like grover tuners thats why i said 69.the 72 could also be an early 73.

dswp · Post by **dswp** » Fri Jun 24, 2005 5:54 am

VERY close Ken

67 4005FG 68 4001JG 72 4001JG

86 SD bass 74 4001BG (grovers)

bassduke49 · Post by **bassduke49** » Fri Jun 24, 2005 7:00 am

Classics, all. So of the 50 or 60 Shadows ever made, we have, what, 200 or so in this group?

;^)