4001C64; What Should One Expect?

grink · Post by **grink** » Wed Oct 06, 2004 4:40 am

That is, in comparison to my rather new 4003. I know there are different pickups, a narrower neck and according to the specs on Ric's site the C64 may be heavier. I'd appreciat your thoughts. (Actually, I'd appreciate you talking me out of doing it!)

henny · Post by **henny** » Wed Oct 06, 2004 5:16 am

C64 heavier than a 4003?

Uhm. I wouldn't really say so.

grink · Post by **grink** » Wed Oct 06, 2004 5:27 am

That's what I thought, Mark. But Ric specs the 4003 at 9 lbs., the C64 at 10. Go figure...

beatlefan · Post by **beatlefan** » Wed Oct 06, 2004 6:00 am

How much does MOJO weigh?....

:^)

rickfan60 · Post by **rickfan60** » Wed Oct 06, 2004 6:58 am

MOJO can neither be seen nor measured, only experienced.

In answer to the original question "4001C64 What should one expect?" I humbly submit "A damn good time!" That is, if it anything like my V63.

jnbass · Post by **jnbass** » Wed Oct 06, 2004 8:45 am

I kinda like the "feel" of the C64 neck, seemed like it was flattened in some places. Or maybe its the ones I've played (and not very well).

Of course there's that headstock issue...

IMHO

grink · Post by **grink** » Wed Oct 06, 2004 12:10 pm

Yeah, I'm thinking the neck may be more to my liking as it's the same width as my Precision. What about the pickups? How do output and tone compare to a 4003?

loendmaestro · Post by **loendmaestro** » Wed Oct 06, 2004 1:35 pm

I played my first C64 about 2 weeks ago at the Bass Emporium in Austin TX at the suggestion of fellow forum member Ronn Roberts.
The horseshoe & toaster are a world apart from the traditional 4003 higains. Nice, rich, mellow booming low ends - really clear & full. I was really, really impressed. Played like butter too - so smooth I thought it was detuned!

I'd have to get a V63 though as I really don't like the headstock on the C64.

jps · Post by **jps** » Wed Oct 06, 2004 3:37 pm

The C64 is heavier because the horseshoe pickup is quite a bit heavier than a hi-gain pickup.

ken_swearingen · Post by **ken_swearingen** » Wed Oct 06, 2004 4:01 pm

i checked out a c64 awhile back it felt great nice slim neck sounded great, i couldnt get used to the headstock,i think its the rickenbacker on the trc that makes it look goofy it curves at the bottem poor stenceling makes it look cheap.

titanic_tony · Post by **titanic_tony** » Wed Oct 06, 2004 4:11 pm

I have also been thinking about a c64 but can't get past that headstock. I've been wondering how the neck on the v63 differed. Is it sorta chunky, like a 4003, or slim, like my 4001?

ken_j · Post by **ken_j** » Wed Oct 06, 2004 4:56 pm

At some point in the mid 90's they bulked up the neck. The early ones were thin like your 4001. They made them thicker later on stating that "that was how they really were" in the early 60's. I am not sure of the year the change was made. My 91 was thin, a friends 98 or 99 was thicker.

johnashfield · Post by **johnashfield** » Wed Oct 06, 2004 5:01 pm

I'd love to get a c64s, well, because since I had 'wings over america' I have wanted that bass. But, since I modified my 4003, I am totally getting the sound I want, so its hard to take the plunge and buy it.

Oh what am I saying! I know that the instant I have the money a c64s somewhere is mine! The horseshoe pup is being replaced with a hi-gain though and the .0047 cap if it is in there will go.