Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums
Sign in to follow this  
Bluesy69

3 Strikes Your Out, PRS Blows You Away Gibson

Recommended Posts

So, after a foray to Louisville to play a few PRS guitars, a few Les Pauls of varying ages, a Flying V, some Strats and Teles, it was an entertaining trip! I went to Guitar Center, just because of their variety. I also went to Do Wop Shop and Guitar Emporium as well. Just because I hadn't played some PRS, I played a few lower end ones, a few used ones and a few higher end ones. I didn't play a single one that felt as good as the four Gibsons I own, although a 2004 Les Paul Custom came close, if it didn't have bent bridge posts and a few cracks in the finish around the post holes. Apparently it got dropped or abused fairly hard. The PRS felt like the Fender necks. Most of the tops were pretty and they played alright, not terrible. I didn't nitpick over the finish on them, nor really looked all that close. I buy a guitar for its playability and whether or not I like the feel. I can tell in just a few minutes whether or not I like them. After playing and hearing the PRS, I didn't care for them all that much. They were ok but I didn't feel that they warranted that high of a price tag. My Les Paul Standard was the best guitar I played that day, with a used Fender Telecaster coming in a close second. It was a well put together guitar, setup well and sounded and felt great. They also had a 61 Melody maker and a 64 Strat that were awesome. I didn't get to play them but I did take a look at them. The 89 V was pretty awesome as well and I was tempted but the price tag and the fact that I already have a couple of V's, I didn't buy it.

 

So, for me, PRS didn't make the cut and I probably played 9 or 10 of them. That's my personal opinion and preference and I'm in no way saying anything bad about them. There was one really pretty dark brown colored one, great flame and all but I didn't care for the sound of it that much. So, my opinion is after about 5 hours of playing various guitars, I still like my Gibsons the best, with a couple of Telecasters coming in after those. There was a really pretty Taylor that caught my eye but the store was closing and I didn't get a chance to play it. Had I been seriously shopping and buying, they'd have probably stayed open.

 

So, my opinion is that I don't think PRS blows Gibson away and that's after giving them serious consideration and playing time. I think they're pretty nice guitars but not ones that I will be purchasing. I also won't be trolling the PRS forums but at least now if I'm asked, I can give an honest opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've only just seen this thread. I've not read it all, but the original post made me think that it was the maple top showing. I've jumped to the last page and yes it is. It's not a fault and the shop should have known that (Minimum wage staff again?).

The OP clearly doesn't know Les Pauls and doesn't want to know them.

https://worldguitars.co.uk/shop/prs-guitars-mccarty-594-mccarty-sunburst-with-solid-rosewood-neck-239600/

This is the PRS McCarty. Look at the cutaway. Same as the Gibson, but no moulding. Look how the cap is wider in the cutaway.

My conclusion. Troll, Gibson hater.

 

 

Wow! Did you notice the massive defect on the back of the neck on that PRS!!!!!! Not only is the gloss lower on the back of the neck than the body, its not even dyed/painted the same colour!

Shamefully poor quality control to let that one out. Paul better run out and bring that one back for repair.

 

 

 

Sorry couldn't stop myself LOL

 

 

Johnny

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that Gibson QC could, and frankly should, be improved upon, but surely the tone of the guitar must matter too?

 

The reason I got my 2017 V wasn't because of the brand name or how good the QC was, it was because of the tone. There are any number of brands that offer Vs, but most sound very little like Gibson Vs.

 

If I swapped it out for, say, an ESP/LTD because one strap button wasn't perfectly aligned (I'm a fussy customer too, and I agree that we should have the right to be, as guitars are expensive things), maybe I'd get one with both buttons sitting perfectly flush with the body. But I would get an entirely different tone, wouldn't I?

 

Does that make sense?

 

That said, I've never played a PRS. For all I know, they could sound just like Les Pauls, in which case my argument takes an unceremonious tumble and lands on its two cheeks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have obviously never compared the under-'guard cavities of an old Strat with a newer regular example.

 

 

If it takes an extra 60 seconds longer to eliminate the extra wood then, by definition, it adds time - and therefore cost - to the production process. Surely even you can understand the basics of manufacturing costs?

 

 

They aren't.

 

Washburn. Ever heard of them?

Parker. Ever heard of them?

Steinberger. Ever heard of them?

Hagstrom. Ever heard of them?

Oh, and C.F. Martin & Co. Ever heard of them?

 

All of the above use some form/brand of phenolic resin as a fingerboard material.

 

 

 

When the Les Paul was introduced in 1952 it had a plastic jack-plate, a plastic nut and man-made / acrylic inlays. It's the same today because this is how they should be made.

 

 

Clearly.

 

Pip.

 

C.F. Martin is the only reputable company you mentioned the others are all low end Asian guitar manufacturers, or just dropped down to being an online only company, but even Martin just uses the Richlite on lower end inexpensive models while reserving the rosewood or ebony for the higher priced models.

Now if Gibson did that, fine no problem, but their asking people to purchase a guitar that costs over $2000 and the fretboard is Richlite crap and not real wood.

 

"Even you must realize that !"

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I bought my first Les Paul maybe 16 years ago. I was bargain shopping at a guitar center & happened upon a '98 Standard.

 

They were asking $1,800 for it, which was pretty close to the price of a new one. I planned on spending $550 max that day.

 

A bit of negotiating & I got it for $1300 out the door. Great guitar, I still have it. I broke the neck twice, professionally repaired. Still a great player, sweet tone.

 

I bought my second Les Paul about 10 years ago. A Classic. Gold Top. It was the best sounding Les Paul in the store at that time. To date, the most money I've paid for a guitar. $2K out the door. Then eBay took off.

 

I bought my third Les Paul about a month ago. Off Reverb. 2013 LPJ. Very nice guitar, no regrets. I've yet to find any flaw with any of them.

 

Before I bought the LPJ, I bought a PRS S2 Standard 24. $546 shipped. Nice guitar. & a 2002 McCarty Standard. $1099 shipped.Awesome guitar.

 

Last night I bought a NOS 2016 Les Paul Traditional.

 

ipnxthfw3db3j5440kj7.jpg

 

Should be here by the end of the week. I'll let you know if there are any flaws.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, after a foray to Louisville to play a few PRS guitars, a few Les Pauls of varying ages, a Flying V, some Strats and Teles, it was an entertaining trip! I went to Guitar Center, just because of their variety. I also went to Do Wop Shop and Guitar Emporium as well. Just because I hadn't played some PRS, I played a few lower end ones, a few used ones and a few higher end ones. I didn't play a single one that felt as good as the four Gibsons I own, although a 2004 Les Paul Custom came close, if it didn't have bent bridge posts and a few cracks in the finish around the post holes. Apparently it got dropped or abused fairly hard. The PRS felt like the Fender necks. Most of the tops were pretty and they played alright, not terrible. I didn't nitpick over the finish on them, nor really looked all that close. I buy a guitar for its playability and whether or not I like the feel. I can tell in just a few minutes whether or not I like them. After playing and hearing the PRS, I didn't care for them all that much. They were ok but I didn't feel that they warranted that high of a price tag. My Les Paul Standard was the best guitar I played that day, with a used Fender Telecaster coming in a close second. It was a well put together guitar, setup well and sounded and felt great. They also had a 61 Melody maker and a 64 Strat that were awesome. I didn't get to play them but I did take a look at them. The 89 V was pretty awesome as well and I was tempted but the price tag and the fact that I already have a couple of V's, I didn't buy it.

 

So, for me, PRS didn't make the cut and I probably played 9 or 10 of them. That's my personal opinion and preference and I'm in no way saying anything bad about them. There was one really pretty dark brown colored one, great flame and all but I didn't care for the sound of it that much. So, my opinion is after about 5 hours of playing various guitars, I still like my Gibsons the best, with a couple of Telecasters coming in after those. There was a really pretty Taylor that caught my eye but the store was closing and I didn't get a chance to play it. Had I been seriously shopping and buying, they'd have probably stayed open.

 

So, my opinion is that I don't think PRS blows Gibson away and that's after giving them serious consideration and playing time. I think they're pretty nice guitars but not ones that I will be purchasing. I also won't be trolling the PRS forums but at least now if I'm asked, I can give an honest opinion.

 

Good story and believe it or not I had a similar experience with a PRS custom 22 I owned a few years ago, I ordered it online because it was too costly for the store to inventory it, and the guitar arrived aesthetically perfect but it didn't feel great when I played it and it didn't have that fat woman tone of the 59 LP's that I love, so I eventually sold it and I was going to go back to Les Paul's, which eventually lead to this whole experience that I started the post with.

 

 

However in all your hours of playing PRS guitars I bet you didn't play a PRS McCarty 594, that is a completely different animal, and aside from the usual PRS perfect aesthetics, it feels and plays great with that vintage pattern neck and such low action you can only slide a piece of paper between the strings and fretboard.

 

 

Many have said "it's what the Les Paul should aspire to be" or" what it would be if the Les Paul evolved", and those are various reviewers words on YouTube not mine.

 

So to be clear I'm not comparing any other PRS to a Gibson Les Paul, just the McCarty 594, and having recently played both the Standard and Traditional LP's in the store I can say this " The Les Paul is not anywhere close to being in the same league as the McCarty 594".....it's just not, and unless guitar players here have played both like I have they can't offer an honest opinion.

 

Instead they'll just argue and dismiss it as the ramblings of a so called troll, because they have to justify having spent thousands of dollars on their Les Paul's and never wanting to admit that their is something better out there with better components and a better build quality, so for them to do that they resort to name calling or other false accusations about a person they never met.

 

All so they can glorify their choice of company and guitar instead of actually trying the McCarty 594, or even going on YouTube and trying to find a bad review about the 594...go ahead I challenge anyone of you go and look for a bad review, you won't find one, in fact you'll hear guitar players of all ages sing it's praises....watch the John Mayer on Periscope video, and listen to his praises of the guitar, or will you find some way to disrespect him now and say that his praises aren't genuine ? if you do that, then whose the Troll ?

 

We know the Les Paul has established itself as the worlds most famous and iconic guitar, so of course you can find thousands of videos on Gibson's behalf, but the PRS McCarty 594 is a new model and NO ONE has bashed this guitar, EVERYONE who plays one wants one....don't believe me go to YouTube and see for yourself.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I bought my first Les Paul maybe 10 years ago. I was bargain shopping at a guitar center & happened upon a '98 Standard.

 

They were asking $1,800 for it, which was pretty close to the price of a new one. I planned on spending $550 max that day.

 

A bit of negotiating & I got it for $1300 out the door. Great guitar, I still have it. I broke the neck twice, professionally repaired. Still a great player, sweet tone.

 

I bought my second Les Paul about 5 years ago. A Classic. Gold Top. It was the best sounding Les Paul in the store at that time. To date, the most money I've paid for a guitar. $2K out the door. Then eBay took off.

 

I bought my third Les Paul about a month ago. Off Reverb. 2013 LPJ. Very nice guitar, no regrets. I've yet to find any flaw with any of them.

 

Before I bought the LPJ, I bought a PRS S2 Standard 24. $546 shipped. Nice guitar. & a 2002 McCarty Standard. $1099 shipped.Awesome guitar.

 

Last night I bought a NOS 2016 Les Paul Traditional.

 

ipnxthfw3db3j5440kj7.jpg

 

Should be here by the end of the week. I'll let you know if there are any flaws.

 

Nice story, I see your a bargain hunter, and have bought a few used guitars, I myself on the other hand am a firm believer in, you get what you pay for, and therefore I never buy used, I don't even buy so called new guitars off the wall, to me that's not new, when hundreds of people can come in the store and take them down and hold them up against their clothes with metal zippers and buttons, giving the guitars scratches and dings and so on, but I'm an anal nut I admit it.

 

 

I sincerely hope your guitar shows up in flawless condition, because I soon learned, especially with Gibson, no guitar is ever as pretty as it's stock photo....best of luck, I hope you love it.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's sad that lack of education and understanding a thick Maple cap can appear under a thin binding and that someone can call it a flaw.

 

What's worse is a seller's lack of education and understanding could not educate the buyer.

 

I have been recently educated by Gibson and another seller about the binding.

 

 

However it will never change the fact that I don't like the way it looks, I personally prefer the binding to cover both front and back paint seams, that's the look I like, and I'm partial to the traditional because it had the SOLID body I wanted, Kluson tuners, Rosewood fretboard, burst buckers 1 & 2 and even the honeyburst finish I like....so everything was there.

 

 

If the binding had just evenly covered the seams all the way around, this post would never exist, and I would've been very content with my new Les Paul.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

However in all your hours of playing PRS guitars I bet you didn't play a PRS McCarty 594, that is a completely different animal, and aside from the usual PRS perfect aesthetics, it feels and plays great with that vintage pattern neck and such low action you can only slide a piece of paper between the strings and fretboard.

 

Many have said "it's what the Les Paul should aspire to be" or" what it would be if the Les Paul evolved", and those are various reviewers words on YouTube not mine

 

I'm fairly certain that's one of the ones I played. However, I cannot say with any certainty that it was. It was one of the "top shelf" models with around a $4000.00 price tag on it and it was also locked and I had to have someone get that one down, and one or two to its left. I think they were all over $3000. I can honestly say that I didn't like any of the PRS guitars as much as I love my two Les Pauls and my two Flying V's, all Gibson. I'm not saying it sucks or that Gibson blows them away. I have my preference and the PRS didn't cut it for me. They're nice but my 2017 Standard was the best guitar I played all day that day.

 

That being said, I set up my guitar the way I like it and since the PRS guitars were at Guitar Center and probably came straight out of the factory without any setup, that could be why I wasn't impressed. Maybe there is room for improvement after being set up. I wouldn't give any of them a bad review, just not a glowing review. However, since I didn't actually pay a whole lot of attention as to which models I played and I don't recall you mentioning in your original post which model it was that had you so impressed, I'd be willing to give it another go. I'll never pass down an opportunity to play a guitar, any guitar. If and when I do play one, I'd be happy to post my review. Like I said, I'm not saying that any of the PRS guitars I played weren't good. They just didn't appeal to me. And, don't even get me started on John Mayer. He may be famous but his guitar playing, that I've heard, does nothing for me. My wife has said the same thing about his playing. Granted, I've not heard all his work but I wasn't particularly impressed by him either. He can play but I don't think he's any better than me.

 

Funny thing is, out of all the guitars I played, a little Fender MIM Telecaster was the best out of all of the ones I played at the various stores. It very much surprised me with the way it played and felt. Had I been truly shopping and not just playing, that guitar would have went home with me. It may still come home with me after I play it a few more times. The Les Pauls I played and the Flying V were great but I already have those, so I was mostly testing out other brands and models and that little Tele made the grade and I liked it better than the American made Tele right next to it. We won't talk about how a Goldtop Les Paul Classic would have went home with me if I wanted to spend the money on it but didn't. I can't remember what year it was but it was definitely a nice guitar too.

 

I'll let you know if I played a 594 or get the chance to and will give my honest opinion. Glad you're happy with yours because agree or disagree, we're all musicians here and all have some love of the guitar. If you're happy with yours and making music playing it, great. I'll do the same as will others here and we can agree to disagree whether or not PRS is blown away by Gibsons or Gibsons are blown away by PRS. It's an age old argument and it's all opinion based. Gibson vs Fender, Hendrix vs Van Halen, etc, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just would like to point out -

 

Hagstrom is a Swedish company and during the last century all their guitars were made in Sweden, and some of them still are.

I bought a new Hagstrom Swede in 1978 or '79. Lovely guitar, phenolic resin fingerboard.

Hagstrom claim their fingerboard material is superior to ebony in some ways.

 

http://www.hagstromguitars.com/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm fairly certain that's one of the ones I played. However, I cannot say with any certainty that it was. It was one of the "top shelf" models with around a $4000.00 price tag on it and it was also locked and I had to have someone get that one down, and one or two to its left. I think they were all over $3000. I can honestly say that I didn't like any of the PRS guitars as much as I love my two Les Pauls and my two Flying V's, all Gibson. I'm not saying it sucks or that Gibson blows them away. I have my preference and the PRS didn't cut it for me. They're nice but my 2017 Standard was the best guitar I played all day that day.

 

That being said, I set up my guitar the way I like it and since the PRS guitars were at Guitar Center and probably came straight out of the factory without any setup, that could be why I wasn't impressed. Maybe there is room for improvement after being set up. I wouldn't give any of them a bad review, just not a glowing review. However, since I didn't actually pay a whole lot of attention as to which models I played and I don't recall you mentioning in your original post which model it was that had you so impressed, I'd be willing to give it another go. I'll never pass down an opportunity to play a guitar, any guitar. If and when I do play one, I'd be happy to post my review. Like I said, I'm not saying that any of the PRS guitars I played weren't good. They just didn't appeal to me. And, don't even get me started on John Mayer. He may be famous but his guitar playing, that I've heard, does nothing for me. My wife has said the same thing about his playing. Granted, I've not heard all his work but I wasn't particularly impressed by him either. He can play but I don't think he's any better than me.

 

Funny thing is, out of all the guitars I played, a little Fender MIM Telecaster was the best out of all of the ones I played at the various stores. It very much surprised me with the way it played and felt. Had I been truly shopping and not just playing, that guitar would have went home with me. It may still come home with me after I play it a few more times. The Les Pauls I played and the Flying V were great but I already have those, so I was mostly testing out other brands and models and that little Tele made the grade and I liked it better than the American made Tele right next to it. We won't talk about how a Goldtop Les Paul Classic would have went home with me if I wanted to spend the money on it but didn't. I can't remember what year it was but it was definitely a nice guitar too.

 

I'll let you know if I played a 594 or get the chance to and will give my honest opinion. Glad you're happy with yours because agree or disagree, we're all musicians here and all have some love of the guitar. If you're happy with yours and making music playing it, great. I'll do the same as will others here and we can agree to disagree whether or not PRS is blown away by Gibsons or Gibsons are blown away by PRS. It's an age old argument and it's all opinion based. Gibson vs Fender, Hendrix vs Van Halen, etc, etc.

 

I whole heartedly agree with you about John Mayer, good but not great, I'm a Clapton, SRV and Dickey Betts & Warren Haynes, man myself with the occasional Skynyrd and Gary Moore and Hendrix thrown in for good measure.

However I think you would've remembered the 594 if you had played it, it's the only PRS model that's as thick as a Les Paul in both mahogany and maple.

 

 

Your friendly and passive attitude towards myself and my choice of guitars is a refreshing change to the majority of other responses I've been getting, I was never personally attacking Gibson and yet they all took it as such.

I was just saddened by Gibson's recent lack of quality control, and I hoped that they would improve....that's all.

 

 

As you said we're all musicians and nothing is better than finally finding that guitar that feels as if it were made only for you and forming that bond with it, that very few people except the players like us here in the forum can understand.

Thanks for the extended and honest, friendly reply, it's good to know someone understands what I'm saying, and please let me know if you do play a 594, I would love to hear your thoughts on it.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Farnsbarns

Shall we look at this hallowed thing then, this McCarty 594 thing. What does it have...

 

A truss rod. Idea stolen from Gibson

 

Humbuckers. Idea stolen from Gibson.

 

Tune-o-matic. Idea stolen from Gibson.

 

Mahogany and maple laminated body. Idea stolen from Gibson.

 

Cap and back seem visible in cuttaway. Idea stolen from Gibson.

 

Yes, I see what people mean. Gibson should take a page from PRS's book. No wait, PRS's book is Gibson's book, they took all the pages.

 

[lol]

 

Tell us macblues, if you set up your second account because you forgot the password for the first account why have you been logging in to your first account long after you created the second?

 

Don't pretend you don't see the question. I think this needs answering.

 

[sneaky]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A truss rod. Idea stolen from Gibson...

Thaddeus McHugh in 1921.

I've learned something from this thread at long last!

Thanks, Farns!!!

 

msp_thumbup.gif

 

Pip.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

However in all your hours of playing PRS guitars I bet you didn't play a PRS McCarty 594, that is a completely different animal, and aside from the usual PRS perfect aesthetics, it feels and plays great with that vintage pattern neck and such low action you can only slide a piece of paper between the strings and fretboard.

 

So to be clear I'm not comparing any other PRS to a Gibson Les Paul, just the McCarty 594, and having recently played both the Standard and Traditional LP's in the store I can say this " The Les Paul is not anywhere close to being in the same league as the McCarty 594".....it's just not, and unless guitar players here have played both like I have they can't offer an honest opinion.

 

To be fair, a Traditional lists for $2600, a Standard lists for $3000. A 594 lists for $3600.

 

& while you may not think the Traditional or the Standard compare to a 594, there are people who would rather spend that $3600 on a Custom Shop Telecaster. So this is truly a case of beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

 

Some people like Ford, some like Chevy, some like BMW. Some people prefer Bud Light, some Miller, some Corona.

 

& when I see Warren Haynes, Joe Bonamassa, Slash, or Zakk Wylde start playing PRS, I'll believe the 594 is what the Les Paul should be.

 

Heck, even John Mayer plays his Strats more than his PRS.

 

PRS makes a fine guitar, but it's its own thing. My only gripe with them is you've got to buy a $4600 594 before you get one with a natural, or stained back. The $3600 594 has an opaque finish where you can't even see the wood. For Gibson, that line is much lower. $1800.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice story, I see your a bargain hunter, and have bought a few used guitars, I myself on the other hand am a firm believer in, you get what you pay for, and therefore I never buy used...

 

The Les Paul Classic & Traditional were new guitars.

 

The Standard & LPJ were used.

 

I'll buy used if I'm going to save 30% or more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

However I think you would've remembered the 594 if you had played it, it's the only PRS model that's as thick as a Les Paul in both mahogany and maple.

 

The regular McCarty & the DGT are as thicker than most PRS guitars. I don't believe they're as thick as Les Pauls though.

 

Both the McCarty & the DGT have beefier more 50ish necks.

 

 

Your friendly and passive attitude towards myself and my choice of guitars is a refreshing change to the majority of other responses I've been getting, I was never personally attacking Gibson and yet they all took it as such.

I was just saddened by Gibson's recent lack of quality control, and I hoped that they would improve....that's all.

 

Well when you criticize Gibson's QC, then the two biggest issues are features of the model you're looking at... It comes across wrong.

 

Your maple top on a Traditional isn't a 10 top. It's AA grade. There may be specs the size of dimes in them (not guaranteed to find one, but they're not going to see it as a flaw). It's like complaining there's no flame on a $3800 guitar when you buy a 58 True Historic.

 

Same thing with the binding. I understand your preference (even though the 594 doesn't have binding on the body & the ones with the faux binding doesn't carry into that lower cutout, because it not going to look the way you prefer if it did)... I understand your preference, but that is not the way it is.

 

It's like complaining that a sesame seed bun has seeds in the top, but not the bottom bun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1500931291[/url]' post='1870837']

The regular McCarty & the DGT are as thicker than most PRS guitars. I don't believe they're as thick as Les Pauls though.

 

Both the McCarty & the DGT have beefier more 50ish necks.

 

 

 

 

Well when you criticize Gibson's QC, then the two biggest issues are features of the model you're looking at... It comes across wrong.

 

Your maple top on a Traditional isn't a 10 top. It's AA grade. There may be specs the size of dimes in them (not guaranteed to find one, but they're not going to see it as a flaw). It's like complaining there's no flame on a $3800 guitar when you buy a 58 True Historic.

 

Same thing with the binding. I understand your preference (even though the 594 doesn't have binding on the body & the ones with the faux binding doesn't carry into that lower cutout, because it not going to look the way you prefer if it did)... I understand your preference, but that is not the way it is.

 

It's like complaining that a sesame seed bun has seeds in the top, but not the bottom bun.

prsguitars

 

Actually the neck profile is PRS's beefiest neck it's pattern vintage, and the neck and the body is bound, the body might be faux binding but it still looks great.

Plus the guys at Andertons music in the U.K. did a side by side comparison and the Single cut 594 is the same thickness as a Les Paul, and the double cut, is just a hair thinner than that.

PRS has been making their guitars the same way for 30 years I expected it to look precisely as it does with the lower bout unbound and all, it's always been like that.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

prsguitars

 

Actually the neck profile is PRS's beefiest neck it's pattern vintage, and the neck and the body is bound, the body might be faux binding but it still looks great.

Plus the guys at Andertons music in the U.K. did a side by side comparison and the Single cut 594 is the same thickness as a Les Paul, and the double cut, is just a hair thinner than that.

 

I don't own a singlecut. I don't trust a word Chapman says (though I wish I could play like him, be as successful in business as him)... & that may be true for a single cut, though I doubt it. I have a McCarty here, it's not even as thick as my telecaster. But it is thicker than my PRS Standard 24 (& lighter).

 

The 594 is no thicker.than the regular McCarty.

 

Yes, pattern Vintage is beefier than normal PRS, I'd say comparable to 50s Les Pauls & Teles.

 

 

 

PRS has been making their guitars the same way for 30 years I expected it to look precisely as it does with the lower bout unbound and all, it's always been like that.

 

Gibson's 50"s Les Pauls show the exposed seem in the lower bout since the top is thinner on the edge than it is in the center. My 2006 Classic is built the exact same way.

 

However, you said you don't like to see that seem. Obviously it's ok for PRS to do it on a guitar that costs much more (even though there is no real bindung).

 

I agree, it looks better the way PRS does it, but I never called the way it's done on a Traditional a QC problem.

 

My 98 Standard has thicker binding to cover up the seem. I prefer the vintage Kluson tuning keys & should swap them out, but I never got around to it.

 

My 2013 LPJ has the faux binding, similar to the PRS. It definitely gets thicker, closer to center.

 

So my issue here is with you calling these features "poor QC" when it is obviously not the case. Customers actually complained that modern standards don't expose the seem the way the 50s guitars do. This is years after customers complained they could see the seam. To try & make everyone happy, they developed the Classic model, which became the Traditional model, then the Traditional & Classic models.

 

 

I don't know how to get a 50s neck with modern binding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1500944910[/url]' post='1870873']

I don't own a singlecut. I don't trust a word Chapman says (though I wish I could play like him, be as successful in business as him)... & that may be true for a single cut, though I doubt it. I have a McCarty here, it's not even as thick as my telecaster. But it is thicker than my PRS Standard 24 (& lighter).

 

The 594 is no thicker.than the regular McCarty.

 

Yes, pattern Vintage is beefier than normal PRS, I'd say comparable to 50s Les Pauls & Teles.

 

 

 

 

 

Gibson's 50"s Les Pauls show the exposed seem in the lower bout since the top is thinner on the edge than it is in the center. My 2006 Classic is built the exact same way.

 

However, you said you don't like to see that seem. Obviously it's ok for PRS to do it on a guitar that costs much more (even though there is no real bindung).

 

I agree, it looks better the way PRS does it, but I never called the way it's done on a Traditional a QC problem.

 

My 98 Standard has thicker binding to cover up the seem. I prefer the vintage Kluson tuning keys & should swap them out, but I never got around to it.

 

My 2013 LPJ has the faux binding, similar to the PRS. It definitely gets thicker, closer to center.

 

So my issue here is with you calling these features "poor QC" when it is obviously not the case. Customers actually complained that modern standards don't expose the seem the way the 50s guitars do. This is years after customers complained they could see the seam. To try & make everyone happy, they developed the Classic model, which became the Traditional model, then the Traditional & Classic models.

 

 

I don't know how to get a 50s neck with modern binding.

 

This video shows the thickness of a Les Paul and a 594 side by side and they are the same thickness. Plus if you think the regular McCarty is the same thickness as a 594, you need glasses immediately, because you obviously have never seen a 594 in person, it's PRS's thickest guitar thus far.

Why do you think guy's like myself who do love Les Paul's are gravitating to the 594 ? PRS is essentially copying the Les Paul, and with those new 58/15 low turn pickups, it's the Les Paul sound to a tee.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This video shows the thickness of a Les Paul and a 594 side by side and they are the same thickness. Plus if you think the regular McCarty is the same thickness as a 594, you need glasses immediately, because you obviously have never seen a 594 in person, it's PRS's thickest guitar thus far.

Why do you think guy's like myself who do love Les Paul's are gravitating to the 594 ? PRS is essentially copying the Les Paul, and with those new 58/15 low turn pickups, it's the Les Paul sound to a tee.

 

What exactly are you attempting to do here? This is not the PRS forum, it is the Gibson forum. Would you go into a Chevrolet dealer telling them that their quality sucks and how your Ford is so much better? You have provided conflicting information across your posts on various threads here. We have noted you don't like Gibson quality and that you are a troll. Go and enjoy your PRS for a few days until you return it for a new one because the pickups are adjusted too high or a string is out of tune. Maybe you can find a good Fender after you burn through a dozen PRS guitars and return them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...

If weight relieving is so revolutionary and sustain improving, why is Gibson the only one doing it ?

You mean to tell me that Leo Fender and Paul Reed Smith, don't know what their doing with sustain by still making solid body guitars without weight relieving ?I seriously doubt it.

PRS SC245 weight relief X-rayed:

 

prsscxray.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting picture, Cap!

 

laugh.gif

 

Pip.

 

Wow!

 

Now the question devolves to which is better: slot weight relief or round holes?

 

Perhaps Cap could give us a lecture about the acoustic properties of round holes versus slots! [biggrin]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...