Gibson Les Paul Vs. PRS McCarty

[Chistopher]

So I got the chance to actually play a private stock PRS McCarty 594 today and it really made me realize that the McCarty was in a way the last great Gibson guitar. Now I know it's not technically a Gibson, but many of you know the story of how Ted and Paul worked together to create the masterpiece it ended up as. It's almost a perfect match of the PRS 22 and a Les Paul.

But I was wondering, among you guys that have played both McCartys and Les Pauls, which do you think is better, the tried and true Les Paul or the more "revised" McCarty.

I might have entered a bit of a honeymoon phase with the small amount of time I had with the McCarty. In fact I think the McCarty deserves the title of Les Paul II more than the SG does.

What do y'all prefer of the two?

[Diego]

Re: Gibson Les Paul Vs. PRS McCarty

You might like this, even if not everyone digs the Captain.
He does own both a 594 and a '58 RI Les Paul, so his opinion is worth it's weight in gold to me.

[GuitarGuy503]

Re: Gibson Les Paul Vs. PRS McCarty

It's all a matter of personal preference. What may be best for someone may not best for someone else. Personally I appreciate both and while I only own an R8 I'd love to own a PRS Singlecut as well for something different.

[orpheo]

Re: Gibson Les Paul Vs. PRS McCarty

I prefer neither, I like both. the McCarty sure has that Gibson-ish feel, but it ain't a les paul. It lacks the heft, it lacks the thickness of the body (I can handle a tummy cut, this is just not thick enough) and the scale is wrong, imho, for it to be considered a LP beater. However, on its own merits, it's great.

[eclecticsynergy]

Re: Gibson Les Paul Vs. PRS McCarty

I have nine Les Pauls and two McCartys but I don't have a 594. Even aside from the wraptail bridges my McCartys are both doublecuts, too different from an LP for me to offer a meaningful comparison. IMO though, the slight extra thickness in the McCarty body definitely brings them a big step closer to LP territory in both tone and feel. They're really quite a different animal from regular PRSs. I often say I'm amazed at what a difference a mere eight of an inch makes.

[Nightburst]

Re: Gibson Les Paul Vs. PRS McCarty

I can't help but think of prs as what gibson could have been if they would accept moving forward with new techniques and refined guitar shapes. They let prs eat the cheese from their bread.

[YeRedHouseOverYonder]

Re: Gibson Les Paul Vs. PRS McCarty

Don’t own a PRS, but have played a couple. I still want a Santana Core Model to this day. I do own a R8 however (avatar). Just my two cents and sorta echoing orpheo: a LP sounds more raw to me. PRS guitars sound more refined because of their methods are more precise. I feel like you can hear it in the video that Diego posted. If we’re talking hands down better LP tone, I prefer the raw character from the R8. Different strokes for different folks.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[6stringerguy]

Re: Gibson Les Paul Vs. PRS McCarty

Prs all the way purely on sound

[Diego]

Re: Gibson Les Paul Vs. PRS McCarty

Don’t own a PRS, but have played a couple. I still want a Santana Core Model to this day. I do own a R8 however (avatar). Just my two cents and sorta echoing orpheo: a LP sounds more raw to me. PRS guitars sound more refined because of their methods are more precise. I feel like you can hear it in the video that Diego posted. If we’re talking hands down better LP tone, I prefer the raw character from the R8. Different strokes for different folks.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The PRS sounds a bit more even across the frequencies in the videoclip, whereas the Gibson sounds ranchier and thicker in the mids, with a bit more bark while the PRS has more spank and attacks quicker.
Both sound incredible.

[Chistopher]

Re: Gibson Les Paul Vs. PRS McCarty

Another thing I noticed about McCartys tend to want to he played through a Hughes and Kettner whereas a Les Paul will always be happiest played through a Marshall.

Of the two, which wiring do y'all prefer? I'm on the fence, PRS offers useful versatility with the partial coil splits, but the Les Paul offers familiar simplicity.

[orpheo]

Re: Gibson Les Paul Vs. PRS McCarty

I prefer a Victory V100 over well... 99.9% currently out there on the market. it's got the marshall tones I want but with a bit 'more' to it. I just can't get enough of that amp.

As for the McCarty: I just finished a guitar that's based on the McCarty: fat korina back (I prefer korina over mahogany, but that's just taste I guess), thick carved maple top, thick neck, slightly longer scale etc etc. This beast has the heft of a les paul but the bite of the McCarty. I'm glad I have my own shop so I can really test and experiment all I want with scales, timbers etc.

[blueman335]

Re: Gibson Les Paul Vs. PRS McCarty

I'm old school, there's nothing like an LP. Nothing else will substitute for it. That said, I think Gibson should have gotten more creative in the '80's and offered new models to compete with the wave of new guitars. Gibson pretty much held to their traditional designs and missed a lot of potential sales. Apparently no one at Gibson figured out that they could have carried a traditional line and a modern line simultaneously.

[GuitarDoc]

Re: Gibson Les Paul Vs. PRS McCarty

I could never understand why Gibson couldn't keep everything the same with their LPs, but just improve on the quality of manufacture. Even in the video, he hinted at the poor fit of binding-to-body, etc.

If you didn't know anything about guitars and saw a Gibson LP for the first time (not knowing that it was a "Gibson"), you'd think it was a very cheaply made knock-off of a great guitar.

[AlexR]

Re: Gibson Les Paul Vs. PRS McCarty

One of the issues with the plastic binding is that is has to be scraped. This often leads to a ridge, which is what a lot of people complain over. PRS doesn't do binding.......and doesn't even make an attempt to do anything in the cutaway. Which looks worse than no binding at all when the rest of the body has that unpainted/faux binding look.

Tonally I'm glad Gibson stuck to their guns. I have a PRS s/c kit build and it just doesn't seem to do the things that I want from that shape guitar.
But people seem to forget that Gibson did offer a whole range of other guitars in the 70's and 80's. The fact that they missed doesn't mean they didn't try. There are only so many times you can be fail being creative in a business sense, and especially where there are boundaries on what you can make due to trademarks etc.

[Hank-]

Re: Gibson Les Paul Vs. PRS McCarty

I would have liked if PRS had introduced a McCarty model in SE lineup earlier on, its difficult to get hold of USA PRS guitars or CS Les Pauls where I live, not to mention import taxes levied on the standard models ones.