The National Department Of 594 Soapbars

You are correct. The Soapbars we used in the past were similar to other PRS pickups from that time, they had a lot of output. The new soapbar pickups are vintage voiced.

Good to know I'm not imagining things!

This model hits a sweet spot with me in every way. Feels great, sounds amazing, and, being a PRS, is a work of art. Home run!
 
You are correct. The Soapbars we used in the past were similar to other PRS pickups from that time, they had a lot of output. The new soapbar pickups are vintage voiced. Duncan made/makes the Soapbar pickups for us because we aren't tooled up for the P-90 jigs on our pickup winding machine.
And perhaps also because Seymour is a genius. And so is Paul.
 
Not to put any undue pressure on anyone, but you have one week left to order one through a dealer....... Go!
 
You are correct. The Soapbars we used in the past were similar to other PRS pickups from that time, they had a lot of output. The new soapbar pickups are vintage voiced. Duncan made/makes the Soapbar pickups for us because we aren't tooled up for the P-90 jigs on our pickup winding machine.

I have quite a few guitars with P-90s in my woodpile. (none from PRS, but what can ya do?) Having experimented with several different makers, I've ended up deciding that Seymour Duncan's vintage-style P-90s are at least as good as anything out there and better than most, including those from some well-respected boutique winders.

Of course my favorite P-90s are still the vintage ones. In one case they are in a modern guitar, so it's not just the vintage wood. Same thing with the original PAFs. It's still awfully hard to top those, at least if you're wanting to work in that general ballpark, design- and sound-wise.
 
Having experimented with several different makers, I've ended up deciding that Seymour Duncan's vintage-style P-90s are at least as good as anything out there and better than most, including those from some well-respected boutique winders.

Agree completely.

Of course my favorite P-90s are still the vintage ones. In one case they are in a modern guitar, so it's not just the vintage wood.

The caveat with the vintage pickups is that some sound different/better/worse than others.

The vintage wood discussion is always interesting. I've played some electric and acoustic vintage guitars whose wood "soured". And some just don't sound much different than they did new. My '65 SG Special is one such guitar; it's been in my life since it was new. A few might sound better, though unless you played it when it was new yourself, how would you really know it aged to become better?

Another part of the discussion that's kind of related is that lots of "iconic" guitar tone recordings were made with guitars that were new, or only a few years old, back in the day. This is a point Paul Smith has made.

Even Clapton's "old" Beano guitar was what, only 6-7 years old when they cut that record.

But it's certainly interesting!
 
So what? It's still a great idea that I have voiced several times. Needs a trem, though.

PRS isn't going to make what you want for the obvious reason that they wouldn't sell very many. It's not going to happen, period.

That should be clear to even the most obstinate whiner and complainer.

You could get what you're insisting is so great in PS. They'll make one for the extra dough.

On the other hand, you could throw a tantrum and stamp your feet. You're welcome to do that. Go right ahead! I'll watch. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
Director,
Have you or any of the sub-committees in the National Department of Soapbars undertaken any studies to compare the (potential) results of Soapbars with maple necks compared to Soapbars with mahogany necks on the 594 If so, are there any findings you can share, or do you have any initial insights that might warrant a federal grant to further investigate this compelling topic?
P90s
 
"PRS isn't going to make what you want for the obvious reason that they wouldn't sell very many. It's not going to happen, period".

Unfortunate. And a good part of the reason I have three guitars (down from four) so equipped, all made in Germany, as opposed to Maryland. Of course those builders do not make a thousand guitars a year, let alone a month, so their flexibility is greater.
 
Director,
Have you or any of the sub-committees in the National Department of Soapbars undertaken any studies to compare the (potential) results of Soapbars with maple necks compared to Soapbars with mahogany necks on the 594 If so, are there any findings you can share, or do you have any initial insights that might warrant a federal grant to further investigate this compelling topic?
P90s

Actually, the Director reports that prior to the formation of the National 594 Soapbar Department he had two CU22 Soapbars, both with maple necks. One had a RW fretboard, the other had a maple fretboard. The maple fretboard model belonged at various times to the director and to his son, during the period from about 2000 - 2014.

Your Director has also had two McCarty Soapbars, one with a mahogany neck, and the other with IRW. The mahogany version was in the Director's stable from about 2001 - 2009, and the IRW neck version was there for probably 3 years during the same period.

All 4 had the earlier Duncan P-90s that PRS deployed. All four had the 25" scale length.

Of course, there can't be a true scientific comparison between them, since the McCartys were stoptails, and the CU22s were trems, and other features were different. In addition, the scale lengths and bridges of all of them were different from the current one.

Nonetheless, your happy-go-lucky Director is definitely that guy who'll wade in and express his usual subjective and anecdotal opinion garnered from comparing the older guitars. ;)

The maple/maple CU22 Soapbar had a very fast attack with very solid fundamental tones, and very crisp low notes. The director appreciated its direct crispness, and its brighter character. The mids and upper mids were characterized by a "flute" resonant sound so typical of maple necks, especially on the neck pickup.

The maple/IRW CU22 Soapbar had a slightly slower attack, with a bit less twang. The overall sound might be described as warmer. The director didn't have this one very long, but not because of the tone. That's just the way life was in the director's whirlwind of guitar comings and goings back then.

The mahogany neck McCarty Soapbar was significantly warmer. There was lots of clarity and sparkle in the upper mids, with a less crisp bass note tone than the CU22 Soapbar, however, the guitar was very "traditional soapbar" sounding and expressive.

The director owned the 2004 or 2005 NAMM IRW neck McCarty Soapbar. This guitar was very lively and crisp, like the maple/maple CU22 version, only with a fatter low end, and less of the hollow "flute" sound in the mids that the maple necks had.

All of the above guitars were played through the Director's amps of the period; a smattering of Mesas and Two-Rocks that were in the Director's studio for long enough that all of the guitars were played through the same amps.

The director now has different amps, and a different studio, and doesn't have the other guitars to compare the 594 to. In addition, the 594 has Vintage Duncan pickups, and the others had the brighter, hotter Duncans from the "oughts". So the Director must refrain from speculating how all this stuff would work with the 594.
 
Actually, the Director reports that prior to the formation of the National 594 Soapbar Department he had two CU22 Soapbars, both with maple necks. One had a RW fretboard, the other had a maple fretboard. The maple fretboard model belonged at various times to the director and to his son, during the period from about 2000 - 2014.

Your Director has also had two McCarty Soapbars, one with a mahogany neck, and the other with IRW. The mahogany version was in the Director's stable from about 2001 - 2009, and the IRW neck version was there for probably 3 years during the same period.

All 4 had the earlier Duncan P-90s that PRS deployed. All four had the 25" scale length.

Of course, there can't be a true scientific comparison between them, since the McCartys were stoptails, and the CU22s were trems, and other features were different. In addition, the scale lengths and bridges of all of them were different from the current one.

Nonetheless, your happy-go-lucky Director is definitely that guy who'll wade in and express his usual subjective and anecdotal opinion garnered from comparing the older guitars. ;)

The maple/maple CU22 Soapbar had a very fast attack with very solid fundamental tones, and very crisp low notes. The director appreciated its direct crispness, and its brighter character. The mids and upper mids were characterized by a "flute" resonant sound so typical of maple necks, especially on the neck pickup.

The maple/IRW CU22 Soapbar had a slightly slower attack, with a bit less twang. The overall sound might be described as warmer. The director didn't have this one very long, but not because of the tone. That's just the way life was in the director's whirlwind of guitar comings and goings back then.

The mahogany neck McCarty Soapbar was significantly warmer. There was lots of clarity and sparkle in the upper mids, with a less crisp bass note tone than the CU22 Soapbar, however, the guitar was very "traditional soapbar" sounding and expressive.

The director owned the 2004 or 2005 NAMM IRW neck McCarty Soapbar. This guitar was very lively and crisp, like the maple/maple CU22 version, only with a fatter low end, and less of the hollow "flute" sound in the mids that the maple necks had.

All of the above guitars were played through the Director's amps of the period; a smattering of Mesas and Two-Rocks that were in the Director's studio for long enough that all of the guitars were played through the same amps.

The director now has different amps, and a different studio, and doesn't have the other guitars to compare the 594 to. In addition, the 594 has Vintage Duncan pickups, and the others had the brighter, hotter Duncans from the "oughts". So the Director must refrain from speculating how all this stuff would work with the 594.
The Director makes a maple necked 594 seem like an intriguing proposition with flute-like upper registers. Does your Board approve the commission of PS guitars or do Foundation guidelines limit you to standard factory issues?
 
The Director makes a maple necked 594 seem like an intriguing proposition with flute-like upper registers. Does your Board approve the commission of PS guitars or do Foundation guidelines limit you to standard factory issues?

The Director has 4 PS guitars, and two Not-PS guitars. The Director believes that Cores are as good as PS, just different.

The Director likes cool guitars, regardless of PS-ness; the Director does not discriminate. The Board only gets a vote in her...uh... its advisory capacity. ;)
 
Back
Top