PRS has re-engineered the shape of its tuners

[littlebadboy]

The article mentions:
So, what’s so innovative about these tuners? Well, cosmetically they're designed to echo the 12th fret bird wingspan design, but the change isn’t just ergonomic. Instead, they were “first and foremost” designed to increase the tonality of the guitars that feature them.

What do you guys think?

The rest of the article is here.

 

[SinSir]

There's another thread about it going on

 

[SinSir]

New tuning buttons

They look big! but Paul says lighter. I thought they looked kinda plain jane, actually. I will take their expertise, in the end.

forums.prsguitars.com

 

[Alnus Rubra]

The article mentions:
So, what’s so innovative about these tuners? Well, cosmetically they're designed to echo the 12th fret bird wingspan design, but the change isn’t just ergonomic. Instead, they were “first and foremost” designed to increase the tonality of the guitars that feature them.

What do you guys think?

The rest of the article is here.

Yeah, but what about the thickness of the headstock veneer?

 

[RickP]

That’s why there’s only one screw in the truss cover. And thank goodness it’s a Phillips head… makes all the difference.

Like in the other thread… the only opinion that matters is between the tuning pegs there. It’s all going to be alright.

 

[Bogner]

What do you guys think?

I Think They Suck. They Look Like They Have Been Ground Down To About Two Thirds Of What They Once Were.

 

[Bogner]

Yeah, but what about the thickness of the headstock veneer?

It's A Nice Touch...

 

[JMintzer]

How should I feel about these buttons?

 

[JMintzer]

Or these?

 

[mixmkr]

The imperial are nice. I'd take them before the new design.

 

[Senor Verde]

The new tuners are not the most attractive to me. I'd like to see them from the back side and wonder if some aftermarket tuners would drop right in. However, I would probably just get used to the look and leave them alone.

 

[Going Modal]

Or these?

View attachment 12260

THREE truss-rod cover screws??? Oh, the horror..!

 

[Going Modal]

...not the most attractive to me. I'd like to see them from the back side...

That's what HE said.

 

[dkilpatrick]

They do serve a purpose, I’ve always found the original metal buttons add a bit of weight to the headstock. I’ve swapped out all of my metal ones for lighter wood ones matching the headstock veneer. Makes a big difference. I couldn’t care less what shape they are as long as they still turn smoothly. But the lighter weight is a plus in my book.

 

[Herr Squid]

They do serve a purpose, I’ve always found the original metal buttons add a bit of weight to the headstock. I’ve swapped out all of my metal ones for lighter wood ones matching the headstock veneer. Makes a big difference. I couldn’t care less what shape they are as long as they still turn smoothly. But the lighter weight is a plus in my book.

OK, now that's genuinely interesting to hear from a player and long-time member. Paul hisself has said for a long time that reducing mass on the headstock is a Good Thing. They've been progressing in that direction for a long time now, I think. I thought the phase 3 tuners with the open gears were a weird choice, but they work really well, and I think "skeletonizing" them to uncover the gears was a deliberate decision to reduce mass.

Of course with this new announcement, everybody's seeing those unmistakable plastic buttons with a big wingspan conflating it with a "plastic == toanz!" message. Was that what PRS meant to get across? It think it's what the interwebz commentariat has glommed on to and I detect a whiff of New Birds blowback.

Looks like I need another beer.

 

[OGN]

As long as there’s not a stringwinder fitment problem, they look okay. Even if they remind me a bit of Lampwick’s teeth.

 

[bodia]

They do serve a purpose, I’ve always found the original metal buttons add a bit of weight to the headstock. I’ve swapped out all of my metal ones for lighter wood ones matching the headstock veneer. Makes a big difference. I couldn’t care less what shape they are as long as they still turn smoothly. But the lighter weight is a plus in my book.

OK, now that's genuinely interesting to hear from a player and long-time member. Paul hisself has said for a long time that reducing mass on the headstock is a Good Thing. They've been progressing in that direction for a long time now, I think. I thought the phase 3 tuners with the open gears were a weird choice, but they work really well, and I think "skeletonizing" them to uncover the gears was a deliberate decision to reduce mass.

Of course with this new announcement, everybody's seeing those unmistakable plastic buttons with a big wingspan conflating it with a "plastic == toanz!" message. Was that what PRS meant to get across? It think it's what the interwebz commentariat has glommed on to and I detect a whiff of New Birds blowback.

Looks like I need another beer.

I'd concur on the weight bit. Remember when they changed from PIII to Vintage on the 594 and Paul said it was for weight relief, and how it effeced tone. Everyone lost their sh!t. Well, here's picture proof that they were lighter. And, I can recall sitting with Mr. 594 (aka MA Pete) one afternoon with a couple of new 594s (meaning 2020...nitro, tuners, etc) and a couple of the "old" version. We both agreed that there was something a little "more" with the newer ones. Was it the nitro? Was it the tuners? Don't know, but it was discernable.

 

[JasonE]

Then a bunch of people will put a clip on tuner on the headstock and put the weight back.. That is literally a half an ounce.

 

[dkilpatrick]

On PRS hollowbodies, which are light bodied guitars to begin with, it’s the difference between having considerable neck dive and hanging balanced on a strap.

 

[Mark Ray]

My only comment is that this development wouldn't keep me from buying one.