• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

I will be getting Peavey T40 soon

#21
Baird6869 said:
Of course your back will be too sore to play with the mutant babies!:crying::D
Click to expand...

that, sir, is why the good lord invented four inch straps. ;)

seriously though, i do agree only someone with herculean back strength should keep a t-40 on for an entire 3 or more hour gig.

mostly, i've been using mine for practice and to record things. the t-40 is a great bass to have around for recording purposes if you're too lazy to get all your other basses to behave. in that capacity the t-40 owns every other passive bass i can think of, AND their mothers!
 
#22
a_ribbon said:
that, sir, is why the good lord invented four inch straps. ;)
Click to expand...
I have a 4" Sadowsky neoprene strap and that damn bass still kills my back!:spit::D


a_ribbon said:
seriously though, i do agree only someone with herculean back strength should keep a t-40 on for an entire 3 or more hour gig.

mostly, i've been using mine for practice and to record things. the t-40 is a great bass to have around for recording purposes if you're too lazy to get all your other basses to behave. in that capacity the t-40 owns every other passive bass i can think of, AND their mothers!
Click to expand...

Completely agree. Mine is on the wall right behind me in my office (luckily I screwed into the stud!) and I LOVE playing it. I am going to use it to record, practice in the basement and likely bring to jam nights.
 
#23
i can't help but think that if the t-40 weighed as much as an average p that it would have been used by a lot more big name "bass stars."

then again i'm kind of glad it wasn't. i probably wouldn't have been able to afford it, then. ;)

though i did read somewhere on here that you can still by the pickups from the dude who designed the bass. i should look into that a bit more... p-40, anyone?
 
#25
i was actually thinking about that earlier... i'd love to get another t-40 and shove a top loader on it so i could put on some flats! i really don't trust the break angle on that bridge for flats and TI's aren't exactly being given away, you know?

i wonder what would fit though?
 
#26
a_ribbon said:
i was actually thinking about that earlier... i'd love to get another t-40 and shove a top loader on it so i could put on some flats! i really don't trust the break angle on that bridge for flats and TI's aren't exactly being given away, you know?

i wonder what would fit though?
Click to expand...

I've been stringing TI's string through on my fretless Traben since I bought it early this year, never been a problem.
 
#29
a_ribbon said:
really? i've never had a bass that didn't have a top loader option, at least, before. i'll give it a try. thanks darky. :)
Click to expand...

No bother dude, I think I strung through with Roto's once too, and remember the first basses were string through only, and had only flats.

I think its just Labellas that shouldn't be trung through, but didn't Jamerson do it with them?
 
#30
i actually have gone out of my way to not buy through body basses up until my t-40. i'm not sure why, though. i think its because one of my old bassists had a *really* ghetto 90s p of some sort and it was a POS into next week and i developed 'tude from there.

and yeah, i think jamerson used labella. :bassist:
 
#32
Baird6869 said:
What about yanking off the monstrosity they call a bridge and replacing it with something lighter? That thing must weigh a ton!
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, that bridge isn't that heavy. It's cast, and is actually hollow at the back, and the saddles are partially hollow. Even the "sustain Block" which sits in a route in the body is pretty small. It's probably around the wieght of a BAII.

No matter what strings Jamerson used, I don't think that his P-bass had a string-thru-body option.
 
#33
your best bet for a lighter T-40, beyond having Chip Todd do the custom lighten-ing thing for you, is to get one of the solid colored basses. I scored a black on maple '79 last week for $270 off ebay last week (shipping brought it up to $315, still a steal for a near-mint black T-40) and it's definitely a little lighter than my natural ash on maple 1980 model. i had heard that the later model solid colored T-40's (blade pickup era) are the lightest though.

interestingly enough, there's a tonal difference between my '79 and '80: the black '79 is a bit brighter (seems more full-range, almost piano like) with less overall warmth and fullness than the natural ash '80, which has more of a P bass like thickness to the low mids and a bit less top end. I'm thinking of having a tech take a look at both basses electronics to make sure everything is working right, though it might be just a difference in the body woods (though i'm not positive the '79 isn't ash...). I'm gonna try some nickel lo-riders instead of the SS (which is what they both have right now) on the '79 and see how that works out.

God bless the T-40, such a great bass.
 
#36
ishouldbeking said:
i had heard that the later model solid colored T-40's (blade pickup era) are the lightest though.

interestingly enough, there's a tonal difference between my '79 and '80: the black '79 is a bit brighter (seems more full-range, almost piano like) with less overall warmth and fullness than the natural ash '80, ... though it might be just a difference in the body woods (though i'm not positive the '79 isn't ash...)...
Click to expand...

The solid color t-40's were poplar (not ash unfortunately), so they should be a bit lighter than the ash natural versions. My white '80 is a touch lighter than my ash '79, but not much. If you can find one of the earliest solid color models, they were made of alder. However, only a few were made before going to poplar, and there's really no way to tell which is which.

Your '79 (the first "full" year of production IIRC) could concievably be alder or poplar and either one could account for the slightly lighter weight and different tones. My white '80 came without electronics, and has darkstars in it, so I never had a chance to do a good tonal comparison

You're probably right about the later model T-40's. I've never had a late model t-40, but I am told that they were slightly more contoured, and were a bit lighter than earlier versions. However I've never heard of an unmodified T-40 of any year that wasn't referred to as "Heavy". For better or worse. "heavy" is part of the T-40 expereience.
 
#37
well the bass was delivered yesterday. i'm very pleased to say the least, the action is low, it's not as heavy as thought, but i really didn't get to play that long because i had to things i had to do before i went to work. i'm very happy with this purchase, i think i got the most bang for my buck. for $300 shipped, i don't think i could have bought another bass shipped of this quality, playability and sound.

:)
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back