Re: NGD! took my first step into PRS land
And can someone explain why the pre 95 PRSs are so desireable? I hear people say that all the time, which is why I jumped on this one as quickly as I did
IMO- the biggest difference which makes them better is the bridge, at that time, was made by Mil Com. It was solid one piece- meaning the block and baseplate were both milled out of a single piece of metal. After 95, they switched to a 2 piece design- like a strat or Floyd Rose- where the block bolts onto the baseplate.
Then there's the neck heel. PRS started increasing the size of the neck heel to eliminate dead spots. However, there is misinformation on this. The huge heel was used on the 22 fret models, the 24 fret models just increased a little, and IMO did not effect playability.
The fretboard on pre 95 tended to be Brazilian rosewood. After 95 they switched to Indian rosewood.
PRS was a smaller shop then, so the quality of the wood- particularly the maple on a 10 top tended to be better than what you would find on a present 10 top. Mahogany was Honduran mahogany, as they grew they had to use mahogany from other sources. Inlays were solid mother of pearl. In time they had to switch to abalone laminate. These are all changes that had to be made for environmental concerns as they grew.
These are points that a PRS collector nitpicks over. I have a recent PRS, and IMO they're just as good or better than the early ones.
IMO alot of the hype is due to misinformation Ed Roman spread, particularly comparing the large heel on the 22 fret models to the small heel on the pre 95 24 fret models.
Also, I believe they stopped using the sweet switch that year.
Sometime near 95 they started using CNC machines, as compared to completely by hand. However, the CNC only does the rough cutting of the body and neck, there is still alot of hand work performed. The CNCs are more accurate and consistent, but some view them as robots building guitars. There's still alot of handwork to be performed