inside the PRS SC245 and SC250...

[veryhungrycaterpilla]

Re: inside the PRS SC245 and SC250...

Last night I was messing around with the guitar, and realized I had not done a "headstock" test. I strummed a few chords (unamplified) and grabbed the headstock. The dang thing felt like a Jackhammer. I've never had a normal size headstock that resonated like that, the only thing that was remotely close was the big Dean headstock and the Hamer Standard (USA). The neck joint area will rumble your guts if you strap the guitar up pretty high.

That is how I pick a particular guitar of a model I want. You can change pups, but you can't make the body/neck more resonant.

 

[theodie]

Re: inside the PRS SC245 and SC250...

Now that's just silly. The presence of chambered wood in the guitar is moot next to the fact that it's scale length is a quarter of an inch shorter than a Les Paul.

You are on the right track but, on the wrong train,
http://www.stewmac.com/fretscales

A Gibson does not use a 24 3/4 scale these days.

 

[krankguitarist]

Re: inside the PRS SC245 and SC250...

You are on the right track but, on the wrong train,
http://www.stewmac.com/fretscales

A Gibson does not use a 24 3/4 scale these days.

Well I'll be ****ed. Learned something new today.

 

[theodie]

Re: inside the PRS SC245 and SC250...

Well I'll be ****ed. Learned something new today.

I bet most folks are not aware of that tidbit.

 

[jmh151]

Re: inside the PRS SC245 and SC250...

I bet most folks are not aware of that tidbit.

Wow. I wasn't aware. Maybe a 245 will sound closer to a vintage Les Paul than Gibson's Historics?

 

[JeffB]

Re: inside the PRS SC245 and SC250...

I was aware. FWIW, I could not feel/tell a diff until I picked up the 250. Then the scale length difference was blatantly obvious to my fingers which were short fretting :chairshot