Other Guitars

NGD: Cold snap in hell.

26

You looking for a new market for Tru Arcs?

I'm curious how deep the body is. I've seen some PRS hollows that were comically thick, like 3 full inches, which looks mighty odd with the streamlined PRS silhouette.

27

I'm in total shock.

You just made me remember I had a dream I owned one of these last night.

I think the only PRS I would want would be a Silver Sky.

My brother loves his PRS though.

28

That's a nice looking guitar, Tim, I like it! I thought I remembered you stating somewhere (everywhere) that IIRC "thou doth not liketh PRS guitarith's"! Hell has indeed dropped a few degrees (at least), and you have a lovely new PRS guitar! Play her in the best of health, my friend!

29

No shame man. I have a PRS Santana SE (1st generation) and I absolutely know what to expect from it every time. It’s what I use to de-bug noisy amps. And the Mann tremolo is the best ever. Three octave dives and returns to perfect tuning.

Rejoice.

30

You like it?

I'm seeing if I like it.

I do like that it's completely sorted out, right out of the case. Simple straightforward design, executed with finesse. Fine, functional hardware. Clean, complete workmanship throughout, great fretwork, nut, setup. Light, tight, and resonant. Top and back tap-tone both centered on G.

You looking for a new market for Tru Arcs?

Well, always - in a lazy, take-it-as-it-comes way. But not with PRS. Few have a build which would accommodate a Tru-Arc as we know them.

I'm curious how deep the body is.

1.75" around the rim, probably 2.5" in the middle. Weight is 6 lbs 4 oz. The horns are actually larger than on solidbody and semi PRSeseses, maybe not quite as sleek. I'm not crazy about the binding on the back either, a touch of dress that seems out of place on the very subdued design, and visually accentuates the depth of the guitar.

31

1.75 sounds like a pretty good thickness for a hollowbody.

32

I'm not crazy about the binding on the back either, a touch of dress that seems out of place on the very subdued design, and visually accentuates the depth of the guitar. Proteus

Hey Mr. Proteus, how about a picture of the back of the guitar highlighting the binding? You've piqued our (my) interest in judging for ourselves (myself), on how it looks. I can barely see the binding from the frontal shot you posted above. Thanks, I'd really like to see it!

33

This angle emphasizes any lack of grace in the "design" of the back - which I think results more from design and ergo decisions made for the playable parts of the guitar, rather than any ambition to treat the back as its own playground for the sculptural graces.

It even looks a little Mosritey, donit?

34

Not as bad straight on.

I suppose PRS must have a reason (presumably a sound sound reason) not to minimize the neck and joint and heel. Given the morless hard-rockin' brief of the original PRS design, you'd have thought they might have gone neck-through and completely heelless.

35

I don't know why this has never struck me before. My first exposure to PRS was at SummerNAMM 1985 in Nawlins, which I think was their commercial debut.

At the same show, SLM/Westone introduced their Pantera, also a 24-fret, doublebucker stoptail with prominent wood figure - and a "modern" uneven cutaway scheme not unlike PRS's.

36

But the Pantera's back is concavely radiused, in complete harmony with the top.

While the guitar looks from the front like an arch-top solidbody, it's consistent in depth across the whole body. It's all "carved" (or composed of multiple chunks of wood glued up and CNC-shaped), but it looks like a bent piece of wood.

And it has a smooth heelless cutaway design that makes the back as sleek as the front.

37

By comparison, a similar shot of the SE Hollowbody Standard's heel and cutaways.

38

A sense of body depth and play of the top and back bindings.

In order to make a hollowbody, PRS has had to re-jigger their pretty-sleek classic design in a slightly clumsier way, coarsening the profile and size of the cutaway horns - presumably to create enough of a "box" for a completely hollowbody build in the modest Chinese-build price range of the guitar.

Still, I think they could've done a thing or two to soften and streamline the profile. That flat line between the cutaways wouldn't stand out so proudly without the white binding. A cream, yellowish, or even tortoise-shell would, I think, have produced a more unified look.

Then again - like classic Gibson designs, there's something utilitarian and honest about it. And, all things considered, it's a nitpick: overall, the guitar is well proportioned, and a pretty good interpretation of the PRS profile in hollowbody drag.

39

The most exposure I've had to the PRS scene was one that belonged to a roommate who ended up being a roommate for 4 years. So I had plenty of experience with that guitar, but no other PRSs. It was a gift from his father, but he ended up focusing more on bass, so the PRS sat pretty on the wall for years. It was a Custom 22 model I believe, double cut, cherry red flame top, faux binding, two buckers, wraptail, etc. T'was a very fine guitar, impeccable in craftsmanship. The neck was a little bulky for my taste, and at the time I was pretty averse to double bucker hardtail guitars. I think I could appreciate it more today, but unfortunately I don't live with it anymore.

40

Just deleted my Rickenbacker reference. Made rather redundant by the latest image from Tim.

42

OMG! Heresy on this forum!! LOL

The demos I've heard of those guitar sound VERY good. I was even considering one of those instead of an ES-335/339. (I have bought neither yet).

But one of my bucket list guitars is a DGT. Even used they are quite expensive. Having a hard time sounding that much on a guitar. I am still planning on getting one, someday before I die LOL

44

It’s fully hollow, other than a block under the bridge.

45

you asked why they didn't do a neck-through design. that would be de facto a centerblock.

46

I didn’t make the antecedent completely clear, but that musing was about the original 80s solidbody PRS design, not this guitar.

47

Intriguing. I never got along with PRS except the feel of their thickest/widest neck profiles.

BUT....One of the best guitars I ever played was a used and beat up white PRS at Rudy's Music in NYC in the summer of '16. They know me as a Gretsch player there but told me to try it. The neck was perfect and loved the tone from all pickup selections. It was a great price but some home improvement projects sucked up the budget. I wonder where it is now.

Nice Proteus.....Enjoy it!

48

If I were ever to succumb to Mr. Smith's creations, this is the one that might do it for me:

49

Herr Prot, usually, at some point in your NGD threads, you explain why you bought a certain guitar or how it scratches a particular itch. I don't think I saw one in this post. What prompted the purchase? Not that you need a reason, mind you. I'm just curious. Did it just scratch a PRS itch, plain and simple?

50

I see Tavo was at a loss for words. I think what he wanted to say was: “So have you picked out a law school yet so you can complete the transition and become a ‘blues lawyer?’”

Like Taylors, I’ve tried to like PRSs, and the soapbar, with the wraparound tailpiece, had me goin,’ but I never pulled the trigger, and at this point, probably won’t. But if you’re happy, enjoy.


Register Sign in to join the conversation