Ive seen some PRS acoustic’s with Steve Fischer’s name on the stamp. These are typically from 2010. Are these guitars what you’d call prototypes? Any differences to the guitars that came later?
His name on the sticker doesn’t imply prototype. His name was on production guitars while he was there. The guitars evolved some after, as is the case with most PRS stuff but I couldn’t point to any specific post Fischer changes in guitars.
Would a PRS acoustic with the Steve Fischer name on the stamp be the equivalent of a core model or a PS?
And most of the models with his name had the carbon fiber-non adjustable- truss rod; which is said to make no difference at all as to its playability. The 2 that I played were great. I have a post-Steve core model. Had nothing to do with his name.
I had one with his name and the carbon rod, and also have a later PS with the carbon rod, something I wanted after owning the Core version. What I can positively say is that the carbon rod certainly makes a difference as to the guitar’s playability, because the neck never moves, bows, or needs adjustment. It’s consistent every single day. And by consistent, I mean consistently great. That consistency makes all the playability difference in the world. I also think not having a big hunk of metal inside the neck is good for the guitar’s tone. It’s subtle but the guitars sound really sweet.
I probably should have clarified my statement. Because acoustic guitars can be very sensitive to their environment, a seasonal tweak of the truss rod is sometimes needed for those that can't maintain a consistently humid environment. Also, some players like more relief than others, hence the adjustable truss rod is their preference. I didn't intend an inference that the carbon fiber rod is inferior, just that some believe the seasonal humidity variations dictate a neck adjustment. That's where the "playability" part came in.
Yup. The good news is that with the carbon rod, being much stiffer than metal, it doesn’t ever need a neck adjustment due to seasonal changes. I’ve had mine since 2013. It plays exactly the same every day. I do use a D’Addario humidipak system to keep the top from sinking or swelling, so there’s that. I’m in Michigan; we get some pretty wild seasonal changes in temp and humidity.
I tend to like a little flatter action than factory setup, and adjust the truss rod to achieve my preferred setting. We don't all play the same way or have the same attack. So, I've shied away from the "fixed" rod for that reason. Regarding the tone difference, I have this comment................... OK, Les, come and get me! LOL.
Who’s saying that everyone should get the same stuff? Or hear the same details? People should use what meets their needs. As to tonal quality, I have a theory, nothing more...it’s based on the idea that lots of little things add up. It’s generally conceded that 30s and 40s Martins have a special sound. A lot of that - most of it, probably - has to do with the bracing and other construction details. But it’s also interesting that Martin started the 30s with ebony truss rods, then moved to a T-bar non-adjustable metal rod that they used until the 80s. So, Classic Martins have different truss rods than modern Martins. They’re also regarded more highly. Why? Here’s an article showing the rods in cross-section: https://hazeguitars.com/blog/martin-guitar-non-adjustable-truss-rods So here’s my theory: Everything in the neck of a guitar vibrates, and therefore has a resonant frequency. Vibrating stuff makes sound. Tap on a piece of metal, it rings. An adjustable rod uses a hollow tube with a metal part inside to tighten and loosen. It’s different than a T-bar in shape and mass. It will resonate a certain way. A solid metal rod also resonates a certain way. I’d imagine carbon fiber has its own resonant properties, but they’d be different from metal. As we know from experience, a maple neck has a slightly different sound than a mahogany neck. We also know that the neck is an important part of the tone-generating on a guitar, since it touches the strings, and since it vibrates even more noticeably than the body when a note is plucked. So we know that what the neck is made from matters. The fretboard matters. Hell, what the nut is made from matters - most folks can hear the difference between a bone nut and a plastic one. Put a microscopic coating on a string, it’ll sound different because the coating affects how the string vibrates. That being the case, why shouldn’t the truss rod materials matter? They kind of have to. The two PRS acoustics I’ve had with the carbon fiber rods have had an unusually sweet and woody tone - for whatever reasons. I can only guess! Perhaps one of many reasons has something to do with not having a hunk o’ metal in the neck? As I said, it’s just a theory. I have no way of proving it. But I like what I’m getting with the carbon fiber rods. It ain’t broke, so I ain’t fixin’ it.
Honestly, I don't doubt they sound different. But my dog can hear things that I can't (and well, I don't even actually have a dog). However, I bet this guy can.
I could either be that guy, or I could simply have an overactive imagination. Being just a guy, and not a scientist, I’ll never know which. Such is my lot in life. Lots of theories, none proven. I just throw ‘em out there for mass consumption and wait to see what happens. I should probably specialize and stick to arguing over tube amps versus modelers.
