Holy Crap PRS have ditched the wrapover

[John_L]

http://prsguitars.com/sc58/index.php

Yep a PRS SC with a neat stop tail. What bugs me is that they were using this stop tail in the mid 90's on a prototype of the McCarty that I was able to play (they let the public play and rate at the London Music Show) in 1994 so why has it taken this long to cross over from the Private Stock models. Still it's a shame they don't have it in a 25" scale.
I just wonder what Gibson's lawyers are going to say.

[Nightburst]

Re: Holy Crap PRS have ditched the wrapover

I hope this will affect the retail price of used singlecuts in a positive way!
This model of guitar is exactly what Gibson could have done themselves if they weren't so dumb. :P To me it's the ultimate SC type of guitar, an instant classic in these modern times.

[uOpt]

Re: Holy Crap PRS have ditched the wrapover

I just wonder what Gibson's lawyers are going to say.

There was a court ruling that is considered final that you can only trademark the shape of the head plate. Guitar cloners are now free to copy body shape including bridge setup and whatnot freely.

This was the result of Fender against IIRC Suhr.

[ex-250]

Re: Holy Crap PRS have ditched the wrapover

YES!!!!! i hate the wrapover.

[John_L]

Re: Holy Crap PRS have ditched the wrapover

They have a bunch of new models out all of which look good in different ways although I'm not sure the 'new faded McCarty' colour is anything they haven't had before.
The NF3 looks good although I don't know what the cost will be. I wonder if the new neck pattern will be any good. For my money PRS are a few steps behind Godin for that style of neck I wonder if this will be the catch up?
The 1985 reissue is good looking but has a post 95 heel which is a shame.

As for the lawsuits. The Gibson vs. Warwick one seems to contradict that. Although I don't know the ins and outs.

[ImmortalSix]

Re: Holy Crap PRS have ditched the wrapover

I liked that stop tail.

How do you intonate those things?

Me too.

You don't.

PRS has a pretty damn confident statement, full of swagger, on their website that unequivocally states that the manufacturing tolerances, everything from how and where they age the wood, to where they locate each bridge, are so damn tight that a bridge with adjustable intonation is not necessary.

They are telling you "it's intonated properly."

I have one, and I gotta say, they're right. It is.

[astrozombie]

Re: Holy Crap PRS have ditched the wrapover

Me too.

You don't.

PRS has a pretty damn confident statement, full of swagger, on their website that unequivocally states that the manufacturing tolerances, everything from how and where they age the wood, to where they locate each bridge, are so damn tight that a bridge with adjustable intonation is not necessary.

They are telling you "it's intonated properly."

I have one, and I gotta say, they're right. It is.

Yeah right Hunter. I'll believe that when I see it.

[uOpt]

Re: Holy Crap PRS have ditched the wrapover

I liked that stop tail.

How do you intonate those things?

There are two screws going from the back towards the posts. So you can adjust the position of the bridge, both ends separately, relative to nut and frets. The bridge doesn't rest on the posts directly, the screws going through the bridge are at the posts.

Don't think about using a wound G string, though, or anything else unusual.

[ImmortalSix]

Re: Holy Crap PRS have ditched the wrapover

Wow thats cool.

Yeah right Hunter. I'll believe that when I see it.

I just looked for it on the PRS FAQ, and I couldn't find it. But I remember it well, and everyone knows my memory is as good as fact.

Here is a picture of mine, for reference:



It does have two screws that allow you to adjust it oh-so-slightly at the posts.

This guitar is intonated better than all of my other guitars.

[John_L]

Re: Holy Crap PRS have ditched the wrapover

For about the last year all SC245's have had adjustable wrapovers I think PRS have realised that with a 24.5" scale you can't get the intonation as spot on as you can with the 25" (Martin found that in the 70's when they used non adjust bridges on their electric guitars before they gave up on them.)
I still wish Paul would use the non trem version of his trem bridge more at the moment it is only on the Mike Mushok baritone.

[phil_104]

Re: Holy Crap PRS have ditched the wrapover

Yeah right Hunter. I'll believe that when I see it.

I've seen it.

[tone4days]

Re: Holy Crap PRS have ditched the wrapover

my sc245 and ted dc245 soapy intonate fine ... but i use plain jane 10s in standard tuning with a 'standard' action

if you tune down, use heavier strings, use a higher action, you can run into trouble ... bummer that intonatable wrap bridge is so dang pricey

t4d

[apj]

Re: Holy Crap PRS have ditched the wrapover

you can buy a replacement that is intonatable, but yeah I've had both a PRS with stoptail and trem and they were both intonated perfect.

[JOLLY]

Re: Holy Crap PRS have ditched the wrapover

it's about time

[SamusChief]

Re: Holy Crap PRS have ditched the wrapover

There was a court ruling that is considered final that you can only trademark the shape of the head plate. Guitar cloners are now free to copy body shape including bridge setup and whatnot freely.

This was the result of Fender against IIRC Suhr.

I wish ESP would make some of their Japanese guitars here then... Explorers with blackouts.