All Things Being Equal...

[László]

Speaking of holy grail guitars, all things being equal (i.e.,money is not a factor), would you rather have your favorite PRS or some holy grail guitar that ‘everyone says it’s the best guitar ever made’ etc.

I personally would rather have my McCarty Singlecut than a ‘59 Burst, because I like the PRS sound better. I think I can do more with it. I get the whole thing about the Bursts, and I’ve played a couple back in the day, and they’re super-nice guitars. But if they weren’t the objects of worship, I’d prefer the PRS.

That’s a personal thing, and no one is expected to agree with me. 11Top and I once discussed this a few years ago, and I said pretty much the same thing then.

I’d rather have any of my PRSes than a ‘54-65 Strat. I’m not that big on Strats, and yes I’ve played a BUNCH of Strats from that era. I was offered a clean ‘65 Strat for $3500 about 15-16 years ago, and passed on it, also passed on a ‘53 Goldtop Les Paul in the 90s for about the same money.

Now, I’m NOT claiming that I made a good financial decision - certainly it turned out that I did not choose wisely on the economic front. But as a player, I like what I like, and those guitars ain’t it. Also, I already have a ‘65 SG Spl. that I don’t care much about compared to my PRSes. So it’s not like I never had a vintage guitar.

Again, a personal thing. I like PRSes. I relate to the tone.

So, all things being equal (if money or market value are NOT a factor in this discussion), would you rather have your fave PRS(s) or some quasi-mythical holy grail guitar?

Discuss amongst yourselves.

 

[jcha008]

I’m the same way. While it’s not like I could afford those insane vintage guitars to begin with, it’s also never really been my thing. I do own a couple Les Paul Customs, but I’ve always preferred some of the newer tops and finishes compared to the older ones. But even in saying that, there is nothing I would rather have than my PRS Singlecuts. I’ve never played another guitar that fits my hands and ears like those guitars and I don’t see that changing anytime soon. Any guitar that I order from PRS in the future will just be more Singlecuts, it’s become an addiction .

 

[László]

I’m the same way. While it’s not like I could afford those insane vintage guitars to begin with, it’s also never really been my thing. I do own a couple Les Paul Customs, but I’ve always preferred some of the newer tops and finishes compared to the older ones. But even in saying that, there is nothing I would rather have than my PRS Singlecuts. I’ve never played another guitar that fits my hands and ears like those guitars and I don’t see that changing anytime soon. Any guitar that I order from PRS in the future will just be more Singlecuts, it’s become an addiction .

I love the Singlecuts. I’ve had most of the models that have come out (I’m a serial ‘collector’ lol), and they’re just so great. The tone is so malleable, it can really be shaped in personal ways, and I believe it’s an advance on the LP concept.

I’m NOT dissing LPs. They’re cool guitars, and I was a Gibson man for a long time (1967-1991). I just happen to prefer my McSC to an LP.

Crazy as that sounds.

 

[markd21]

I would, and do, prefer my favorite PRS guitars over certain holy grail guitars. A large chunk of my PRS collection is courtesy of me selling a 1963 Strat. It was cool, but not something I gravitated toward. I figured (as did my wife) that the value of the strat would be better used toward things I would actually play.

 

[AP515]

If I were a collector, I'd care about the vintage stuff. I'm a player, and a poor one at that. I prefer the tone and playability of my PRSi.

 

[BWV548]

The vintage guitar craze, and a fair number of phenomena in guitar land, strikes me as a clear manifestation of declination bias. This doesn’t mean that people who have a strong emotional pull to a vintage instrument should seek an intervention of some sort, to correct the cognitive bias. Nor do I claim to be free of and above cognitive biases (far from it!!). I do, however, think that there is a prevalent attitude of looking backwards in the guitar world (and many other areas too). While looking backwards can be educational, and chasing the sound of your favorite artist can be fun and bring joy (very good things!), I do think the amount of backward looking (hearing, really) is probably doing more harm than good to guitar land. Nostalgia and a degree of wonder at the past is perfectly normal. However, I don’t find laudatores temporis acti bring much of anything to the conversation

 

[bodia]

I'll stick with my PRSes. I dig old guitars, but I'm not into playing them. If I was a collector, maybe it would be a different story. I'm content with my PRS collection!

 

[pauloqs]

As an economist, I usually love ceteris paribus (all other things being equal) discussions, but this particular case is a rare exception. I wouldn't be too happy having to choose only one between an R9 (or a real burst) and a McCarty. It pains me to even think about having to forego one of them. Both bring me an enormous amount of joy and inspire me to play more. I like being able to choose between them. Though very different, I'm indifferent between them, as I value both equally high. With that said, I prefer the McCarty over any other LP or G-guitars that is not an R9 (or a real burst). Conversely, I prefer the R9 (or a real burst) over any other PRS that is not a McCarty. I might wake up one day, and being forced to choose only one, pick the R9 due to looks and history just to change my mind less than an hour later thinking the lighter weight of a McCarty to be more comfortable playing for long stretches, then changing my opinion yet again after another hour or less and so on.

The rawness and grit of a good LP is very endearing to me, as is the precision and smoothness of a McCarty. Both tones, albeit different, sound amazing to me. Again one is a more raw in your face guttural and the other, although having some similarities, is still different and has a precision and a ease of cutting through a band mix that you don't often find anywhere else other than a PRS. The neck on both are really close, in terms of depth and shape, which is a big reason I gravitate towards these two guitars. For my hands, those necks are the perfect Goldilocks example. Not too thick, but not too thin either. Not too much shoulder, but not a full out V-shape. They are just perfect guitars, or maybe the closest thing to perfection I've found so far.

As an aside, I love Tim Pierce, but as a car enthusiast I think he couldn't be more wrong with comparing a PRS to a Ferrari. I would associate a LP with a Ferrari or a Lamborghini. I would say a PRS is more like a Bugatti or a McLaren. For instance, the Bugatti Veyron, were cars that despite its speed were very tamable and relatively easy to drive. Ferrari are usually or at least historically have been cars that are absolutely phenomenal despite its imperfections, a less utilitarian design and less than perfect QC.

 

[Mozzi]

I would rather have MY guitars (any of them if I had to pick just 1) than a 'holy grail' - like a 58 Gibson LP, a 63/64 Strat or whatever anybody else considers to be the 'holy grail' of guitars. Even my 'least' favourite - my PRS 509 - would be preferable to me than a 58 Les Paul. My 509 is only my least favourite because I see it more as a 'SC' guitar that I can use as a Humbucker neck and bridge guitar and I prefer a shorter scale too. The reason I see it more as a SC guitar is because I have excellent Humbucker guitars - 594, Cu24, HBii and most recently, my PRS Special 22.

Everyone of my guitars offers me more than a 'vintage' museum piece that I would feel is more of an Asset, a collectable that I could sell and retire on. At that age, the guitar would be best preserved as additional wear and tear (unless its already badly beaten up) could knock thousands off its value. If I inherited one (no chance of me buying one) I wouldn't hesitate in selling and replacing it with my guitar collection and would still have enough left over to be extremely comfortable. As I already own my collection, I don't know if I would stick it under the bed or sell now to reap the benefits now even if in 10yrs it could be worth double.

The only reason I would pick a 'holy grail' guitar if I was offered one or my 'favourite' (not that I can pick a favourite out of my other 4 as they all offer something that I love) guitar would be for purely financial value. I would take the Holy grail, sell it as soon as I could and with that money, buy my favourite guitar as well as any other 'gear' I want, stick the rest in the bank and live off the interest.

As great as a 58 Les Paul can sound, and I am not a Single Coil fan so not considering the holy grail strat or tele, there is alternative guitars that can sound close enough as well as offer modern appointments that I would be more than happy to have a Core PRS (non 10-top as all my PRS guitars are) for the advantages it offers over a vintage instrument in playability, feel and stability and all my guitars have more tonal variety too - my Hollowbody may only have the 3 options you get with a LP but can blend in Piezo and my most versatile, the PRS Special, offers 12 possible PU combinations. All are reasonable weight-wise, all have the benefits of experience, evolution etc so don't have the inherent flaw of that headstock design.

Take money out of the equation and there is no way I would pick the 'holy grail' (its not my holy grail). The only reason to pick it would be financial, to sell and use that money to buy whatever you want. Without its financial guitar, its just a used, limited and dated instrument that is only where it is because of historic relevance and limited availability. Even Bernies 'the Beast' (what value must that have) can be matched by an SE Bernie - at least close enough and there are numerous LP type guitars that I could buy with the money of selling 'the Beast' if I were to ever be gifted it. I would sell Greeny too if Kirk Hammet were to gift it to me too.

I think I have made it clear as to where I stand on this. I think my PRS Special is a beast with so much tonal options. Its nit too heavy and its certainly a stunning looking guitar - not an old worn out relic of the past that really only has financial value to me - historical importance too but I would rather have my PRS Special 22 or 594 to play - 2 guitars that come closest to the 58 Les Paul - I guess even my HBii can do the same job as well with my 509 and Cu24 being similar but also different enough that if I wanted to replace everything that a 58 Gibson LP can do, these 2 would not be my first choice as they are too different.

 

[veinbuster]

I have some other brands and there are things I find very appealing about them.

If I was doing a money is no object acquisition, it would be the ancient ones from John Mann’s and/or Garrett Park. Hands down, no question and I’d invite a dozen best mates over for a tea party. I just don’t care that much about mythical magic.

Ron Thorn is hands down my other favourite builder. His work is much more expensive now that he works for Fender, but it is in the new, modern, known commodity camp. He has an inspiring creativity.

 

[BWV548]

I would say a PRS is more like a Bugatti or a McLaren. For instance, the Bugatti Veyron, were cars that despite its speed were very tamable and relatively easy to drive. Ferrari are usually or at least historically have been cars that are absolutely phenomenal despite its imperfections, a less utilitarian design and less than perfect QC.

Really??? PRS's are of extremely high quality, yet quite readily available, if one's finances allow. Haven't Bugatti made less than 1000 cars total??
Cars aren't really my thing, but I'd say Les Pauls are more like Ladas

 

[Casi1]

I dig old guitars IF they speak to me. I prefer them to new guitars IF they speak to me. By speak to me, I mean that the guitar feels and sounds perfect to me... it says ‘I am special... take me home’. I wouldn’t buy a ‘59 Burst just because it’s a ‘59 Burst (heck, I have played a ‘59 Burst that didn’t sound or feel all that special and I have played one that I would have sold a kidney and half a lung for because it was that perfect).

The ‘59 Burst that I loved was more about feel than tone. I played a new LP that sounded close to that ‘59 but it definitely didn’t feel like it so the old guitar thing is a feel thing for me. That ‘59 checked both boxes: feel and tone.

If money wasnt an issue but I could only take one guitar home, I would choose the one that checked the most boxes as long as it spoke to me. If it doesn’t speak to me, I ain’t interested.

All of my current PRS guitars told me that they were special. Over the past year, I have traded away a couple PRSi that felt good but the tone wasn’t special enough to my ears. So they moved on. The ones that I still have are keepers. However, if I were offered a holy grail guitar that also spoke to me, then I’d be all over that bad boy. But holy grail guitar that hangs on the wall looking pretty 24-7 because I like to play other guitars instead? I will pass on that.

I like my guitars like I like my men (well, wait a minute, minus the old vintage part). Some guys want to just walk around looking hot, like that’s enough. I like functionally hot. In other words, hot guy has to do something other than look hot if he wants to stick around. Just because all the other girls are chasing after the hot guy doesn’t mean that I have to chase him. I will chase the guy that I like because of x,y, and z. For guitars, x,y, and z are tone and the feels.

 

[11top]

I’d take a real ‘59 Les Paul, sell it, buy a new ‘59 reissue, a PRS SC 245, and a winter home in Florida.

 

[sergiodeblanc]

There are too many functional things my preferred PRS guitars have that those other “holy grail” guitars don’t have... I can’t really compare them.

Honestly, the PRS trem, nut, and locking tuners alone have made me buy at least ten of them. I have no interest in allen wrenches, having to tune my G string every couple of songs, or chewing my palm up on protruding trem saddle adjustment screws.

What’s the vintage “holy grail” equivalent to CE’s and Santana’s anyway?

 

[sergiodeblanc]

I’d take a real ‘59 Les Paul, sell it, buy a new ‘59 reissue, a PRS SC 245, and a winter home in Florida.

I mean, we all would. Maybe not those guitars or in that state but...

 

[11top]

I mean, we all would. Maybe not those guitars or in that state but...

Which is my point.

I also think both new instruments I cited are the best they’ve ever been.

 

[vchizzle]

I’d take a real ‘59 Les Paul, sell it, buy a new ‘59 reissue, a PRS SC 245, and a winter home in Florida.

That’s almost my answer. ‘59, sell it, pay off the house, buy a few PS’s that suit my needs. Bank for a few GAS attacks.

 

[Tosca]

That’s almost my answer. ‘59, sell it, pay off the house, buy a few PS’s that suit my needs. Bank for a few GAS attacks.

Sell the ‘59 LP and look forward to being able to spec a new PS PRS every year for the rest of my life...

 

[pauloqs]

Really??? PRS's are of extremely high quality, yet quite readily available, if one's finances allow. Haven't Bugatti made less than 1000 cars total??
Cars aren't really my thing, but I'd say Les Pauls are more like Ladas

I think you might have missed my point. I wasn't talking about production levels, but performance. What I was trying to convey is that PRS guitars have a level of precision and finesse in fit & finish, attention to detail, comfort, and ease of usage that I usually don't analogously associate with Italian cars, not even the high performance ones.

I thought the whole premises of this was to take price out of the equation. It is as if a world ruler decided that every guitar in the world, used or otherwise, that every guitar costs $2,000, what would you choose? The moment you allow for arbitrage, we are out of this hypothetical question posed by Les. Maybe I understood it wrong. Anyways, if you allow for arbitrage, I'll have David Gilmore's black Strat, sell it and buy, in terms of guitars, an R6, an R8, an R9, an R0, a PRS McCarty, a PRS Custom 24-08, a SC 594, a Mira, a Paul's Guitar and a CS Tele. Even better, would be to keep my current guitars, sell Gilmore's guitar, use the money to put it down towards a new house in the Bay Area or some other disgustingly expensive place. I would rent the house and use the net between rent and mortgage as another revolving source of income to buy more guitars.

 

[László]

laudatores temporis acti

As an economist, I usually love ceteris paribus (

Latin! I love it, gentlemen!! Only on the PRS Forum.

Soon we’re going to be translating Caesar’s Commentaries, and yes indeed, Gallia in tres parties divisa est. Then maybe we can swing into a little Virgil translation (I’m a fan of the Aeneid), and finish up with my personal favorite, Ovid. Any time you want to delve into Epigramma Ipsius, we’re on.

Though I’d have to brush up just a little. It’s been a long time since my college Latin class; OK, like maybe 2000 years. But I remember a lot!