Good one, Bert. That was a photoshopped BBR-hybrid you posted on the "My Dream Rick" thread.berth wrote:Maybe it was this postingadmin wrote:I would love to know more about who came up with the idea.
Who says dreams can't become realities?
Moderators: rickenbrother, ajish4
Good one, Bert. That was a photoshopped BBR-hybrid you posted on the "My Dream Rick" thread.berth wrote:Maybe it was this postingadmin wrote:I would love to know more about who came up with the idea.
+1!marc61 wrote:It's an awesome looking bass...If only...
No one.libratune wrote:Who says dreams can't become realities?
+10. Dislike that reverse headstock.nattiep wrote:I like the color but I was never fond or the headstock. That's what ruins it for me.
Yeah, remember there's a certain 4001v63 FG calling your name, too ...s4001 wrote:Two piece neck, bet it's thin....
damn RAS.
Last time I checked, Paul McCartney's bass was not (nor had it ever been) Jetglo, Midnight Blue, Satin Jetglo, or this color. I mean...Its still a beautiful bass and all, but isn't it similar to, say... a Chris Squire bass in Ruby, a Pete Townsend in Blue Boy, or a Susana Hoffs in Mapleglo? I look at it and I'm confused! And the C64S features body horns that are rounded to represent a butcher's overzealous sanding job, so I think it's especially confusing when one gets a beautiful finish like this."Since the time he obtained his Bass in 1965, Paul McCartney’s original Rickenbacker 4001S bass (actually made in 1964) has “evolved” through Numerous modifications. Using the 4001C64 starting point, the 4001C64S fast forwards to incorporate these changes to replicate his Bass as it finally exists today. Most evident is the reshaped body, zero-fret Fingerboard, pickup type, and tailpiece detail. A satin sealer-only finish helps protect The natural Maple body and neck, as well as the Rosewood fingerboard."