Rare Kay TV-1 Bass

MollyKay · #1 01-20-2008, 09:57 AM

For all you Kay bass lover’s out there…here is a rare one…this is a 1953 Kay TV-1 bass. This bass was painted sparkly gold at the Kay factory…on purpose. We are currently stripping and refinishing this bass because the finish had become so worn…it truly is an ugly duckling that wants to be a swan…this bass is one of THOSE Kay basses with awesome tone. I wanted to share this event because the TV models are so rare…and again just in case it causes a commotion…this is our hobby…restoring vintage American made plywood basses.

Okay with that out of the way…here is the good stuff…though this bass was ugly, it has awesome tone and in very good condition. Hiding under all that paint are some interesting observations. This bass was painted at the Kay factory which started with a white ground coat, to a grey primer, a gold sparkly paint and then finished with a clear coat. At some point in the life of the bass it was coated with a brown stain to cut the brightness of the gold paint. As we stripped the bass you could see all of these layers, not to mention the gold paint has begun to get a greenish almost “Verdi” patina to it…down right ugly.

Now that the bass has been stripped clean there are some other curious findings…there were factory repairs (patch work) under the paint. This bass probably had some “issues” and did not make the grade for a lacquer finish so it was set a side for the gold paint “cover up” job. There are two other non-Kay findings, the first is the top is not spruce, it is maple. The front and back do not show signs of any flamed maple wood. The grain is much more similar to our vintage Epiphone B-1 or American Standard, more plain and plywood looking wood. The next REALLY cool thing is the back is significantly more “bellied” then any of our other Kay basses…I don’t know what Kay mold they used, but this back it different. As we (I say that like I get my hands dirty…I don’t) were stripping the bass I could see the pronounced bulge (not a sound post bulge, but a bigger, deep curve at the C bouts) on the back. I kept looking at it thinking this is strange. Once the bass was completely stripped and dry I look a flexible drafting tool and molded it to the TV bass and then laid it against my 1944 Kay bass and wow…this bass has a good 1/2 to 3/4” inch deeper bulge on the back…really cool. This may also explain the deep tone of this bass. There is a larger then normal cavity for the sound to resonate. Again this bass sounds and looks more like our Epiphone bass.

The bass is currently stripped clean and in the prep stage for the first ground coat of Waterlox (or maybe Watco…not sure yet). This bass is going to be a dark, flat brown with a hint of yellow/orange and will get the traditional Kay black double pin stripe. We are excited to get some color on this bass just so we can see the grain more clearly. This Kay bass is unlike any we have restored in the past…it is very cool with a real story to tell. I’ll post a few pictures of where we currently are and will post more as progress develops.

I know this isn’t a three hundred year old Italian bass with a long pedigree but the same passion and research can be applied to an American plywood bass…hope you enjoy my findings…we are excited about this bass.

MollyKay · #2 01-20-2008, 09:59 AM

...this is messy, messy work!

Mr.Phil · #3 01-20-2008, 03:59 PM

I suppose its up to you, but since you're into restoring and all... why not restore it to the original condition, right down to gold sparkle finish? I think it'd be a neat piece of Americana.

MollyKay · #4 01-20-2008, 04:41 PM

The decision to go dark brown was thought about a long time. We even consulted Roger Stowers the very helpful Kay bass expert. In the end it was decided to go with a dark brown because the gold paint really does not add to the appeal or the tone of the bass (paint is so thick and sound damping). A hand rubbed oil varnish will give this bass more sound (we hope) and more appeal for the next 50 years. If this was a rockabilly bass…gold sparkle finish would be the cats meow. Being in our mid-life so to speak…our rockabilly, rock and roll days are behind us. About the only thing “rocking” in the future might be a rocking chair. :smug...but thanks for asking!

Mr.Phil · #5 01-20-2008, 04:52 PM

Well, I wasn't thinking rockabilly per se, as thats not really my bag. I was thinking more from an American History standpoint. You know, trends in pop culture, etc... However, I suppose it does make more sense to have a more playable bass than a more accurate to period one. If only those things went hand in hand. Your answer makes sense enough to me tho. Good luck with the restoration.

Jason Sypher · #6 01-20-2008, 04:55 PM

Do you have any photos from before you started refinishing. I would love to see it. Thanks. I think it's great you are taking these basses on and restoring them. Some day this will be a 300 year old bass with pedigree....Kay.

Johnny Atomic · #7 01-20-2008, 08:24 PM

I'm sorry, but it makes me absolutely ill to see somebody strip that bass. I would have LOVED to had that the way it was, now I wouldn't want it at any price.

Johnny

Junkyard Slug · #8 01-21-2008, 01:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Atomic

I'm sorry, but it makes me absolutely ill to see somebody strip that bass. I would have LOVED to had that the way it was, now I wouldn't want it at any price.

Johnny

X2

Sorry, I am with Johnny on this one

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr.Phil

. . . Good luck with the restoration.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jason Sypher

. . .I think it's great you are taking these basses on and restoring them. . .

I think Restoration might be the wrong choice of verbage here. I would also like to see a before photo if you have one.

JYS

ctregan · #9 01-21-2008, 04:07 AM

With out the gold paint it is no longer a TV-1. Save the what is left of the paint for a possible color match.

ArenW · #10 01-21-2008, 04:58 AM

I have one just like it. Somewhere along the line someone decided to strip mine as well but didn't finish the job. Mine still has the gold paint on the scroll, heel and around the inside edges of the F-holes. A pity if you ask me, but it really does sound great for a Kay. I opted to leave whatever paint wasn't stripped just as a record of what it was.

On a side note, my TV-1 has the unusually swelled back as well but all of the wood is a very curly maple. I'm really surprised that it was chosen at the factory for the TV line, as there are no factory repairs and the wood is really beautiful.

Good luck with the project.

MollyKay · #11 01-21-2008, 05:06 AM

These are our before pictures...I have no pictures of the bass from new.

All opinions are respected and appreciated...thanks for your honesty.

mpoppitt · #12 01-21-2008, 05:55 AM

I'm also with Johnny on this one. This bass was something special, even if it was 'ugly'. Now it's just another re-fin Kay.

The only thing I might have done is try to get the dark stain on top off to get at the original gold underneath (if thats even possible). Either way I thought it was cooler looking before...

I'm always of the opinion that if the original finish is all still there, no matter how beat, it should be left alone. It's only original once...

Jason Sypher · #13 01-21-2008, 05:59 AM

It doesn't exactly look gold now does it? I was thinking it would look more like that neck heel shot from above but it just looks like a dirty Kay. I would love to see how it looked new.

NUTT · #14 01-21-2008, 07:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MollyKay

All opinions are respected and appreciated...thanks for your honesty.

Personally, I like Crocs. They are extremely comfortable. I'm on my 3rd pair now. I wore one pair out walking in them, a second pair is relegated to "garage duty" as they are covered in oil, grease & chain lube, and my third pair is my current pair and are nicely broken in.

Oh wait.... the bass.

I dig it and, like Mr. Phil, would love to see if refinished into original condition with gold paint. I'm wondering if it doesn't have some flaws in the wood, similar to electric basses that get paint. The one's that are finished in a transparent/sunburst color generally have the nicest grain & the one's that are painted don't. Of course if you want a good sounding bass then the paint might inhibit that.

Regardless of what you do you have a nice piece of history. Document everything and if/when you sell it find a Kay collector who will refin it back to original spec.

Pete G · #15 01-21-2008, 11:08 AM

AFAIAC, the owner of an instrument can do with it what he or (and?) she pleases.

Molly and her husband want this thing to sound great. That appears to rule out a true "restoration." They didn't have much to start with it, and it appears they're turning it into an exceptional playing instrument for a Kay.

More power to them.

Anyone who wants to restore the gold paint on a bass that never should have been painted gold to start with can, of course, go out and get one and do it himself. I'd applaud that too, if you did it.

In the meantime, I applaud Molly for what she's doing, which is also good.

MingusAmongUs · #16 01-21-2008, 11:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pete G

AFAIAC, the owner of an instrument can do with it what he or (and?) she pleases.

Molly and her husband want this thing to sound great. That appears to rule out a true "restoration." They didn't have much to start with it, and it appears they're turning it into an exceptional playing instrument for a Kay.

More power to them.

Anyone who wants to restore the gold paint on a bass that never should have been painted gold to start with can, of course, go out and get one and do it himself. I'd applaud that too, if you did it.

In the meantime, I applaud Molly for what she's doing, which is also good.

+1
From the pics it doesn't look like there wasn't much gold left anyway, and we know that Molly's plan for the bass is bluegrass - which is primarily acoustic. So you want to get the bass sounding it's best and paint is only going to hinder the sound. As she mentioned, the paint would only be a good idea for a rockabilly player who is typically going to plug in. So I too approve of the strip decision.

A side note:
It's interesting to me that you mention the bigger bulge and that this may contribute to a bigger sound. It makes sense to me. But it's worth pointing out that Epiphones, as you know MollyKay, tend to have a lot of boom too, in spite of the fact that they are quite a bit narrower in profile than your average bass (at least mine is). So it's really voodoo to me what makes the sound.

Gufenov · #17 01-21-2008, 12:16 PM

Does anyone else see the irony in the rockabilly guys wanting to restore the gold-sparkle finish to its original state? How many times have they been criticized for painting flames on an "original" finish?

drurb · #18 01-21-2008, 12:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gufenov

Does anyone else see the irony in the rockabilly guys wanting to restore the gold-sparkle finish to its original state? How many times have they been criticized for painting flames on an "original" finish?

Sure, but those "original finishes" are typically not rare versions of a given DB. I'm never likely to have flames on my bass.

Johnny Atomic · #19 01-21-2008, 12:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gufenov

Does anyone else see the irony in the rockabilly guys wanting to restore the gold-sparkle finish to its original state? How many times have they been criticized for painting flames on an "original" finish?

I don't want it "restored", I want stuff like that LEFT ALONE.

I've never, nor will I ever paint flames on a vintage bass w/ original finish. I'll never refinish any worn vintage instrument that has one square inch of original finish in any way. If some numb nutz had already started stripping it or totally screwed up the finish that's another matter.

I made my living selling vintage instruments for quite a few years and learned you never ever ever strip an original finish instrument no matter how bad you think it looks. This is especially true of super rare stuff. If that was a 50's strat a $50,000 instrument, was turned into a $5,000 instrument.

I look at it like if you own a rare vintage instrument, you are it's care taker as much as you are it's owner. You owe it to future generations to preserve this piece of americana.

And I do understand, that they own the thing, they can throw it off a bridge if they want to. But that doesn't mean when someone CAN do something, they SHOULD.

I'd never heard of a tv-1 before this thread, but now I want to own an original finish tv-1.

But yes, I did paint flames on my brand new blond swingmaster.

It's a player grade new instrument, not a historical object.

Johnny

MingusAmongUs · #20 01-21-2008, 12:57 PM

This kind of brings up a sore point for me, which is the whole idea of "collecting." Instruments were meant to be played, not looked at through museum glass, and as a musician, it pains me to think that somebody would put more value in an instrument because it's in its original state, regardless of how it plays or sounds. It's a fine line I know, but I think many musicians understand or share this POV. Collectors have made fortunes by creating value where there was none, and at the same time putting many instruments out of reach from the actual musicians who could be playing them, and in turn taking away from others the pleasure of hearing them played.... alas, poor Urich!

Thanks, MK for remembering what this instrument was made for -- to make boom boom.