Why so much trash talk on SE's?

[Furtive]

Ruger made a bunch of great points that don't require further explanation or reinforcement.

At some point I'll call the haters out and get one of those Indonesian Standards. I really want to compare a 2016 Indo to my 86 Standard and see how significant the differences are.

 

[rugerpc]

I think a few separate things are being argued by the haters with various degrees of accuracy and/or truth.

Are SE's a great value for their price point? Absolutely. I would stack an SE up against anything any other guitar maker is selling at the comparable price points.

Are they as good (are they as resonant, do they sustain as long, are they built to as exacting of specifications) as a Core PRS? Objectively no. They have parts that are made of different materials than Core parts which were specifically engineered to enhance the tonality of the core guitars.

Are SE's a REAL PRS? Depends on your definition. If Made in Maryland is your definition, then no. If made to the standards and specifications of PRS, then yes.

Are you a better player if you own a Core PRS? No.

Are you a worse player if you own an SE? No.

Before anyone accuses me of hating PRS SE guitars, I have a Zach Myers SE that is a great guitar. However, it is not nearly of the quality of my S2 or Core guitars. It's less resonant, sustains less, and doesn't seem to want to stay in tune. Hell, the first time I took off the strings, the bushing for one of the tuners fell out. Am I complaining about the SE, absolutely not. I have modded it to the point that I like it (which is what matters) about as well as my USA PRS guitars.

You say that the SEs are a great value for their price point, yet you go on to compare them to core models.

This, for me, is the disconnect in the debate and where I just start shaking my head.

People acknowledge that the price points, even raison d'être are different, but go ahead and make invalid comparisons anyway, with the intimation almost always being that the SEs are confusingly lacking in this or that aspect.

I suggest that there should be no confusion.

 

[Huggy Love]

and does so with great representation for PRS.

Now that is the subjective point, many can argue (and I have pondered why) that the SE could have been produced under another name and headstock like some companies do with subsidiaries, so it would not confuse or take away from the glory of the core line. I've even heard a few guitarists say that "PRS is going downhill & making things overseas" without understanding the main 3 series of PRS guitars. (They just don't know)

You gotta admit it took a lot of guts to keep lower range models under the PRS label, and it hasn't hurt the company any either.

 

[Rockula]

Ok, find the guys who trash talk the SEs, and haul their sorry butts down to a Gary Clark Jr. Concert. Have them watch him play fantastically well on an off-the-rack Epiphone Casino. I have an Epiphone, and some USA Fenders and Gibsons, and the SEs are way "better" than either my Epiphone, or most of my Gibsons. By that, I mean the SEs have a great neck shape, good fret work, good sustain, and good tone.

Does that mean I don't think high-end Gibsons and PRS core models are not worth their prices? Absolutely not. I've played some of both of those, and I though they were even better than my guitars. But, I can't justify that kind of expense at the moment myself. I'm glad that I've had the chance to own or try many, many guitars over the years. After 30 years of experimenting, I'm still learning new things about what I like to play. If I'd waited for a high end guitar all these years, I'm not sure where I'd be now.

And since Gary Clark Jr. plays nothing but modern off the rack guitars (looks to me like his most valuable one is a fairly generic custom shop Strat), I guess he's still waiting too.

 

[FantasyMetal]

You say that the SEs are a great value for their price point, yet you go on to compare them to core models.

This, for me, is the disconnect in the debate and where I just start shaking my head.

People acknowledge that the price points, even raison d'être are different, but go ahead and make invalid comparisons anyway, with the intimation almost always being that the SEs are confusingly lacking in this or that aspect.

I suggest that there should be no confusion.

I don't understand how your post is different than mine?

 

[mmarshburn]

You gotta admit it took a lot of guts to keep lower range models under the PRS label, and it hasn't hurt the company any either.

You know, I hadn't given that much thought. You see "S*****, by F*****" and such, but PRS, while they don't put the signature on the headstock, still market them as PRS guitars of the SE line. Excellent point.

 

[Furtive]

Folks, I know this might sound like crazy talk, but...

Is there *any* chance that Paul Smith and the PRS Board of Directors are (ahem) in business (ahem) to build and sell guitars for profit?

And this might make me sound like I need either more or less medication, but...

Hasn't Paul Smith always offered a range of products to include lower priced models? Even in 86 there were the pre-Standard and the Custom. And you know he was looking at getting the EGs built in Japan by Fuji-Gen back in the late 80s.

This final thought will have some folks convinced I need a brain scan... or if I even have a brain:

What if the Board of Directors did their homework (and continues to do their homework) to sell just the right percentage of US, S2 and SE lines so that the company has the best chance of long term survival, and return profit to it's investors?

PRS continues to produce better guitars with each additional decade of their existence, while expanding to four production lines in three countries. We have not seen the quality slump like the dark days of CBS or Norlin hit PRS in 31 years. That is a huge accomplishment.

I have more than a few PRS. Guess what? They're all good guitars. Some are better than others. Some are amazing, but there are no dogs in the bunch. The common element in their DNA is consistency. Buying any PRS unseen is a no-brainer for me, because of that level of consistency. I know that unless something is broken, I can do a setup and it'll rock the way a PRS typically does. Otherwise - fretwork, weight, general quality of parts and overall attention to build - have a baseline. Again, I haven't seen a dog with the PRS headstock yet.

For the people with deep pockets - Pardon me, do you have any Grey Poupon? And btw, more power to ya. You're buying top shelf art that can be enjoyed like nothing else. Enjoy those beautiful instruments, but keep in mind that the company is in business to make money. If it wasn't about making money, Paul would still be in the first small shop with a few helpers.

My point: enjoy a PRS. There is one in every price range, and they're all good.

 

[xjbebop]

I'm curious. .. most all reviews I've seen are positive....

 

[11top]

I got to thinking this morning about all of the trash talk I've seen people do on reviews for the SE's..."

Who are these "people" and "reviews" you are referring to? I have never seen a bad review by "true" experts in the field. If you have, I'd be curious to read one.

Some "forum (not this one of course ) experts" are actually lemmings and will only follow others off the cliff. If their heros didn't play it, it can't be any good.

I think the SE guitars are the best bang for the buck out there. But, hey....I'm just a forum expert.

 

[IKnowALittle]

I've played a few SE's and S2's over the past couple of years. They are good guitars and offer excellent value.
However, I can't categorically state that they are "the best" in that price range. There is an awful lot of competition and some other excellent guitars available in that market.
If I were looking for a guitar in that price range, I'm not sure a PRS would be my choice. I can't get past the honkin', huge bevel on the S2's, just a personal aesthetic, so they would be out of the equation.
The new CE looks interesting and if it had an alder or swamp ash body and maple board, I would be all in. Maybe that will come, PRS isn't exactly reticent when it comes to updating and offering variations.
Functionality, playability etc. are all important, but I have to enjoy the look of any guitar I play or it's a no-go for me.
I think the hyperbole on both sides of the question gets a tad overwrought.

I am in the market for a particular PRS and keep my eyes open for it. On the other hand, perhaps it's best that it isn't available .... "the GAS is strong, the wallet weak".

 

[Drew]

I've seen quite a few people tote SE's to gigs. I remember the semi hollow SE sounding particularly good live. They are fantastic guitars.

 

[mmarshburn]

I have never seen a bad review by "true" experts in the field. If you have, I'd be curious to read one.

I've never seen a complaint by a "true expert." And, you're correct, it's pretty much mostly people whose idols play other brands. Nobody significant.

Ive seen quite a few reviews here and there on retail sites giving them low rating for having to do minor tune ups like intonation and string height. It's mainly just people complaining about insignificant things. Just don't understand why people seem to expect the same things out of them as the core models have.

 

[G-Man]

I am surprised a bit by this thread since I have seen very few posts bashing the SE models. I totally agree with the price for like performance, they are very competitive with the Mexican Strats and some Epi's, ESP's, Chapmans, etc. Also agree with the comment that the complaints are usually about setup and such which I did see when I picked a few up at GC. No biggie with a few quick adjustments. Overall, I think PRS knocked it out of the park to diversify into lower price points from a strategy standpoint.

Where I think the arguments get a little sideways is where people buy a new SE for $800, play it for a week, rip everything out of it and spend almost the retail price upgrading the components. You then have a $1500 SE competing against some of the American Standard Strats, S2's, other USA used models and others where the argument becomes less compelling. At $800, very few quality alternatives exist. At $1500, the competitive scope changes and bit an PRS may be less competitive, especially vs. the used market.

 

[Dusty Chalk]

Yeah, also, where's this trash talk? I don't hear it, and I hang out at a couple PRS groups on Facebook. Not really asking, I don't care, just wondering if the OP is looking for it (you can find negative comments about anything if you look hard enough).

 

[Blues Trucker]

First, great video Joe!!
Ive never heard any negative comments about SEs. Yes, Ive seen stuff about them not being as good as the Cores, but DUH!!

 

[G-Man]

Two things that may be causing some negative comments in other places.

Some of the SE models are just drop dead gorgeous and look more expensive than an $800 guitar vs. some are a bit understated in appearance but probably worth the price of admission. no difference in quality but one of looks. Again, less brick and mortar test drives and more buying over the internet One thought here is to make a further definition from the Indonesian vs korean products to differentiate the tiers a bit more.

The other is the used market. Many are offered for sale at the retail or near retail prices although they are used, pointing some people to some view of higher buyers remorse. This is no different across brands and typical of the used market. One will say that the market is flooded with SE's and S2's but it is also flooded with other makes and models in similar price ranges.

 

[EveryAxeAGem]

First, if there is another thread on this, please direct me to it.

I got to thinking this morning about all of the trash talk I've seen people do on reviews for the SE's... It's saddening really. Numerous times I've browsed and found tons of negative comments regarding many aspects, but generally saying stupid things like "it's crap."

My first question lies in the realm of "did you expect a $3,000 guitar for $750?" I mean, seriously... The reason I've heard it took so long for Paul to get the SE line going is because he didn't want to skimp on quality. But, let's be realistic. You can't produce the same quality of guitar at the SE level as you can for the core or artist level.

Now, my thoughts are that the SE line are great guitars. Especially because of price. I'm very pleased with both the quality I feel in them and the sound they produce. The fact is: I don't feel I'm expecting too much in my guitars. I realize that I'm not going to get a similar sound out of my Tremonti SE until I drop Tremonti pickups in it.

I guess my largest confusion is why? Why do some seem to hate them so much? Are they just ignorant?

The true question is, why bother?

I'm over here having all the fun and awe with my SE Bernie Marsden, and they're over there bitter and devoid.

The killer vibrations from my killer power chords from my killer BM will drown out any pipsqueak molecular air agitations they can contrive. Come again bro?

I put my BM on a pedestal, I really do. It's that good a guitar. And uh, take my word for it, it is in illustrious company and does not lack competition.

 

[Huggy Love]

I say we go out and find these scourges of society that are making these false claims of the SE inadequacies and hold them down and rip out their fingernails.
See how good their chops are after that.

........or at least scrunch their index so they can't play power chords.

 

[mmarshburn]

Yeah, also, where's this trash talk? I don't hear it, and I hang out at a couple PRS groups on Facebook. Not really asking, I don't care, just wondering if the OP is looking for it (you can find negative comments about anything if you look hard enough).

I'm most definitely not looking for negativity. Random comments throughout looking around generated this. Yes, there are a lot of positives to be said in many reviews, but I have seen several that belittled the guitar.

 

[Mixstar]

"haters, do not criticise me for my flaws and mistakes when you can’t even see your own"