Opinions on This C64S

admin · Post by **admin** » Tue May 23, 2006 6:16 am

Just the ticket for that vintage sound Chris.

simer4001 · Post by **simer4001** » Tue May 23, 2006 10:04 am

Very cool Chris.

admin · Post by **admin** » Thu May 25, 2006 6:16 am

For those with the 4001C64S, does the sanded horn make it any more comfortable to play than the traditional 4001? One wonders what prompted the sanding to begin with.

simer4001 · Post by **simer4001** » Thu May 25, 2006 7:17 am

It plays the same to me Peter. I think it was probably an aesthetic thing that Paul liked.

bksmithey · Post by **bksmithey** » Thu May 25, 2006 10:22 am

I always thought it was just a result of aggressive measures taken when removing the psychedelic paint job, and not necessarily done with any intent to reshape the horns.

simer4001 · Post by **simer4001** » Thu May 25, 2006 10:41 am

Brian, check out this photo with the MMT paint job stripped away, but with the unshaven horns.

bksmithey · Post by **bksmithey** » Thu May 25, 2006 10:51 am

Guess my brain was not fully engaged when you posted that picture earlier, I completely missed the point. Thanks Brian, very interesting, first time I've seen Paul's bass with the paint stripped but horns still cresting.

simer4001 · Post by **simer4001** » Thu May 25, 2006 10:58 am

No worries Brian. I don't remember posting the picture earlier. I need a vacation. It looks good huh?

bksmithey · Post by **bksmithey** » Thu May 25, 2006 12:05 pm

Sure does. Now it gets back to Peter's question, I wonder what got into him to sand it more and smooth out those horns. Any ideas on how long it was in that intermediate state (sanded w/ cresting horns)? It was bare wood at the time, correct? That would tend to collect dirt/sweat/whatever, maybe the sanding that took down the horns was just a general cleaning attempt.

admin · Post by **admin** » Thu May 25, 2006 2:23 pm

Bk: I think your hypothesis is a reasonable one. I can only speak to the feel of a 4003, but the upper horn has never bothered me. So I cannot see any playing advantage to shaving it down. Brian seems to agree that there is no appreciable difference, from the comfort point of view between a 4001 and a the 4001C64S.

So outside of the coolness factor, what else could have motivated Paul to sand the upper horn? Did he simply take it too far when trying to remove the fireglo finish? Is this the work of someone else? With all the interviews that have been conducted I have always found it unbelievable that more questions have not been asked about McCartney's basses?

admin · Post by **admin** » Thu May 25, 2006 2:40 pm

Hey Chris! Are you going to leave the 4001C64S the way it is or are you going to sand it down?

simer4001 · Post by **simer4001** » Thu May 25, 2006 4:06 pm

I can't believe you suggested that Peter! Don't touch it! If you want one with sanded horns, buy another one.

jps · Post by **jps** » Thu May 25, 2006 4:37 pm

Sand it!

simer4001 · Post by **simer4001** » Thu May 25, 2006 4:44 pm

Jeffrey, you're not helping young man.

apollo11 · Post by **apollo11** » Fri May 26, 2006 2:06 am

Brian,
I think Peter was merely joking about sanding the horns, as noted by his bug-eyed, open-mouthed icon at the end.