Quality Control / Design Improvements / Cost

spawnofthesith said:
I love both for what they are :love:love:love
Click to expand...
My brain: “can’t we all just get along?”
My wallet:
Im Not No Way GIF
 
spawnofthesith said:
I love PRS but none of them feel or sound much like a Gibson to me, even the ones that are supposed to be "LP killers" :idk just a completely different playing experience. Which isnt a bad thing, just not the same
Click to expand...
None feel like a Les Paul. They're better balanced, for one thing. As opposed to sounding like one, it's really splitting hairs when it's like for like pickups, or similar pickups, in a McCarty 594 SC into a gained up amp. I'd love to meet the person that can correctly identify by hearing the LP every time, when played back to back.
 
metropolis_4 said:
Oh really… then why this:



:grin :grin :grin
Click to expand...

I have a erm... reputation for my heated defense and love of Gibson in the past... just don't have the energy or desire to get into all that on this forum :LOL:


In regards to PRS, my 594 is one of my favorite guitars but still aint no gibson. It sort of looks like one, and the similarities end there :idk
 
spawnofthesith said:
I have a erm... reputation for my heated defense and love of Gibson in the past... just don't have the energy or desire to get into all that on this forum :LOL:


In regards to PRS, my 594 is one of my favorite guitars but still aint no gibson. It sort of looks like one, and the similarities end there :idk
Click to expand...
I’d love to hear the comparison. I’ve done it, but it wasn’t science level.

EDIT

Going back to that video (JFC, 2018. It's been six years!) I'd say the 594 perhaps sounds a little more "hi-fi", for lack of a better term. However, through a Mesa Fillmore 25 into a Recto 2x12, Zoom Q2N not moving, through exactly the same settings, it's just not dramatic enough for me to say "Yeah, that guitar's definitely better than that one" in either direction.
 
Last edited:
I could try and do a very unscientific test later :LOL: I have kind of similar pickups in the bridge of my LP and 594 (pegasus in LP scourge in 594) but down to the nitty gritty thats still Alnico 5 vs 8 and a 0.9K difference in resistance...

But regardless of sound they feel like to dramatically different instruments to me. To make a dumb and cheesy analogy the 594 is small and sporty to zip around town with, the LP is a substantial beast you might take offroading :rofl

I will reiterate, I'm not saying one is better than the other, I love both they're just different to me. And I think Paul intentionally was trying to do his own thing with it, even if it is inspired by an LP

Silver sky on the other hand is kinda just literally a strat :LOL:
 
A lot of the reason I love my partscasters (sorry @spawnofthesith :p) is that in the end I control what i want and how well it's executed-- from fret work to hardware, electronics, etc. I guess I have control issues?:rofl
A lot of it is I won't fork out 2-5K for a new instrument to have finish flaws, a structural design element that is risky and so on. I think brands like PRS have gained a ton of traction in the market because they addressed the issues that Gibson failed to address. PRS also pushes design elements like hardware, electronics and body shapes. Gibson doesn't seem enthusiastic enough in this department?
 
FuzzyAce said:
I think brands like PRS have gained a ton of traction in the market because they addressed the issues that Gibson failed to address
Click to expand...

I don't know...I don't see prs or esp like Gibsons with less/no issues.

The guitar PRS built it's reputation upon I guess is the double cut custom, a guitar that has nothing to do with any Gibson.

I feel there's more competition coming from those who claim to build proper Les Pauls but better (like heritage) with all the design flaws included.
 
I truly believe that a significant enough portion of Gibson's fanbase would revolt, if they changed the headstock to something with better string pull angle, reduced the pitch, and added a volute. The average Gibson fan wouldn't be interested. They'd probably even say "I might as well get a PRS McCarty 594, and it won't be like my good old LP". Obviously it's impossible to tell (unless someone's a luthier here) if they made those three changes how dramatically different it would sound/feel.
 
I’ve asked this before and I’ll ask again…..why is everything always “as good as a Gibson” or “as good as a Fractal”? :unsure:
 
From a business perspective, Gibson has tried a few times in the past 50 years to be very creative and forward thinking in making new designs and it hasn’t worked. The new models don’t sell well while the old designs sell.

Makes sense that they decide to make what sells. Historically there’s not a lot of incentive for them to try to be innovative because they never see a return on that investment
 
metropolis_4 said:
From a business perspective, Gibson has tried a few times in the past 50 years to be very creative and forward thinking in making new designs and it hasn’t worked. The new models don’t sell well while the old designs sell.

Makes sense that they decide to make what sells. Historically there’s not a lot of incentive for them to try to be innovative because they never see a return on that investment
Click to expand...


100%

What I don't understand is why they don't try to design something really new for them.

It doesn't have to be revolutionary just new.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top