Nitro finish “sink” on newer core models

[Grim_Pickins]

I recently got a ‘23 McCarty 594 single cut 10-top in charcoal burst and love it. I have one question though- when the light reflects off the top at certain angles, the grain in the top can be seen “telegraphing” through. This appears as long vertical lines that are especially noticeable on the upper bout where the paint is solid black. There is also some horizontal waviness that coincides with the flame. It is definitely the grain lines in the wood, as you can follow them to where the see-through part of the burst starts and see the grain clearly. The finish is not cracked like with checking. I’m assuming this is from it being a very thin nitro finish, so I’m curious- do all the nitro finished core models exhibit this to some extent? Obviously every piece of wood is different, but I’m just curious if this is abnormal in any way or all part of the deal with PRS nitro? I’m coming from Gibsons and haven’t noticed it this prominently on them, but maybe their finish formula or method is different? I don’t necessarily dislike it, but just want to know it’s totally normal and not a sign of any workmanship issues or sloppiness. Also, if you have any pics of guitars showing this effect, I’d be interested to see them. Thanks!

 

[Steve Dombroski]

yea, this is totally normal. even some older "thin finish" PRSs have this as well. I have a couple of '91 Artist 1s, and you can literally feel the wood grain on them because the finish is so thin. I actually like it quite a bit. You may notice over time that the finish will also sink into the divide between the maple top and the mahogany body...this is totally normal too.

 

[Black Plaid]

Yes, some of my favorite ones exhibit this and I think it's glorious!

It's a reflection of the wood, which you cannot get perfectly flat without dumping a bunch of filler in it!

 

[ElrytNamrogo]

Yep, totally normal. Even exhibit this on some of my other PRS guitars without nitro....just something that happens over time.

Personally, I really like the look of it when it happens on ash....

 

[SinSir]

I understand your concern. On one hand I like it but on another other can be over the top. It was one of the few reasons I wasn't interested in taking a green Myles Kennedy home. With the swamp ash body the sinks to the grain were everywhere. Even though I knew it was normal my brain processed it like a defect.

 

[Gtrbldr]

Yep, totally normal. Even exhibit this on some of my other PRS guitars without nitro....just something that happens over time.

Personally, I really like the look of it when it happens on ash....

Same here, my extremely heavily figured 10 from the 20th anniversary cu22 with poly has very noticable grain lines coming through (love that). Same holds for my nitro (not heavily figured) 09 smokeburst. The joints of the bookmatch and the glued on top are very noticeable. No problem what so ever: just gives some extra mojo

 

[László]

I recently got a ‘23 McCarty 594 single cut 10-top in charcoal burst and love it. I have one question though- when the light reflects off the top at certain angles, the grain in the top can be seen “telegraphing” through. This appears as long vertical lines that are especially noticeable on the upper bout where the paint is solid black. There is also some horizontal waviness that coincides with the flame. It is definitely the grain lines in the wood, as you can follow them to where the see-through part of the burst starts and see the grain clearly. The finish is not cracked like with checking. I’m assuming this is from it being a very thin nitro finish, so I’m curious- do all the nitro finished core models exhibit this to some extent? Obviously every piece of wood is different, but I’m just curious if this is abnormal in any way or all part of the deal with PRS nitro? I’m coming from Gibsons and haven’t noticed it this prominently on them, but maybe their finish formula or method is different? I don’t necessarily dislike it, but just want to know it’s totally normal and not a sign of any workmanship issues or sloppiness. Also, if you have any pics of guitars showing this effect, I’d be interested to see them. Thanks!

I have a bit of sinking into the grain on my Private Stock models. Comes with the territory.

Embrace it. It's not thick plastic, like poly. It's thin plastic (nitrocellulose was actually the first plastic in the late 19th C).

 

[Grim_Pickins]

Awesome, thanks guys. I think I knew it was normal, but the extra peace of mind is nice. I guess the reason I’ve seen it less on my gibsons is likely them using a thicker, goopier nitro. There’s always that stage of nervousness when spending so much on a new guitar until I get more comfortable with it over time. I’m glad it’s something to embrace. And in the spirit of that, post your grain sink pics!

 

[László]

Kinda hard to see it in this pic of my 1965 SG Special, but you can see it on the carved edge of the guitar.

A ‘feature’ of this old SG was that they spent maybe ten seconds on it in the sanding department! The edges ripple, those aren’t dents! My brother bought this new and it became mine in 1967, so I know how nearly every ding and dent got there!

Typical of Gibson nitro, it only took 30 years or so for the neck to finally dry and not feel sticky. By 1997 I could almost play it in summer!

People wax nostalgic about how they made them back in the day. Well, this is how they made them. People were a lot less picky, this was a fairly expensive guitar - it cost over $250 new plus the case, when Fenders were less expensive items (Put in perspective, a 1965 Mustang was $2500 out the door including lots of options, and a Corvette ran less than a Core PRS goes for now).

The crackling in the finish isn’t showing up in this pic. The lighting wasn’t the best at the house I was visiting. Oh, the tuning pegs weren't oriiginally black - that's 59 years of tarnish on the nickel hardware. I was a kid when I got it. I knew nothing of guitar care, and had I known anything, I still wouldn't have done much of it.

Because of the…erm…less than stellar mod to install the tune-o-matic bridge in 1971, the case is probably worth more than the guitar!

I’ll see if I can get any shots of the sinking on my PRS’, but it’s pretty subtle.

You might be wondering what the screw between the bridge and the stop tail was about.

I don't remember!

 

[guitarbods]

yea, this is totally normal. even some older "thin finish" PRSs have this as well. I have a couple of '91 Artist 1s, and you can literally feel the wood grain on them because the finish is so thin. I actually like it quite a bit. You may notice over time that the finish will also sink into the divide between the maple top and the mahogany body...this is totally normal too.

You like it. Great. But when I spend $10 plus thousand dollars for a wood library 594 with special features and I get this finish failure not on one guitar but 3 other PRs core guitars I find that tragic

I’ve had so many PRs guitars over the past 23 years. They’ve always been about quality and consistency in manufacturing and assembly, about tone, and about beauty

But, please put aside the aura of PRs and core models and above and realize that they are electric guitars! A little thicker base coat and finish coat might not meet Paul’s dream of a Stradivarius guitar with his name on it BUT IN REALITY they will be played through high quality and lesser quality amps and effects. The tone he speaks of is tone when the guitar is not amplified.

John Mayer tone comes from an amp rig in the high 6 figures. What his guitar might lack in tone or sustain he makes up with his rig including plethora of fantastic effects.

What he does get from PRs guitars is the feel and stability of the instrument and how it performs mechanically.

So with all that said, the guitars are great but unless they remedy my situation of these non grain but chemical coating problems, I’m going back to Gibson, Suhr, and fender. Whatever these might lack in construction quality and stability, a good setup can remedy that. Oh, the Suhrs I have are perfect in every way. Didn’t mean to link them with the other guitars

 

[László]

John Mayer tone comes from an amp rig in the high 6 figures. What his guitar might lack in tone or sustain he makes up with his rig including plethora of fantastic effects.

What he does get from PRs guitars is the feel and stability of the instrument and how it performs mechanically.

I can't blame you if nitro isn't your thing. It has its adherents and detractors. But I'm pretty sure Mayer doesn't just buy PRS because they're comfy and stable. There's more to it.

I was told Mayer spent a long time - years - working with PRS on the pickups alone, so we know at least something about how the tone of the guitar came into play; it wasn't just the mechanics and feel.

I hear the pickups and the various woods when I play clean to semi-dirty, which is my usual MO. I have currently, and have owned, amps that I think are super-nice, like PRS CAD amps and Two-Rocks, but none of them cost six figure money. Very nice amps, though.

One of the reasons I love PRS is that I can hear the wood varieties that go into making them. For those who say the wood doesn't matter except how it looks, I'd say play a bunch of Strats with a maple fretboard, and a bunch with a rosewood fretboard and tell me you can't hear the difference between the two.

But I can only speak for myself, and for my money, a guitar is first and foremost a tone machine, like the oscillators and filters on a synth, only they're generated by strings and wood. I'm fussy about taking care of my guitars, but tone comes first.

There are those who like what nitro does, and those who don't. I've actually been in both camps, as I had, well, not the best luck with sticky Gibson finishes that never seemed to dry and stuck to me in summer like glue, so for years I insisted on poly.

On the other hand I had a poly finish crack and flake off a 900 series Taylor after a very short time, and the thing never left my studio before it happened. So you never know.

My PRS nitro finishes have all worked out well. Four of my nitro guitars have been Private Stock models, and I've had no problem with them, though there's a little pore-sinking on the back of my PS McCarty Singlecut after owning it for 11 years that's really hard to see.

I've had my current PS models for 12 and 11 years, respectively, so if there were problems that bugged me, I'd have suffered them already.

Again, this guitar thing is all personal preference. No two of us have the exact same senses, taste, playing style, etc. I think it's perfectly OK to say, "I don't care for this result, I'm going to change brands I buy."

 

[guitarbods]

You like it. Great. But when I spend $10 plus thousand dollars for a wood library 594 with special features and I get this finish failure not on one guitar but 3 other PRs core guitars I find that tragic

I’ve had so many PRs guitars over the past 23 years. They’ve always been about quality and consistency in manufacturing and assembly, about tone, and about beauty

But, please put aside the aura of PRs and core models and above and realize that they are electric guitars! A little thicker base coat and finish coat might not meet Paul’s dream of a Stradivarius guitar with his name on it BUT IN REALITY they will be played through high quality and lesser quality amps and effects. The tone he speaks of is tone when the guitar is not amplified.

John Mayer tone comes from an amp rig in the high 6 figures. What his guitar might lack in tone or sustain he makes up with his rig including plethora of fantastic effects.

What he does get from PRs guitars is the feel and stability of the instrument and how it performs mechanically.

So with all that said, the guitars are great but unless they remedy my situation of these non grain but chemical coating problems, I’m going back to Gibson, Suhr, and fender. Whatever these might lack in construction quality and stability, a good setup can remedy that. Oh, the Suhrs I have are perfect in every way. Didn’t mean to link them with the other guitars

Sign in - Google Accounts

Google Photos

Home for all your photos and videos, automatically organized and easy to share.

photos.google.com

I tried to link these in the reply but it would not work. But I pasted the URL in the search bar and each pic came up.

Here are links to the photo of my 2023 prs 594 Core 10 top. Hopefully, this link works. You can enlarge the picture, but I think the original size is evidence enough of what is all over the body of this beautiful guitar.

 

[Steves355]

Yeah, I hate Nitro. I don't see the fuss. My Nitro guitars are a nightmare. My fav finish is actually my Anderson. My fav PRS are between 2011 and 2018. My Nitro PRS is a PITA. Enough for me not to buy another.

 

[d^rren]

Nitro will continue to shrink for years.

 

[Monahan]

Yeah, I hate Nitro. I don't see the fuss. My Nitro guitars are a nightmare. My fav finish is actually my Anderson. My fav PRS are between 2011 and 2018. My Nitro PRS is a PITA. Enough for me not to buy another.

Interesting.
What about the PRS Nitro finish makes it a PIA?

 

[d^rren]

Nitro finishes are delicate. They shrink and check and crack over time. You have to be careful about what materials they come near – certain kinds of rubber and leather will discolour or even eat into the finish. And of course, the finish yellows over time and likely has little in the way of UV protection, so the colour your guitar is today might be different from the colour it will be in 10 or 20 or 30 years.

 

[Monahan]

Nitro finishes are delicate. They shrink and check and crack over time. You have to be careful about what materials they come near – certain kinds of rubber and leather will discolour or even eat into the finish. And of course, the finish yellows over time and likely has little in the way of UV protection, so the colour your guitar is today might be different from the colour it will be in 10 or 20 or 30 years.

Makes sense.

Considering how much the company likes to play with finish formulas, I suspect PRS is using a formula different/more durable nitro than the traditional 50's era formula. If I recall correctly, Private Stock has (had?) an option for an old-type, traditional formula nitro, which would behave in the manner you described. It's probably for those who dig the "relic" look.

No matter the finish type, there's always tradeoffs. My old faithful Carvin SC90 (I bought new from their Hollywood store in the early/mid 90's) is finished with poly, and somehow moisture got underneath and created little white dots all along the bottom... also looks like it's damaged the seam of the two-piece maple top. Took it to a luthier some years back and asked about correcting it; "If this was lacquer, no problem-- but for this, the repair cost would be more than the guitar is worth." Still, I'm tempted to do the repair myself...

Anyway-- thanks for your input!

 

[d^rren]

There are parts of PRS's constant process of wanting to improve things that I truly appreciate. Their production process, particularly for necks, produces instruments that are stable and durable. But pickups and finishing always seem to be a moving target for them, and they've made a lot of problems for themselves over the years, particularly with various finish issues… clouding, dyes fading, etc. Sometimes it's good to just leave certain things alone, instead of trying to reinvent every wheel.

 

[Maertl513]

Shrinking or sinking is not only a phenomen of nitro finishes.

When the luthier or manufacturer has got time and each layer could fall in whilst dry process, then even a PU coat could be such thin that you can feel the grain under finger tips and nails. And you can obviously see it.

PRS on the other hand side puts much effort in a perfect flat coat, either nitro and PU.