The CORRECT McCartney Conversion...

Vintage, Modern, V & C series, Fretless, Signature & Special Editions

Moderators: rickenbrother, ajish4

teeder
Senior Member
Posts: 6396
Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2004 5:00 am

Re: The CORRECT McCartney Conversion...

Post by teeder »

I thought the wood received a coat of sealer at the factory when it went in for the pre-Wings Over America tune-up?
User avatar
ram
Senior Member
Posts: 3743
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 2:55 pm

Re: The CORRECT McCartney Conversion...

Post by ram »

don't forget the missing part of the pickgaurd down by the knobs.... progress pictures please!
The only thing we can perceive are our perceptions - George Berkeley
User avatar
congerz83
Intermediate Member
Posts: 750
Joined: Tue Jul 04, 2006 5:14 am

Re: The CORRECT McCartney Conversion...

Post by congerz83 »

bugman wrote:I had a C64S years ago and am saving to get one again but while I loved the bass, I also wished it was more correct in shape,contour, and finish. I am going to watch this thread and will be interested in how close you get it to look like the present day McCartney RIC. Did you have to send the RIC away or is he located close to you?
Not far at all! Mr. Mark Walker lives about 40 minutes from me in NY's best borough... BROOKLYN!
LET THE WORLD KNOW YOU WANT PAUL TO BRING BACK THE 4001. JOIN OUR FACEBOOK GROUP!! http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=147641915268984
User avatar
congerz83
Intermediate Member
Posts: 750
Joined: Tue Jul 04, 2006 5:14 am

Re: The CORRECT McCartney Conversion...

Post by congerz83 »

aceonbass wrote:One detail impossible to replicate will be the end of the fretboard's location relative to the upper and lower cutaways. RIC appears to have lengthened and moved the neck blank further forward to allow greater access to the higher frets. Since the scale length hasn't changed, this means the tailpiece is also slightly further forward. The pickguard, still resting up against the end of the fretboard, is now much closer to the cutaways. I personally don't care for the way this looks. As an aside, this would have been a good time to add a 21st fret, since the guard would have moved back closer to it's original position relative to the cutaways.
Very funny you mentioned that... I noticed that myself the other day...
LET THE WORLD KNOW YOU WANT PAUL TO BRING BACK THE 4001. JOIN OUR FACEBOOK GROUP!! http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=147641915268984
User avatar
congerz83
Intermediate Member
Posts: 750
Joined: Tue Jul 04, 2006 5:14 am

Re: The CORRECT McCartney Conversion...

Post by congerz83 »

For strings, I just bought a set of Pyramid Flats. Your thoughts?
LET THE WORLD KNOW YOU WANT PAUL TO BRING BACK THE 4001. JOIN OUR FACEBOOK GROUP!! http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=147641915268984
User avatar
ilan
RRF Consultant
Posts: 2903
Joined: Thu Jun 13, 2002 7:00 pm

Re: The CORRECT McCartney Conversion...

Post by ilan »

If they fit the "long, shiny kind" description, you're safe.
"A Noble Instrument Must Be Nobly Regarded"
User avatar
johnhall
RIC
Posts: 3926
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2000 11:17 am
Contact:

Re: The CORRECT McCartney Conversion...

Post by johnhall »

teeder wrote:I thought the wood received a coat of sealer at the factory when it went in for the pre-Wings Over America tune-up?
It did but there wasn't much left of it the last time I saw it.
User avatar
iamthebassman
Veteran RRF member
Posts: 2415
Joined: Tue May 28, 2002 5:00 am
Contact:

Re: The CORRECT McCartney Conversion...

Post by iamthebassman »

ram wrote:don't forget the missing part of the pickgaurd down by the knobs.... progress pictures please!
I thought that broken pickguard was replaced years ago.
"Top 10 Best Bass Players" Austin Music Poll 2014, 2013, 2012, 2011, 2010
User avatar
deaconblues
RRF Consultant
Posts: 2390
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 5:14 pm

Re: The CORRECT McCartney Conversion...

Post by deaconblues »

I think this is a great project. Good luck!

It's funny, a member here was once tarred and feathered for questioning why the shape of the c64 was so different from the original. My, how times have changed...
User avatar
iamthebassman
Veteran RRF member
Posts: 2415
Joined: Tue May 28, 2002 5:00 am
Contact:

Re: The CORRECT McCartney Conversion...

Post by iamthebassman »

congerz83 wrote:For strings, I just bought a set of Pyramid Flats. Your thoughts?
I know you're not asking me but I'll tell ya anyway, I used Pyramids for a few years on my Hofner and they were OK, tried them on my 4001S and was not happy, too dull and floppy.
For several years now I've used LaBellas on the Hofner and GHS Precision Flatwounds on the 4001S.
"Top 10 Best Bass Players" Austin Music Poll 2014, 2013, 2012, 2011, 2010
User avatar
congerz83
Intermediate Member
Posts: 750
Joined: Tue Jul 04, 2006 5:14 am

Re: The CORRECT McCartney Conversion...

Post by congerz83 »

iamthebassman wrote:
ram wrote:don't forget the missing part of the pickgaurd down by the knobs.... progress pictures please!
I thought that broken pickguard was replaced years ago.
From what I understand, you're correct... Perhaps during the Pre-WOA RIC "tune-up"
LET THE WORLD KNOW YOU WANT PAUL TO BRING BACK THE 4001. JOIN OUR FACEBOOK GROUP!! http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=147641915268984
User avatar
congerz83
Intermediate Member
Posts: 750
Joined: Tue Jul 04, 2006 5:14 am

Re: The CORRECT McCartney Conversion...

Post by congerz83 »

deaconblues wrote:I think this is a great project. Good luck!

It's funny, a member here was once tarred and feathered for questioning why the shape of the c64 was so different from the original. My, how times have changed...
I was very careful how I worded the beginning of this thread for the same reason. Some people shiver at what sounds like critism of the company, others get angry.

Let the record show that I mean NO disrespect to anyone with this project. It's something I've wanted to do for years.
LET THE WORLD KNOW YOU WANT PAUL TO BRING BACK THE 4001. JOIN OUR FACEBOOK GROUP!! http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=147641915268984
User avatar
congerz83
Intermediate Member
Posts: 750
Joined: Tue Jul 04, 2006 5:14 am

Re: The CORRECT McCartney Conversion...

Post by congerz83 »

iamthebassman wrote:
congerz83 wrote:For strings, I just bought a set of Pyramid Flats. Your thoughts?
I know you're not asking me but I'll tell ya anyway, I used Pyramids for a few years on my Hofner and they were OK, tried them on my 4001S and was not happy, too dull and floppy.
For several years now I've used LaBellas on the Hofner and GHS Precision Flatwounds on the 4001S.
Unreal! After talking about them for YEARS, finally someone else admits to using the GHS Precision Flats... Been using them from the beginning. I want to try something with lower string tension though. The GHS's have created a "just enough to be annoying" tail-lift on my C64. I understand though that my C64S has a 5-screw bridge, so THAT bass won't be an issue... Just want to try something different.
LET THE WORLD KNOW YOU WANT PAUL TO BRING BACK THE 4001. JOIN OUR FACEBOOK GROUP!! http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=147641915268984
User avatar
sloop_john_b
Rick-a-holic
Posts: 13843
Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2005 6:00 am

Re: The CORRECT McCartney Conversion...

Post by sloop_john_b »

I too like the GHS Precision Flats!
eddied
Veteran RRF member
Posts: 218
Joined: Tue May 01, 2001 2:41 am
Contact:

Re: The CORRECT McCartney Conversion...

Post by eddied »

Thought I'd show eveyone my pride and joy. It is an actual picture taken by me @ The Boston Garden during the Wings Across America Tour. A really nice stage roadie allowed me to get up close and take a picture of the HOLY GRAIL Paul's 4001S. I will never forget the night. Check it out.
Boston garden 76.jpg
Post Reply

Return to “Rickenbacker Basses: by Joey Vasco & Tony Cabibe”