Seen the new PRS ad?

guitars4you

meltedbuzzbox said:

So where is all the abuse for Anderson, suhr, Nash, bravewood, vintage, feline, and all the other people that have setup a business on reproducing other companies guitars with slightly different headstocks?

IMO opinion it is not abuse to PRS for trying to copy a Strat - I'm a big PRS fan - sold 1000's - owned, played, sold and purchased them - It is that a) it just looks so wrong, mainly due to the headstock and b) not sure why they went with a 7.25" radius board

I'm 100% behind PRS with the early EG models, DC3, NF3 and 305's as well as the new breed of S2 models - But IMO they have got this one seriously wrong

dazzajl

I’ve played a ‘proper’ PRS or two and briefly owned an SE. All have hugely impressed me but none have moved me. We’re all different but the personal appeal of a Strat for me is not in it being perfected. It’s in it feeling like a plank and having an organic nature to the way it plays. 

But I do completely get the idea that PRS would like to show what a Strat is according to thier philosophy. 

Bucket

meltedbuzzbox said:

So where is all the abuse for Anderson, suhr, Nash, bravewood, vintage, feline, and all the other people that have setup a business on reproducing other companies guitars with slightly different headstocks?

Because their headstocks look cohesive with the overall design.

underdog

darcym said:

does this not feel a bit petty ?

famous respected guitar player who has built a relationship with a major guitar producer has asked them to make a guitar in the style of a guitar he loves with a few minor tweaks to make it "better" for him, and due to fan demand / questions its been made into a production run ?

I don't think Suhr gets this hassle for their pure strat copies, or Anderson for their high end strat copies, it doesn't float my boat at all, because I like a strat (I'd certainly be interested in trying one for personal interest) but some of the stuff is interesting from an engineering point of view, such as the fact that the head stock is a back to front PRS to give the lower strings more tension to make it feel how he wants the "bounce" to feel.

Does it really warrant this level of "spite" in the comments ? 

Level of spite? If Gibson had made this we'd be on page 6,327 of the thread by now, hell gibson can get it more wrong by releasing a guitar in a non traditional colour.

Plectrum

DrJazzTap said:

I admit when I read "reach for the sky" I thought of woody from toy story.

I thought of Douglas Bader.

darcym

Bucket said:

meltedbuzzbox said:

So where is all the abuse for Anderson, suhr, Nash, bravewood, vintage, feline, and all the other people that have setup a business on reproducing other companies guitars with slightly different headstocks?

Because their headstocks look cohesive with the overall design.

I don't think it does, the suhr and Anderson headstock is basically a point, I don't think it looks like it follows the strat design, part of that though is because you're used to seeing the Fender headstock on a strat, so anything other than that looks odd.

ICBM

I think the Suhr and Anderson headstocks are absolutely awful, Anderson especially. They just look like an afterthought with no style or character. The new PRS one is only ugly because it doesn't suit the rest of the guitar. It would be fine on a slightly pointy Superstrat, for example if Steve Vai decided he needed a PRS...

Strat54

guitars4you said:

meltedbuzzbox said:

So where is all the abuse for Anderson, suhr, Nash, bravewood, vintage, feline, and all the other people that have setup a business on reproducing other companies guitars with slightly different headstocks?

IMO opinion it is not abuse to PRS for trying to copy a Strat - I'm a big PRS fan - sold 1000's - owned, played, sold and purchased them - It is that a) it just looks so wrong, mainly due to the headstock and b) not sure why they went with a 7.25" radius board

I'm 100% behind PRS with the early EG models, DC3, NF3 and 305's as well as the new breed of S2 models - But IMO they have got this one seriously wrong

I'm surprised Paul's gone down this well trodden path with so little of the innovation that he has become famous for. If you look at Tom Anderson's design he still manages to incorporate tweeks like his wedge neck joint and trem. All I can surmise is that this is a last ditch attempt to refill the PRS reserves whilst twisting the knife a little into Fender. The last few interviews I saw Paul gave me the impression that he'd become a little jaded with the industry, he seemed to have lost his spark which is understandable at his age and years in the job. These will still sell by the bucket load no doubt.

Dominic

Other than a marketing strategy and the fact that they have already done similar there was really no need for the guitar
- the Brent Mason was the latest semi- strat type and is a fantastic guitar .....all they needed to do was swap the outer hum buckers for a single coil option and call it a John Mayer instead of the lesser known Brent Mason but that would not have got past the marketing director.
 Aesthetics aren't everything ..........my mates wife is ugly but she's fantastic in bed !

Strat54

meltedbuzzbox said:

So where is all the abuse for Anderson, suhr, Nash, bravewood, vintage, feline, and all the other people that have setup a business on reproducing other companies guitars with slightly different headstocks?

No abuse for Anderson. Tom is an innovator and Fender themselves have borrowed from his designs and thinking, he doesn't just shout about like Paul does. 

Fifty9

I think there is zero wrong with the guitar or headstock, it’s just that we’re conditioned of have an expectation of what a strat is/should be. There’s no way for PRS to build a strat-a-like that everyone will think is a winner imho.

All strat clones from serious builders are good looking, quality guitars and if the neck profile was right, I know I’d enjoy playing. 

Philly_Q

Bucket said:

I guess the problem is what I said in the first paragraph of this post - they have a strong and carefully cultivated brand identity. Where within that do they propose to place an identikit Strat copy with its only aesthetic difference being a headstock so wrong it looks like a bad Photoshop mockup? Surely there are plenty of ways PRS and John Mayer could have worked to alter the Strat design template to make it look a bit more imaginative, or come up with a new, recognisably PRS, but 6-in-line headstock.

There was the one they made for Danny Spitz.

Any takers?  No?

Bucket

darcym said:

Bucket said:

meltedbuzzbox said:

So where is all the abuse for Anderson, suhr, Nash, bravewood, vintage, feline, and all the other people that have setup a business on reproducing other companies guitars with slightly different headstocks?

Because their headstocks look cohesive with the overall design.

I don't think it does, the suhr and Anderson headstock is basically a point, I don't think it looks like it follows the strat design, part of that though is because you're used to seeing the Fender headstock on a strat, so anything other than that looks odd.

Well yes, very odd. I don't think any three-a-side headstock works with the Strat shape. At least the Suhr and Anderson are roughly in line with tradition despite their rather bland designs.

The one I like most in that department is the Pensa headstock, which is like the Suhr one but a little less insipid:

https://thumbs.static-thomann.de/thumb/bdbmagic/pics/bdb/387783/12551271_800.jpg

Strat54

Bucket said:

darcym said:

Bucket said:

meltedbuzzbox said:

So where is all the abuse for Anderson, suhr, Nash, bravewood, vintage, feline, and all the other people that have setup a business on reproducing other companies guitars with slightly different headstocks?

Because their headstocks look cohesive with the overall design.

I don't think it does, the suhr and Anderson headstock is basically a point, I don't think it looks like it follows the strat design, part of that though is because you're used to seeing the Fender headstock on a strat, so anything other than that looks odd.

Well yes, very odd. I don't think any three-a-side headstock works with the Strat shape. At least the Suhr and Anderson are roughly in line with tradition despite their rather bland designs.

The one I like most in that department is the Pensa headstock, which is like the Suhr one but a little less insipid:

https://thumbs.static-thomann.de/thumb/bdbmagic/pics/bdb/387783/12551271_800.jpg

That's because John Suhr designed the headstock back when it was Pensa Suhr. The raw bodies and necks back then were made by Tom Anderson.

markblack

Head stock looks a bit odd, bit big, tuners look strange position wise. I don't see how PRS could change the head stock. It's their headstock, much like fender gibson etc.

Looks better on the Brent Mason which to me is a Strat copy.



The press pic dosen't help - it's so dull in white. 

My thing is it's just a bit dull... Another strat. (and I like a strat)

I get why smaller makers copy Les Pauls and Strats as it's hard to get people to buy something different by someone they've never heard of.

All that said... it's a signature guitar then John Mayer can have what he wants... and if he fell out with Fender then I guess that's a good a call as any. He also has the SuperEagle - which is a 'proper PRS' - albeit a f**king expensive one.



JM fans will buy it - the old #gayformayer thing. I don't mind Mayer - he's a good player some of his songs make me cringe but the John Mayer Trio stuff is a good listen. He's got that pretty boy problem (I'm sure he doesn't care see it as a problem).

I'm not into signature guitars so I don't get that excited about these things. But I do have a Johnny Marr Jag as its great version of a Jag and I like what Annie Clarke did with the St. Vincent - a guitar that people praise and from everything I've read is great.

octatonic

I love the Grosh one.
It looks like a fat Art Deco penguin.
Or Hercule Poirot.

StuartMac290

Two grand and you only get a gig bag?! Come on

OilCityPickups

Strat54 said:

Not liking the 7.25" radius...or the headstock......

https://www.gearnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/Silver_Sky_Frost_grande.jpg

https://www.gearnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/Silver_Sky_Frost_back_large.jpg

That headstock is absolutely horrible on what is so obviously a straight Strat rip off. What are PRS thinking? Is  'Self Destructive Gibsonitis catching?'
ICBM took the words out of my mouth ... makes the Gibson Jimi Hendrix model look tasteful, and I never thought I'd say that. 

How to take a design icon and f--k it up beyond recognition.

mburekenge

The rule for a fancy and pricey strat copy is a derivative, slightly tweaked yet worse looking strat headstock. 

Schnozz

octatonic said:

I love the Grosh one.
It looks like a fat Art Deco penguin.
Or Hercule Poirot.

XD - It's the little things that make your day