594 - Single or Double cut?

Ron

New Member
Joined
Jul 21, 2012
Messages
60
Location
Texas
Finally had the pleasure of playing a 594 doublecut. I've been eyeing these guitars on line since their release and this particular one fully met and exceeded my expectations. My number one guitar since 2008 is a Custom 22 loaded with 59/09's in 2013. Recently I added a 3 way push/pull and so glad I did. I do have other great guitars but always go to the CU22.

I admit to being bit by the LP bug a while back but just not so much a fan of the brand. I've considered finding an SE model such as the Zach Myers or Bernie Marsden to fill the niche but keep thinking about an LP to round out the collection. This store did not have a 594 singlecut in stock, but after playing the doublecut it really did not matter.

I'd appreciate your thoughts on the two styles of the 594. I assume the neck profiles (love the graduated pattern vintage) are the same on each. The 58/15LT's are the same on each. What difference could I expect between the two?

Thanks!
 
General agreement is the SC has about 5% "more" if that makes sense. Consensus is that if you want That Sound with double cut ergonomics, the regular version is it. If you gotta have the 5% "more" and/or you want the single cutaway ergonomics, go Singlecut.

Win-Win
 
I'm new to PRS, or I could say PRS is new to me. I just spent the last couple weeks looking at everything PRS online and finally bought a 594 double cut. I have a 2016 Gibson Les Paul Standard and originally I wanted a SC 594, I guess mostly because of looks and what I was already familiar with.

Over the course of trying to choose a specific guitar the SC or DC issue became less and less important. I definitely wanted a 594 so that choice was carved in stone. I also wanted a highly figured top so that was my second priority. Next was color and style, I'll only say that I prefer some colors much more than others and probably 2 out of 10 appealed to me and 1 out of 20 really grabbed me. I also wanted a natural/clear coat mahogany body. I could have lived with a light stain if it was translucent and didn't hide the natural figure.

Neck wood was less important but I liked the mahogany better than the maple ones and liked the rosewood necks even more. Fretboard and headstock overlay didn't matter to me much other than matching well with and complimenting the rest of the guitar. Same with hardware color.

I was blown away when one showed up locally with a guy I've bought 3 other guitars from. It not only met every criteria, it was exactly what I was looking for. PRS McCarty 594 Wood Library Artist Package with a gorgeous flame maple 10 top with the nicest jade green color I'd seen in my weeks of searching. Both the color and the wood figure complimented each other with neither washed out or muddled by the other. He also gave me a phenomenal price on it that no online dealer would have been able to match. It was a double cut but like I said, at that point it had ceased to matter. Needless to say I bought it on the spot:)

In hindsight I'm actually glad I got the double cut for a couple of reasons. It weighs less than a single cut and/or my Les Paul. It's also nice to have something different since I already have a single cut in my Les Paul. Although it's what I'm used to, I wasn't looking for a clone.

In my usually not so humble opinion, I'd say consider everything else you want first and then if you still have the option and it still matters choose between SC and DC. Everything spec wise looks to be the same except for the weight.
 
Last edited:
General agreement is the SC has about 5% "more" if that makes sense. Consensus is that if you want That Sound with double cut ergonomics, the regular version is it. If you gotta have the 5% "more" and/or you want the single cutaway ergonomics, go Singlecut.

Win-Win
This^

The singlecut gets closer to the LP sound, but the DC is lighter and sits closer to the body, and is just a joy to play.
I'm fortunate enough to own both and some days it's hard to decide which one to pick up.

I can sit and play the DC for a longer stretch due to the lighter weight.
 
This^

The singlecut gets closer to the LP sound, but the DC is lighter and sits closer to the body, and is just a joy to play.
I'm fortunate enough to own both and some days it's hard to decide which one to pick up.

I can sit and play the DC for a longer stretch due to the lighter weight.

Double this! They're both great, but the SC just has a little extra. Can't go wrong either way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ron
I also feel incredibly fortunate to own one of each, and enjoy both for more reasons than I can count.

If one were to twist my arm and make a choice between the two...I'd pick the SC594.

I'm far too dim-witted to explain why it is my SC gets the 'nod,' so I'll just say it's that '5% more' that I can't help but notice.

Deep down, I think I'm a Singlecut guy, with occasional flirtation tendencies with the other side of the fence.

At the end of the day, though, you can't go wrong with either.
 
Hey Guys I don't have or haven't even played a single cut but I did buy a DC 594 last week. My guitar history is predominately Les Pauls for 35 years with Strat or Tele here and there. I've owned 20 + Les Pauls a Traditional or two a Standard and the rest Custom Shop or Collecters Choices. I keep hearing testimonies on the 594 and there were to many common denominators so I figure hey its worth a shot. We'll this thing shot to my #1 the first night and I'm totally blown away with this guitar. The fit /finish play-ability, intonation, balance, versitility, etc. Its truly the best guitar I've ever purchased.
And to top it all off you know when a singer is a really great singer their voice is truly a special voice. This 594 has a truly spectacular voice. The lead voice to me is incredible with the slide tones off the chart good. Mr. Smith and Team have knocked it out of the park with this thing. I'll keep in touch with that little store in Lexington and when they get a SC594 that speaks to me I can answer the above question.;)
 
Last edited:
When I think PRS, I think of the double cut body. When I see a double cut body I say, "That's a PRS."

When I see the single cuts I say, "They're trying to be something they're not."

I understand the PRS single cut is as far from a Les Paul as the double cut is from a strat. But I'm an old fkr & slow to accept change.
 
When I see the single cuts I say, "They're trying to be something they're not."
.

I've had some version of the PRS Singlecut since it was first introduced 17-18 years ago, at least 7 or 8 of them. They're great PRSes.

An SC body does things to the sound of the guitar resulting from the additional contact with the neck on one of the upper bouts, and the thickness of the body.

Putting aside the question of looks, it has a sonic purpose. The control layout has a player convenience purpose if someone (like me) was previously a Gibson player.

I don't look at something like a Taylor dreadnought and think, "It's trying to be a Martin." Instead, I think those dimensions and materials have a sonic purpose and those things are how one achieves it.

There's not much of a payoff in looking at these similarities and making the kinds of judgments you suggest, especially when the Les Paul itself is shaped exactly like the earlier Bigsby solid body of 1948 (look it up), except for the headstock shape; Fender copied that.

There are only so many traditional guitar shapes, and single cutaway shapes have been around for an awfully long time if you consider the old jazz boxes, etc. So for me at least, the only question becomes, "Which instrument do I prefer to play?"

So for me at least, the answer is, a PRS. If it looks like something else, well, whatever, that has function, too. Gibson lost their argument over the similarity of looks thing in court a decade ago; it might be time to move on.
 
Putting aside the question of looks, it has a sonic purpose. The control layout has a player convenience purpose if someone (like me) was previously a Gibson player.

I still currently play Gibson guitars. Several of my other guitars have similar control layouts. But my preference, is more like an SG... or Dean Hardtail

dean-guitars-usa-hardtail-212236.jpg


There's not much of a payoff in looking at these similarities and making the kinds of judgments you suggest, especially when the Les Paul itself is shaped exactly like the earlier Bigsby solid body of 1948 (look it up), except for the headstock shape; Fender copied that.

To each his own. I was simply giving my opinion.

There are only so many traditional guitar shapes, and single cutaway shapes have been around for an awfully long time if you consider the old jazz boxes, etc. So for me at least, the only question becomes, "Which instrument do I prefer to play?"

Like I said... I think PRS did a good job with their double cuts. I think it's uniquely PRS, so much when I see other guitars of similar shape, I think, "That's a PRS copy." & there's nothing wrong with that. I love my Dean Hardtails.

I'd love to own a Knaggs Kenai. A single cut, but different enough to be "unique."

Knaggs-KenaiIndian.jpg


Looks more Telecaster than Les Paul, but not really either.

So for me at least, the answer is, a PRS. If it looks like something else, well, whatever, that has function, too. Gibson lost their argument over the similarity of looks thing in court a decade ago; it might be time to move on.


Right... I think Gibson moved on a while back. I'm saying for me I identify PRS with the double cut bodies.
 
When I think PRS, I think of the double cut body. When I see a double cut body I say, "That's a PRS."

When I see the single cuts I say, "They're trying to be something they're not."

I understand the PRS single cut is as far from a Les Paul as the double cut is from a strat. But I'm an old fkr & slow to accept change.

Totally get it. I was so resentful when they came out with the original Singlecut back in the day. Actually, back then I'd have surely scoffed at a doublecut PRS with binding, two-piece bridge, and four knobs too. I've grown to the point now where I applaud their efforts to build a better mousetrap. I'm all about that classic PRS shape, but since choice is a good thing, I'm glad the Singlecut version is out there too. It suits another base of players and gets more people into the brand, so I'm all for it.
 
Hey Guys I don't have or haven't even played a single cut but I did buy a DC 594 last week. My guitar history is predominately Les Pauls for 35 years with Strat or Tele here and there. I've owned 20 + Les Pauls a Traditional or two a Standard and the rest Custom Shop or Collecters Choices. I keep hearing testimonies on the 594 and there were to many common denominators so I figure hey its worth a shot. We'll this thing shot to my #1 the first night and I'm totally blown away with this guitar. The fit /finish play-ability, intonation, balance, versitility, etc. Its truly the best guitar I've ever purchased.
And to top it all off you know when a singer is a really great singer their voice is truly a special voice. This 594 has a truly spectacular voice. The lead voice to me is incredible with the slide tones off the chart good. Mr. Smith and Team have knocked it out of the park with this thing. I'll keep in touch with that little store in Lexington and when they get a SC594 that speaks to me I can answer the above question.;)

Welcome to the Forum! Great first post!
 
when the Les Paul itself is shaped exactly like the earlier Bigsby solid body of 1948 (look it up), except for the headstock shape; Fender copied that.

This statement intrigued me as I've always been interested in the history of the guitar. I've researched it a little and this is what I've been able to ascertain about the origin of the first electric solid body guitar.

Merle Travis and Paul Bigsby were friends. One day while sharing libations in a pub, Travis sketched an idea he had to build a full-sized solid-body electric guitar on a napkin. That guitar was incredibly modern for 1948, with true six-on-a-side tuning machines, neck-through construction, and the idea to "make a guitar sustain like a steel guitar," with aluminum nut and bridge. What is remarkable is the shape of the headstock. Look familiar?

https://www.premierguitar.com/articles/Forgotten_Heroes_Paul_Bigsby?page=2

Bigsby finished the guitar on May 25, 1948. Although there had been electric guitars for almost twenty years, and some that could be called a "solidbody" guitar (the Rickenbacker bakelite spanish guitar, the Slingerland Songster spanish, and the Audiovox Spanish electric), the one that Merle Travis and Paul Bigsby came up with in May 1948 can definitively be called the first modern solidbody electric guitar. It's importance and influence can only be realized when one realizes what came after it--the Fender Telecaster, the Fender Stratocaster, the Gibson Les Paul, the Gretsch Duo-Jet, and others--all owing a heavy debt to the ideas that Paul Bigsby first introduced in the Merle Travis solidbody electric guitar.

Travis also had Bigsby convert the neck on his Martin D28, at approximately the same time, which he used as his primary acoustic guitar for the rest of his life. Here are a couple of examples. I think "John Henry" is from 1949, very early.

Better view of the guitar. "Nine Pound Hammer" from 1951.


Merle also invented "Travis" picking ... truly iconic. Listen to "Dust In The Wind" for an excellent interpretation into rock music.
He was also an inveterate drunk and amp user, although not a mean one.
He "cleaned up" in the late seventies and then promptly croaked ... what are you gonna do?

What amazes me is this is almost 70 years ago.
My favourite guitarist.
 
Last edited:
For me, the whole question is sound, not looks. I`ve seen very few guitars in my lifetime that I didn`t like to look at. Each combination of wood, shape, weight, scale length, pickups, hardware , ad nauseum results in different sounds. When we get lucky, we find the one(s) that speak to us. Single or double cut, they`re going to sound different. I think that PRS is guilty of trying to make every shape and size sound the best that they can. There aren`t many companies that I can say that about. That`s my key belief. Now, we all have to buy 10 or 12 to hear all the sounds we envision in our heads. Ain`t that a shame?
 
Great post, I Know A Little!

Thx. I appreciate it.
I always like to know more, rather than less, about stuff I'm interested in. In this case the history of the guitar in general.

Both Bigsby and Travis were "eccentrics", in the truest sense of the word. For good and bad.

Anywho, for anyone who might be interested, this clip with Thom Bresh (Travis' son), is very long, very interesting and very entertaining.

 
Last edited:
Back
Top