PRS McCarty & Gibson R9 LP STD

[El Rey]

A lover of PRS & Gibson.....hadn't had either new for decades.

All of 2024 added 8 new (actually all but one) Gibson LP's. 3 are Traditionals, rest custom shop/historic reissues.

And, 4 new core PRS; DGT ten top, Paul's Guitar, Wildwood Library 10-top McCarty & CU 24-08. Fortunately, I love them all!!

A personal observation, my McCarty sounds so similar in many ways to both my R9 LP's. The R9's out of all my LP's sound more alike than all my other LP's. Definitely strange, and yes I realize none of us share the same realities. Subjective for sure. You'd probably have to pick them up, play them.

Weird one. Anyone else experience something like this?

 

[FatFingerBlues]

I lusted after a Gibson for many years
but after I got my PRS guitars I realized I didn't need a Gibson
I have everything I need
What little the DGT doesn't cover the Cu24 does and the Singlecut with Pearly Gates fills in the rest
I also have a Strat so I feel like I have all my bases covered

 

[László]

A personal observation, my McCarty sounds so similar in many ways to both my R9 LP's. The R9's out of all my LP's sound more alike than all my other LP's. Definitely strange, and yes I realize none of us share the same realities. Subjective for sure. You'd probably have to pick them up, play them.

Weird one. Anyone else experience something like this?

This is an interesting video you might enjoy, with Howard Leese of Heart and Bad Company, and Tim Pierce comparing a real '59 Burst, '57 Gold Top, and some new PRS'.

Just my opinion, but the guitars can sound pretty darn close.

 

[VHTStark]

A lover of PRS & Gibson.....hadn't had either new for decades.

All of 2024 added 8 new (actually all but one) Gibson LP's. 3 are Traditionals, rest custom shop/historic reissues.

And, 4 new core PRS; DGT ten top, Paul's Guitar, Wildwood Library 10-top McCarty & CU 24-08. Fortunately, I love them all!!

A personal observation, my McCarty sounds so similar in many ways to both my R9 LP's. The R9's out of all my LP's sound more alike than all my other LP's. Definitely strange, and yes I realize none of us share the same realities. Subjective for sure. You'd probably have to pick them up, play them.

Weird one. Anyone else experience something like this?

You know, when I got my 2015 artist package McCarty I had a an R9 on hand....and had owned a few other Custom Shop Lester's by that time over the years.

Plugging it in, the R9 comparison became super evident to me. Really noticeable similarities in tone and response. Close enough I ended up selling the R9 to a friend for a good price who really wanted it.

I really love the OG McCarty's. That 2015 and my 2022 Robben Ford are both lifer guitars!

 

[gush]

This is an interesting video you might enjoy, with Howard Leese of Heart and Bad Company, and Tim Pierce comparing a real '59 Burst, '57 Gold Top, and some new PRS'.

Just my opinion, but the guitars can sound pretty darn close.

I 100% agree they sound dangerously close.

That video promped me to start a thread asking what everybody thought THE LP tone was to them?

It really got me thnking about that same question when swapping pickups in my mccarty.

Is a 59 LP the tone i think i like?

 

[Gtrbldr]

Are we talking regular McCs or 594s?

 

[doublescale1]

I sold my R9 a couple of years ago when the price of even used ones went crazy high. My late 90's was in mint condition and I got a very good price for it. I liked it, but it wasn't a "changed my life" kind of guitar. I have my core '07 McCarty with a Railhammer Hyper vintage set and a 2017 Les Paul Studio with a Jim Wagner "American Steel" set in it. In my big 9-piece horn band I prefer the McCarty precisely because it doesn't have the extended lows of a Les Paul, therefor it cuts and sits better in that large band mix; much less low end conflict with the keys, bass player and low end horns. The Wagner pickups in my LP Studio are an amazing set of PAF voiced humbuckers that have just enough more "girth" without getting woofy or clogged up in the low mids. I've made peace with any dual humbucker guitar GAS between these two great guitars and the pickups I have in them now.

 

[László]

Are we talking regular McCs or 594s?

In one of Pierce's videos, he compares a regular McCarty to the '59, and again, it was closer than I thought it would be, but I don't remember which video, and didn't want to watch a bunch of them all the way through.

I have a McCarty Singlecut from the PS run of 2014 that's also pretty darn close. Comparing that guitar, I'd say the main difference is that the PRS has a wider frequency balance. The McSC has 57/08s. I think you get a little closer with the 58/15s, though again, it's splitting hairs. The McSC also has a 24.5" scale length.

I've often said we hear the amp more than the guitar. But I recently came to the conclusion that's not necessarily true.

I believe we hear the guitar, with its harmonic content, filtered by the coloration of the amp and its harmonic content. In other words, it's the guitar, enhanced by what the amp is doing (or detracted from, depending on how much you like the amp).

We can still hear the characteristics of the guitar we're playing.

That's why we can hear guitars through amps with a fair amount of gain, and still come to a decision re: whether two guitars sound a lot alike. It'd be an impossible task if all we hear is amp. That's clearly not the case.

I'd compare it to folks saying a particular microphone, like the U47, is "The sound of Frank Sinatra" because he sang through one in recording sessions.

I mean, WTF, that's just nonsense. The sound of Frank Sinatra was Frank Sinatra. The mic merely added a little coloration, and even that was a relatively minuscule amount. Put Frank Sinatra in front of a $50 Chinese mic, and it's still going to be Frank Sinatra (though in his case, it'd be Dead Frank Sinatra, and you'd need one hell of an Ouija Board to hear the sumbitch).

With guitar amps, the degree of coloration is obviously greater than with a mic - they're inherently less accurate in reproduction. But you can still hear the difference between a Les Paul and a Strat, or pretty much anything else, even through fairly high amounts of gain.

 

[Gtrbldr]

In one of Pierce's videos, he compares a regular McCarty to the '59, and again, it was closer than I thought it would be, but I don't remember which video, and didn't want to watch a bunch of them all the way through.

I have a McCarty Singlecut from the PS run of 2014 that's also pretty darn close. Comparing that guitar, I'd say the main difference is that the PRS has a wider frequency balance. The McSC has 57/08s. I think you get a little closer with the 58/15s, though again, it's splitting hairs. The McSC also has a 24.5" scale length.

I've often said we hear the amp more than the guitar. But I recently came to the conclusion that's not necessarily true.

I believe we hear the guitar, with its harmonic content, filtered by the coloration of the amp and its harmonic content. In other words, it's the guitar, enhanced by what the amp is doing (or detracted from, depending on how much you like the amp).

We can still hear the characteristics of the guitar we're playing.

That's why we can hear guitars through amps with a fair amount of gain, and still come to a decision re: whether two guitars sound a lot alike. It'd be an impossible task if all we hear is amp. That's clearly not the case.

I'd compare it to folks saying a particular microphone, like the U47, is "The sound of Frank Sinatra" because he sang through one in recording sessions.

I mean, WTF, that's just nonsense. The sound of Frank Sinatra was Frank Sinatra. The mic merely added a little coloration, and even that was a relatively minuscule amount. Put Frank Sinatra in front of a $50 Chinese mic, and it's still going to be Frank Sinatra (though in his case, it'd be Dead Frank Sinatra, and you'd need one hell of an Ouija Board to hear the sumbitch).

With guitar amps, the degree of coloration is obviously greater than with a mic - they're inherently less accurate in reproduction. But you can still hear the difference between a Les Paul and a Strat, or pretty much anything else, even through fairly high amounts of gain.

Tnx. My McCs are a real LP GAS killers for me, but ai have no comparison, however I get the little broader frequency spectrum, and lack of (unnesessary) low end. So I am not surprised

 

[László]

Tnx. My McCs are a real LP GAS killers for me, but ai have no comparison, however I get the little broader frequency spectrum, and lack of (unnesessary) low end. So I am not surprised

I felt the same way about my McCartys over the years. I was always a Gibson player before 1991, and still have a lot of respect for the brand. But I think PRS' play better, and like you, I prefer the PRS' wider frequency balance.

 

[Bogner]

Are we talking regular McCs or 594s?

I Wish The McCarty Name Wasn't Thrown Around So Much. To Me, The Real McCarty's Are The Original Ones. This 594 Rubbish Should Simply Be 594.

The Real McCarty I Am A Huge Fan Of.

 

[Prina]

My McCs are a real LP GAS killers for me, but ai have no comparison...

Same here. I haven't had an R9 or a Core 594 but wouldn't be surprised if there's more variation within each of those groups than between them.

I don't have my S2 594 SC anymore but between the LP Dlx (mini-humbuckers), Stripped '58 (57/08), P245 (58/15), SE 245 Soapbar (Gibson P-90) & SE245 (Alnico IV Wolfetone Marshallhead) I feel that I have the 24.5" - 24.75" LP-style singlecut space covered. At least enough to cover what my playing warrants. So no LP GAS here.

 

[bodia]

This is an interesting video you might enjoy, with Howard Leese of Heart and Bad Company, and Tim Pierce comparing a real '59 Burst, '57 Gold Top, and some new PRS'.

Just my opinion, but the guitars can sound pretty darn close.

This would be the one you are referring to.

 

[dmatthews]

I Wish The McCarty Name Wasn't Thrown Around So Much. To Me, The Real McCarty's Are The Original Ones. This 594 Rubbish Should Simply Be 594.

The Real McCarty I Am A Huge Fan Of.

I love them both.

 

[SinSir]

I Wish The McCarty Name Wasn't Thrown Around So Much. To Me, The Real McCarty's Are The Original Ones. This 594 Rubbish Should Simply Be 594.

The Real McCarty I Am A Huge Fan Of.

Agreed. A 594 is a 594. Only the OGs are the McC

 

[bodia]

Agreed. A 594 is a 594. Only the OGs are the McC

Fact!

 

[aamefford]

This would be the one you are referring to.

Fun watch! Thank you and thanks @László.

 

[Gtrbldr]

Fact!

Too bad PRS refers to them as McC 594s, so there is that.

 

[SinSir]

Too bad PRS refers to them as McC 594s, so there is that.

Kinda like only my Mom calls me by my full name. And then I better watch out

 

[László]

I Wish The McCarty Name Wasn't Thrown Around So Much. To Me, The Real McCarty's Are The Original Ones. This 594 Rubbish Should Simply Be 594.

The Real McCarty I Am A Huge Fan Of.

Both the original McCarty and the McCarty 594 are great guitars; I've probably had 8 or 9 originals, and 3 or 4 594s. They're simply different flavors, with more similarities than differences.

Ted McCarty and the company under his direction came up with the stuff that lots of PRS guitars are based on, including the mahogany/maple sandwich, the humbucker, the two-piece Tune-O-Matic, the original single-piece stop tail, the four control layout, the scale length of the 594, etc., etc.

Ted was one of Paul's mentors, and it shows. His influences are important to both the original McCarty and the 594.

Paul's acknowledgment of that influence is a stand-up-guy thing. It is honorable and correct to honor one's mentor that way!

As for the two models, regardless of what someone on the outside thinks, PRS gets to name their guitars whatever the f#ck they want to. So there's that.