A True, 100% Classic: The Custom 24

[21Hemispheres12]

The pic is unfortunately not showing up for me. I'd love to see it!

Hm weird it’s not showing up, this link should do the trick!

https://imgur.com/coI27cW

 

[László]

Hm weird it’s not showing up, this link should do the trick!

https://imgur.com/coI27cW

That guitar is FAR more beautiful than my PS! It's fantastic.

 

[Deleted member 5962]

My Custom 24 is the smoothest nicest playing guitar I've ever played.

 

[sergiodeblanc]

I have now realised my errors, and will revert back to just posting Thumper-approved positiveness However, as you asked who doesn't love a Gretsch - Jimmie Webster is a kinda hero as his ideas were (at times) so bonkers. But because you asked I see them as amplified big box jazz guitars from the 40s - so effectively just the same as the ES150. Ditto the ES175 - although the 175 probably deserves kudos (and a place) as the longest running electric guitar in continuous production. Solid Gretches - essentially LP copies with pine knots, cactus and G-brands (thanks Mr Webster). Ricks - yes, I agree (although I don't think they sell by the boat load) - Eight Miles High alone gets them a place. Jazz and Jag - probably not stood the test of time, although they sold by the boat load when new. Plus, King of Surf Dick Dale said the only true surf guitar ws a Strat, and he'd know. That said Tom Verlaine played a Jazz, and as a gen X- ex-punk (TM Sergio) I will make an exception for them because of that. And OK yes to Danelectro/Silver Tone - who doesn't love a plywood and hardboard guitar if the price is right.


Agree

Nah, I wasn’t salty about what you posted, and I wasn’t challenging you out of forum etiquette-fanboy-ism-brand loyalty, it was just legit interweb debate club.

The Custom 24 isn’t even my favorite guitar. Sure, I guess I have one or two laying around but, CE’s and Standards sound better (to me). Back when I bought my first PRS I bought a CE instead of a Custom (and a Metal, doh!) and for the last 6-7 years I’ve been saying that anything that isn’t a “Santana” is “trash”.

“Thumpers Rule” really only applies (for me) when it’s someone’s guitar or a dealer’s run.

 

[Collywobbles]

Nah, I wasn’t salty about what you posted, and I wasn’t challenging you out of forum etiquette-fanboy-ism-brand loyalty, it was just legit interweb debate club.

The Custom 24 isn’t even my favorite guitar. Sure, I guess I have one or two laying around but, CE’s and Standards sound better (to me). Back when I bought my first PRS I bought a CE instead of a Custom (and a Metal, doh!) and for the last 6-7 years I’ve been saying that anything that isn’t a “Santana” is “trash”.

“Thumpers Rule” really only applies (for me) when it’s someone’s guitar or a dealer’s run.

Thanks Sergio - I didn't take it as salty. Plus, I'm fine with being corrected - if someone makes me realise I'm wrong, then great, I'll happily change my opinion. Amber is pretty good song having had a listen, although the bass player's dancing probably needs work if they really want to make the big time

Re Thumper's Rule - I think discussions on the interweb lose all the context and nuances of a f2f discussion and can become unintended train wrecks at the speed of light, so on reflection I think it’s probably a good policy to follow somewhere 'family-friendly' like here

FWIW I agree re Standards - I had a 1985 pre-Standard that was the nicest sounding PRS I've owned from a total of ten (7 of which were Customs / Sigs - a Sig just being a posh Custom). I only got rid it as a bit of post purchase due diligence threw up a shady history, so it went back. (That was another lesson learned - the word is full of crooks, so it's best to do your due diligence before purchase...)

I also used to have a 1986 Metal - strangely I never really bonded with it, so it was sold and it's now in Italy I think.

 

[Proteus]

Well. So in the spirit of respectful collegial non-flaming no-trolls-here discussion, I'll have to take respectful collegial exception to some of the following Gretsch characterizations, and to ask (again without meaning to seem challenging) if you have a lot of hands-on experience with the guitars in question.

However, as you asked who doesn't love a Gretsch - Jimmie Webster is a kinda hero as his ideas were (at times) so bonkers. But because you asked I see them as amplified big box jazz guitars from the 40s - so effectively just the same as the ES150. Ditto the ES175 - although the 175 probably deserves kudos (and a place) as the longest running electric guitar in continuous production. Solid Gretches - essentially LP copies with pine knots, cactus and G-brands (thanks Mr Webster).

I don't think the Gretsch hollowbodies (with the exception of the lineage which started in the late 40s as the Electro, then became the Country Club, and sprouted the Falcon branch of the tree) really serve the same sonic function as any Gibson hollowbody. I don't question that Gretsch was responding to Gibson in the market, and following their lead, as it were. But even with those aforementioned 17" full deep hollowbodies, the internal bracing / sound-posting differed from Gibson practice, and the original DeArmon "Fidelatone" single-coil (brand-named Dynasonic by Gretsch) sounded very little like Gibson's P-90s. So while those guitars obviously looked kinda me-too, they didn't (and don't) sound it. Eventually they found players who exploited that.

And I think the 16" moderately deep hollowbodies - the 6120 - were from their beginnings so different in tone, response, and application that they could no longer be characterized as copies. In the same way that the Dynasonic and the P-90 are so surprisingly different, the Filter'Tron, which came along in 1958 alongside Gibson's humbucker, has to be considered a parallel species of the double-coil genus. Especially in Gretsch guitars, with their distinctive build characteristics (but even when used in other bodies), a Filter'Tron doesn't just sound like another humbucker.

And THEN, where Gibson went with open f-holes in a slimmer body with a plank down the middle for the 335 and its derivatives - presumably to quell feedback and limit inharmonic overtones - Gretsch instead fully enclosed a slimmer hollow body and used various internal bracing (but NOT a full center-plank) toward the same end - and thus the Country Gentleman and the later Tennesseean.

It's not my purpose to debate who did these things first; there was an awful lot of synchronicity at the time, like the same ideas were floating around in the electric guitar community, and both Gibson and Gretsch revealed these changes (from single-coil to double-coil, from full open hollowbodies to thinlines) at pretty much the same time. They had to have been developing through prototypes for some time along their parallel paths.

The explanations are only to illustrate that the Gretsch takes on what LOOK like similar builds are not, in tone and response, copies of Gibson originals. They're different enough to be considered "things" on their own.

Likewise, certainly, the Jet. I know it can look - to those of us steeped in Les Paulotry for years before exposure to it - like a misshapen LP. But in tone, response, and application...it ain't. Especially the first gen Jet, circa 1953-57. Those "solid" bodies are significantly "chambered" inside - the tops were installed over a significantly hogged-out mahogany body - and that, along with the Dynasonics, make for a guitar that's very much its own thing. That design (especially with Dynas) makes a poor Les Paul - but it's magnificent in its own right.

The pine knots, G-brand, western imagery, and leather tooled rims are all silly Websterian ephemera; even Chet hated the ktisch (and I don't think much more of it). It's wrong not to see (or, more accurately, hear or play) beyond that to the distinctive guitars that crap adorned.

Thankfully, they were always available without the cowboy kitsch.

 

[Collywobbles]

Well. So in the spirit of respectful collegial non-flaming no-trolls-here discussion, I'll have to take respectful collegial exception to some of the following Gretsch characterizations, and to ask (again without meaning to seem challenging) if you have a lot of hands-on experience with the guitars in question.



I don't think the Gretsch hollowbodies (with the exception of the lineage which started in the late 40s as the Electro, then became the Country Club, and sprouted the Falcon branch of the tree) really serve the same sonic function as any Gibson hollowbody. I don't question that Gretsch was responding to Gibson in the market, and following their lead, as it were. But even with those aforementioned 17" full deep hollowbodies, the internal bracing / sound-posting differed from Gibson practice, and the original DeArmon "Fidelatone" single-coil (brand-named Dynasonic by Gretsch) sounded very little like Gibson's P-90s. So while those guitars obviously looked kinda me-too, they didn't (and don't) sound it. Eventually they found players who exploited that.

And I think the 16" moderately deep hollowbodies - the 6120 - were from their beginnings so different in tone, response, and application that they could no longer be characterized as copies. In the same way that the Dynasonic and the P-90 are so surprisingly different, the Filter'Tron, which came along in 1958 alongside Gibson's humbucker, has to be considered a parallel species of the double-coil genus. Especially in Gretsch guitars, with their distinctive build characteristics (but even when used in other bodies), a Filter'Tron doesn't just sound like another humbucker.

And THEN, where Gibson went with open f-holes in a slimmer body with a plank down the middle for the 335 and its derivatives - presumably to quell feedback and limit inharmonic overtones - Gretsch instead fully enclosed a slimmer hollow body and used various internal bracing (but NOT a full center-plank) toward the same end - and thus the Country Gentleman and the later Tennesseean.

It's not my purpose to debate who did these things first; there was an awful lot of synchronicity at the time, like the same ideas were floating around in the electric guitar community, and both Gibson and Gretsch revealed these changes (from single-coil to double-coil, from full open hollowbodies to thinlines) at pretty much the same time. They had to have been developing through prototypes for some time along their parallel paths.

The explanations are only to illustrate that the Gretsch takes on what LOOK like similar builds are not, in tone and response, copies of Gibson originals. They're different enough to be considered "things" on their own.

Likewise, certainly, the Jet. I know it can look - to those of us steeped in Les Paulotry for years before exposure to it - like a misshapen LP. But in tone, response, and application...it ain't. Especially the first gen Jet, circa 1953-57. Those "solid" bodies are significantly "chambered" inside - the tops were installed over a significantly hogged-out mahogany body - and that, along with the Dynasonics, make for a guitar that's very much its own thing. That design (especially with Dynas) makes a poor Les Paul - but it's magnificent in its own right.

The pine knots, G-brand, western imagery, and leather tooled rims are all silly Websterian ephemera; even Chet hated the ktisch (and I don't think much more of it). It's wrong not to see (or, more accurately, hear or play) beyond that to the distinctive guitars that crap adorned.

Thankfully, they were always available without the cowboy kitsch.

Thanks for the reply Proteus. I agree I, need to play more Gretsch guitars to form a more considered opinion. TBF they're quite rare in the UK (original / vintage ones anyway) so while I've played a lot of old Fenders and Gibsons over the years, I've not played anywhwre near as many Gretsch. Those that I have have often been in fairly poor condition too, so that doesn't help. Re the cowboy kitsch - I love that part of the brand's history and think that helps make Gretsch what it is. Next time I'm in London I will make a point of trying some old Gretsch (asuming I can find any) and see what I think. They tend to be relatively afordable too - White Penguins aside. Although the odds of finding one of those waddling down Denmark Street is remote...

 

[Doug B]

I have a 2003 CU24 w/ Dragon II pups, and it would absolutely be my #1 guitar - if it was less than it's 8.4 lbs! The neck is perfect, those pups are perfect, I'm not a fan of the rotary switch, but oh, positions 2 & 4! I just got a 2018 CU22 Semi-hollowbody that weighs 6.5 lbs, but the neck isn't the same profile. If PRS made that guitar as a Semi-hollowbody with a 5-way blade it would be perfect. My back is shot, so the lighter the better. My McCarty 594 HBII weighs 5.8 lbs - that's the perfect weight for my poor old back!

The neck on the CU24 is how all my guitars should be. Same with those Dragon II pups. I actuallly prefer them (most of the time) over the 58/15 LTs. Even I can't figure that one out.

 

[Jimi D]

Love this thread... I've enjoyed reading it's entirety and there's so much good stuff here...

Like many, my first PRS was a CU24 from the '90s I ended up selling to Steve Segal (the guy that played with April Wine, not the bloated ex-bodyguard-turned-"actor"-cum-nut-job). My second was a gold wrap special order that I picked up for a song and traded for my first McCarty. My reasons for selling both had more to do with compulsive GAS than any particular issue with the guitars, though I'll admit I'm not much a fan of the HFS/VB pickups, which surely was a contributing factor... these guitars were mine back when a good digital camera had a 3 megapixel resolution and drive space was still dear so these are the only pictures I have of the two of them now:

Then, in 2010, I picked up my 25th Anniversary Custom and that changed everything. I was playing a Strat at the time and owned an LP and SG as well, but few guitars had ever felt so right to me out of the box as this one did, and it has since become the most played (and most gigged) guitar I have ever owned. I fell in love with the 57/08s almost immediately, and though I wasn't sure about the 5-way knob switching at first, it quickly became indispensable to me in the context of the corporate & cover bands I was working with at the time... In the end, it was the perfect guitar for me then and remains a Herculean workhorse now; it just covers so much ground so very, very well. Here's a pic with it between a couple of it's favoured siblings:

It looks pretty spit'n'polish in that pic but the truth is it's carrying a fair few scars at this point. Still plays perfectly and just feels like an old friend though.

This guitar was so good that I started experimenting with other PRS guitars, and a fair few years later I find myself in the very fortunate position of caring for eight wonderful, toneful examples, which I hope to keep until I pass on (at which point they can be passed on ). I no longer have any Gibsons around, and though I've held on to two Strats, two Teles and two Gretsch guitars, I spend most of my time playing PRS instruments now. And it was this CU24 that was the "gateway" guitar, the one that really got me interested in the brand and what they brought to the table.

The pine knots, G-brand, western imagery, and leather tooled rims are all silly Websterian ephemera; even Chet hated the ktisch (and I don't think much more of it). It's wrong not to see (or, more accurately, hear or play) beyond that to the distinctive guitars that crap adorned.

Thankfully, they were always available without the cowboy kitsch.

Hey, some of us like kitsch

 

[Glide-bpm]

My formerly owned 1994 CE24...

 

[Glide-bpm]

My first ever owned PRS... 1998 10 Top Custom 24 purchased new in '98. Yep... Green... Should have kept that one, too...