Page 2 of 4
Posted: Tue May 23, 2006 6:16 am
by admin
Just the ticket for that vintage sound Chris.
Posted: Tue May 23, 2006 10:04 am
by simer4001
Very cool Chris.
Posted: Thu May 25, 2006 6:16 am
by admin
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.
Posted: Thu May 25, 2006 7:17 am
by simer4001
It plays the same to me Peter. I think it was probably an aesthetic thing that Paul liked.
Posted: Thu May 25, 2006 10:22 am
by bksmithey
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.
Posted: Thu May 25, 2006 10:41 am
by simer4001
Brian, check out this photo with the MMT paint job stripped away, but with the unshaven horns.

Posted: Thu May 25, 2006 10:51 am
by bksmithey
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.
Posted: Thu May 25, 2006 10:58 am
by simer4001
No worries Brian. I don't remember posting the picture earlier. I need a vacation. It looks good huh?
Posted: Thu May 25, 2006 12:05 pm
by bksmithey
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.
Posted: Thu May 25, 2006 2:23 pm
by admin
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?
Posted: Thu May 25, 2006 2:40 pm
by admin
Hey Chris! Are you going to leave the 4001C64S the way it is or are you going to sand it down?

Posted: Thu May 25, 2006 4:06 pm
by simer4001
I can't believe you suggested that Peter! Don't touch it! If you want one with sanded horns, buy another one.

Posted: Thu May 25, 2006 4:37 pm
by jps
Posted: Thu May 25, 2006 4:44 pm
by simer4001
Jeffrey, you're not helping young man.
Posted: Fri May 26, 2006 2:06 am
by apollo11
Brian,
I think Peter was merely joking about sanding the horns, as noted by his bug-eyed, open-mouthed icon at the end.