dogrocketp
I drank the PRS kool aid, and it was tasty!
I have several older US bolt ons. As all ways I have to ask,”who cares”, if it plays and sounds great? They’re tools.
I say ask if it comes default with a hard case. Then you will know what’s core
Pretty sure this is still the case. Bridges are made in the US.
And I have used a hard case exactly zero times unless flying.The first 500 SS came with a hard case.
Tremolo bridge made in US, stoptails in Korea (unfortunately).
Tremolo bridge made in US, stoptails in Korea (unfortunately).
Interesting thread here, but now I’m wondering. Where would the bolt-on Brent Mason model fit in? And I have a Studio SAS, bolt-on with maple ‘board, set up with Studio HSS electronics (ok, so they’re Narrowfield ‘single-coils’). Now, I would consider both those as Core, along with my deeply-carved ‘91 CE-24. All are bolt-ons and 100% USA built.
It all starts getting so hard once we start in with the seemingly overlapping categorizations. They’re all just great guitars to me.
If a person really needed to do that, neck construction would seem to be the determining factor between Bolt-Ons and Cores.
Exactly. It’s gotta be more than that. I mean, can’t a Core model have a bolt-on neck within its particular design specs? Or would having a bolt-on, for instance, somehow ‘degrade’ a Private Stock? Nope. Sooo… I don’t see why an official Core model cannot also include bolt-on construction by design.
So, if this therefore negates bolt-on construction as *always* somehow meaning “lesser than Core”, then the current, official PRS “Bolt-On” categorization must also therefore be including *other* qualities besides. Such as having a *Korean* trem system. But then… that spec CAN also be included by choice; Bryan Ewald mentioned that he felt the “lesser” (not his actual words) imported, non-Core trem on the CE24 he was demo’ing helped to impart its more “twangy” nature—and my own CE24 Semi does in spades (-vs- the more robust terms on my several Cores). Which he seemed to really enjoy. And I’m also pretty sure he mentioned that Mayer had spec’ed a similar “lesser” trem for the SS. Hmm.
So… a radical suggestion: Maybe PRS should now be using the terms Core Set-neck and Core Bolt-on for its USA lines, even whether they might spec a “lesser” twangy trem or not. (See the Reverend site for a similar division.) Then, use the simpler categorization of “Bolt-On Series” whenever they use a simpler carve and/or use offshore parts, etc. but are still assembled in the USA factory… but yet they’re still somehow considered a level above an S2 (which, AFAIK, uses even more imported parts). And S2s are also great guitars (I own two).
And finally, just for the record, I’m no “PRS Lawyer” etc., bantering about lotsa terms and such. Nah, I’m actually just a retired high school Art teacher! LOL.
Semantics. So much fun, eh? Anyway, just my $.02 worth.
Don’t split hairs or sniff corks, play guitar. Ooglybong has it right.Interesting thread here, but now I’m wondering. Where would the bolt-on Brent Mason model fit in? And I have a Studio SAS, bolt-on with maple ‘board, set up with Studio HSS electronics (ok, so they’re Narrowfield ‘single-coils’). Now, I would consider both those as Core, along with my deeply-carved ‘91 CE-24. All are bolt-ons and 100% USA built.
It all starts getting so hard once we start in with the seemingly overlapping categorizations. They’re all just great guitars to me.