My 4001C64 report

admin · Post by **admin** » Sat May 17, 2003 6:44 am

Ed: I am not sure why they didn't post either. Please try again it you didn't include everything in this post. I am interested in your comments with regard to tonality.

gpatt5762 · Post by **gpatt5762** » Sat May 17, 2003 6:11 pm

Tonight I played at Church with my C64 (SansAmp to FOH + Hard-wire In-Ears), and heard two guys in the band tell me, totally spontaneously, that my bass sounded better than any other guitar I have ever played with them. And I was in fact registering slightly softer signal strength with the C. Our percussionist said the notes sounded totally clean compared to the 4003S, which has RS66's, and pickups raised as high as I can safely set them. The 4003S has in fact exhibited pickup rattle since I've had the HS on it- not sure what to do there. The sound tech said it had some nice midrange to it- he seem to like unmitigated low end and cranks the subs accordingly.

All the same, it was such a surprise to hear musicians who could care less about "McCartney Specs" and other Life-And-Death Issues notice the sound quality of this new bass as something particularly pleasing to the ear.

Could this be your concept of "where the rubber meets the roadway"?

Garry

rictified · Post by **rictified** » Mon May 19, 2003 3:42 pm

Now its time for a Magical Mystery Tour bass. And while I'm at it, how about a replica stock 70's 4001 with the same neck specs but with the new truss rod configuration?

simer4001 · Post by **simer4001** » Fri May 30, 2003 12:45 pm

Bob,

I may be wrong, but I think John Hall had posted somewhere that McCartney copyrighted that LSD induced aerosal artwork on the MMT bass. Therefore no reproduction.

johnhall · Post by **johnhall** » Fri May 30, 2003 6:34 pm

I didn't post that but it wouldn't surprise me and I know I wouldn't do it without permission. That's not just a legal issue but also one of courtesy.

leftybass · Post by **leftybass** » Sat May 31, 2003 4:08 am

John Hall: Is there truth in the statement that no left-handed C64's or C64S basses are being made as of yet?? Any ETA on production if this is true??

johnhall · Post by **johnhall** » Sat May 31, 2003 8:06 am

Lefties have been produced and delivered. There are still a number of outstanding orders for these, however, as we had to replace some broken tooling. (It was machined from phenolic plastic which warped and broke in some spots. We replaced it with solid aircraft aluminum and are continuing to build all new fixtures in aluminum for this reason.)

leftybass · Post by **leftybass** » Sat May 31, 2003 9:31 am

Thanks muchly, JH. I'll be lookin out for one to try, most definitely.

dougl · Post by **dougl** » Sat May 31, 2003 4:20 pm

I would so appreciate it if any 4001C64 owners could read my post and look at the pictures in the bass section ("My New 4001C64 - Questions, please").

rictified · Post by **rictified** » Mon Jun 09, 2003 3:53 am

Aw that's too bad, I wanted a LSD induced aerosol spray painted McCartney bass with a normal headstock.

eddied · Post by **eddied** » Sun Jun 29, 2003 4:47 am

Now that I have had my C64 for a couple of months, I must tell my story again. From the factory, the Rick strings causes significant buzzing everywhere and I couldn't set the action low enough for my playing. After two weeks, I bought Thomastik's and the E string buzzed no matter what. I let it sit for a week or two, still no dice. I then put on a set of D'Adarrio chromes (flats) and they did the trick. Action low, no buzzing. After a month or so of this combo, I spent another $50 for Pyramids, which I should have done in the first place. They are THE PERFECT STRING for the C64 (IMO). Probably can't get any better for the MCCartney sound. However, as I have stated previously, THIS version of the Horseshoe is nothing like the V63 and the tone, balls and output leaves lots to be desired!!!! It sounds too much like a weak 70's stock treble pickup and I'm still disappointed in the lack of tone I can achieve playing live. Sorry, to upset anyone (J.H.) but the V63 horshoe should have been supplied with the C64. For today's live playing purposes, it is at least %50 more efficient for CUTTING THROUGH THE MIX.
Can I do anything to replicate the desired V63 specs to this weaker C64 horshoe? Buyer beware note: Expect a good month or so for the C64 neck to set in before trying different string combo's.

wints · Post by **wints** » Sun Jun 29, 2003 8:29 am

Ed, it seems your stuck in between wanting a bass that is as close to an original 64 in spec and in aesthetics, but wanting a sound from a different era of Ric basses. The two are really not compatible. If you,ve got used to later hotter Ric pick ups, a horseshoe wound @7.4 is going to sound weak. The timbre of the original combination is based more on subtlety than power. You could drop a V horseshoe into the C, but then you,ve compromised the original point of the C series. Have you then got a C/V....or a V/C?

gpatt5762 · Post by **gpatt5762** » Sun Jun 29, 2003 11:31 am

One should bear in mind that, headstock issues aside, when you hold a C64 in your hands, you are holding a 4001CS in disguise,
that this is likely what Entwistle, Donovan, the guy in the Kinks (I know, I know, Pete Quaife), and Chris Squire got, materially speaking, for a Rickenbacker bass.

Try digesting that one, guys.

Garry

paul_yan · Post by **paul_yan** » Sun Jun 29, 2003 12:13 pm

Forgive my ignorance, is there a .0047 mfd low-cut cap in line with the C64 and C64s treble pickups?
If yes, maybe Ed can replace it with a straight wire and make the pickup fatter and louder?

As far as I know, the V63 treble pickup doesn't have the cap and thus is hotter...

paul_yan · Post by **paul_yan** » Sun Jun 29, 2003 12:22 pm

Ed,
By "CUTTING THROUGH THE MIX", did you mean doing it with low and mid low frequencies, which the V63 seems to be better at?
How about removing the cap (if there is one) and make the C64 horeseshoe a V63?