The Forum Guitar

It would be unlikely for me to buy a "Forum Guitar" as a caveat.


Changing a CNC program is a 5 minute job.

Writing a new CNC program & proving it out would certainly be less than 2 man hours........... No matter what you may be told.

However, PRS has a huge backlog at this time & may not want to disrupt production. Doing so would likely be a hit to profits.

PRS is a business. The bottom line is important. This is the case with every one of us who has a job or owns a business. They "OWE" us nothing.

Hard times will come again......They always do. That would be the time when PRS is likely to be more receptive to bending the rules. OF course, Hard times typically hit all of us at the same time!
 
So would "no inlays" be a CNC change? I really just can't remember off the top of my head...

...or is it a matter of skipping a step? Seriously...there aren't many without inlays out in the wild.
 
Just a thought on the “secret sauce” and gold sharpie thing:

You know, when PRS has done special runs for huge retailers and beloved dealers in the past, those guitars had little more than some sharpie scribbles on the back, or a TRC, or maybe a special color.

If that’s what they’re willing to do for people that sell uh... maybe slightly as many or more guitars for them than we buy... then I feel like perhaps we should be a little more flattered than disappointed.

The last attempt at this project caused some hurt feelings, and subsequently some really f@ckin’ Bangin’! members became disillusioned, lost ambition and/or respect for the company, and moved on.

I, for one am not excited for a repeat occurrence of that.
 
I have a couple of special, limited run PS models (not sure of the number, but less than 100 worldwide). I didn't buy them for that reason, of course; I did it because they were cool guitars.

I wouldn't expect them to go for a penny more than any other PS guitar.I honestly don't know why anyone thinks a forum run would somehow be any more valuable or collectible than any other production PRS. But I don't collect. I'll let the guys who do weigh in on that.
 
OK, I hear that I have ruffled some member's feathers.

This is far from my intent. For anyone who feels I have denigrated them, talked down to them or otherwise been rude or dismissive, I truly apologize.

I'd like to see this thing happen for lots of reasons, not the least of which, I'm hoping it will strengthen the brotherhood that is the forum, I don't want it to be divisive. I understand that if it happens that the specs may leave many wanting. Design by committee is a difficult thing. Everyone has preferences and it will be truly impossible to satisfy everyone's taste.

I apologize as well for my frustration and my reaction to your collective suggestions for builds. I will endeavor to let you know in the future what is and what is not possible without judgement, recrimination or snide remark.
 
Perhaps we should look at this a different way.....

Is it possible to get some pricing flexibility with a bulk PS order? For example, if the forum could guarantee 20 or 30 (or whatever) Private Stock guitars is there enough of a discount in play to make it attainable for forum members? This may be particularly attractive to the PS production line if the guitars could be batched. For example, they all have the same color. If they were all unique PS shape and wood combos, but had the same finish, the PS line may be able to batch that production run together and POTENTIALLY offer some cost savings from the "normal" PS order.

Rather than trying to force fit this into a WL order, is there a way to make it a PS order that is attractive to both the forum members AND PRS?
 
Perhaps we should look at this a different way.....

Is it possible to get some pricing flexibility with a bulk PS order? For example, if the forum could guarantee 20 or 30 (or whatever) Private Stock guitars is there enough of a discount in play to make it attainable for forum members? This may be particularly attractive to the PS production line if the guitars could be batched. For example, they all have the same color. If they were all unique PS shape and wood combos, but had the same finish, the PS line may be able to batch that production run together and POTENTIALLY offer some cost savings from the "normal" PS order.

Rather than trying to force fit this into a WL order, is there a way to make it a PS order that is attractive to both the forum members AND PRS?

I'm pretty sure that PS doesn't normally work that way. There have been PS runs in the past that were many copies of the same PS guitar, but those were models and specs that PRS themselves put together because it was something they were interested in and they thought would sell well. I don't think they were discounted in any way just because they made a bunch of them. I don't think they batch built them either, though I could certainly be mistaken on that point.

Markie has a very valid point in his post above. We are attempting this at a time when PRS has a HUGE backlog. They just added another shift to address all the orders they have. His point is that we cannot dangle enough prospective purchases in front of them to divert their attention from fulfilling the orders they already have. I agree.

The last go-round was slated to be slightly less expensive than the WL run(s) I'm proposing. Even with great and determined effort, Jesse had difficulty lining up 10 people to get it going. If the final specs don't kill it, the price-point could very well doom this attempt as well.

But a discounted PS run would probably attract even fewer members. I'd love to see some PS appointments, but I don't think we'd get a discount, or many takers.
 
Last edited:
Hey, how about we all agree to buy up the remaining Experience Ltd Paul's Guitars, and we call that run our Forum guitar that we let a few other folks buy into?

You know, Ret-Con the whole thing...
 
...

Markie has a very valid point in his post above. We are attempting this at a time when PRS has a HUGE backlog. They just added another shift to address all the orders they have. His point is that we cannot dangle enough prospective purchases in front of them to divert their attention from fulfilling the orders they already have. I agree.
...
I mentioned earlier, and I still maintain, that we should wait until the backlog is past before we try to have the FG done.
 
OK, I hear that I have ruffled some member's feathers.

This is far from my intent. For anyone who feels I have denigrated them, talked down to them or otherwise been rude or dismissive, I truly apologize.
I don't think you have anything to apologize for. Lots of folks seemed to miss the point about trying to keep it within what is normally considered a "core" model with just variations in woods (thus the WL comparison was fair) and AP upgrades. I'd have been annoyed to a far greater degree.

Hopefully things will settle down, and something interesting will be created.

If not, I'm sure there is a guitar or two on Reverb that can soak up any imaginary spare cash I have.
 
I mentioned earlier, and I still maintain, that we should wait until the backlog is past before we try to have the FG done.
While I like that idea in principle, I don't know if the current backlog will abate any time in the near to medium future - PRS is hitting home run after home run, expanding their customer base, and not lowering quality. It will be 4 or 5 years, I suspect.
 
While I like that idea in principle, I don't know if the current backlog will abate any time in the near to medium future - PRS is hitting home run after home run, expanding their customer base, and not lowering quality. It will be 4 or 5 years, I suspect.
I'm guessing they will have breathing room in about 6 months... unless they come out with another high demand model, that is!o_O
 
I also agree with Markie, I think this is just bad timing. I was watching an interview with Jack Higgenbotham and he said they have a 12 month backlog. They have guys working six days a week and a whole second shift crew. They also have their own special editions they literally just released at experience. I bet if this was 2012 they would be more agreeable. However, somehow I feel since this is an official forum it would be good PR to throw in a special inlay for an official forum WL run. Sadly I just think they don't need the business right now or they don't want to open a Pandora's box for special request WL runs. I think the special sauce should be stainless frets, probably the least likely to happen but the easiest to make happen and also the coolest special feature.
 
I’m thinking about a small set of unique features that are easy to implement by PRS, with no CNC retooling, might be a reasonable possibility.

1) Several folks mentioned neck P-90s in their own wishlists. If that’s too complicated for PRS, routing-wise, then how about a P-90 that simply fits into a standard HB PU ring? Those could be outsourced from, say, Lollar, etc. For example. (A 57/09 bridge PU seems to be a popular choice within this forum, AFAICT. Or maybe use a pair of these Lollar P-90s, and then HB rings would always permit modding should one ever choose.)
2) Maybe a limited choice of, say, three colors?
3) Possibly a satin finish? (Or not.)
4) Would using the original Santana headstock require somehow retooling? That’s noticeably different and also speaks to the beginning of the company.
5) Possibly use some type of unique inlay material? Dirty birds? Whatever...
6) If PRS didn’t want to create a special TRC, maybe that could be done via the forum, and then have them made and shipped directly to PRS to be installed. An inscription inside on the control cavity plate would be nice, too, of course.

I think the thing here would be that these features (for example) are unique enough to be identifiable as a forum guitar, and yet they don’t really require any special retooling. Again, to the best of my knowledge.

Just some ideas. All in my opinion and YMMV for sure.
 
Hmm. You think so? They seem pretty basic specs to me. Aside from the P-90 in a HB PU ring, (not hard to implement, AFAIK), my suggestions have all been used in one model or another over time. IIRC, that is. I could also be wrong and am open to correction.

Anyway, they wouldn’t all need to be implemented.
 
Back
Top