Page 1 of 1
4001c64 vs. 4001c64s tailpiece
Posted: Thu Jul 08, 2010 2:45 am
by bbmusic
Okay, help me out with this...
The 4001c64 has the 3-screw tailpiece, and is an accurate reproduction of the bass originally delivered to Macca.
The 4001c64s has the 5-screw tailpiece (right?), and is an accurate reproduction of the same bass as it exists today.
So did he drill new holes in his tailpiece, or swap it out? Was he getting tail lift? What's the story?
Re: 4001c64 vs. 4001c64s tailpiece
Posted: Thu Jul 08, 2010 5:10 am
by weemac
It's a 70s tail that he has on his bass. I believe that the original one cracked (which is rare but not impossible)
eden.
Re: 4001c64 vs. 4001c64s tailpiece
Posted: Thu Jul 08, 2010 5:43 am
by antipodean
I don't think Macca treated that bass with kid gloves....
Re: 4001c64 vs. 4001c64s tailpiece
Posted: Thu Jul 08, 2010 8:57 am
by teeder
IIRC, the bridge is what cracked, which is completely possible. They aren't very beefy. The newer style bridges don't fit in the older tailpieces without modification, so they just changed the whole assembly, IMO.
Re: 4001c64 vs. 4001c64s tailpiece
Posted: Thu Jul 08, 2010 11:40 am
by ken_j
Re: 4001c64 vs. 4001c64s tailpiece
Posted: Thu Jul 08, 2010 1:15 pm
by bbmusic
Thanks Ken! And everybody else who chimed in.
Re: 4001c64 vs. 4001c64s tailpiece
Posted: Thu Jul 08, 2010 1:19 pm
by teeder
I wonder why they "over wound" the new pick-up. That certainly wouldn't match what he had.
Re: 4001c64 vs. 4001c64s tailpiece
Posted: Thu Jul 08, 2010 2:31 pm
by rickaddict
teeder wrote:I wonder why they "over wound" the new pick-up. That certainly wouldn't match what he had.
Maybe so, but I like the results!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R3wA4ZxG ... re=related
Re: 4001c64 vs. 4001c64s tailpiece
Posted: Thu Jul 08, 2010 3:36 pm
by teeder
Yeah, why ask why?
