Looks like everyone should throw away their Les Paul’s then!Yes, I know what signature model guitars are , they are built to that specific artists specs and personal characteristic's which is why they are a poor choice for anybody else other than the person the guitar is designed for . Unless of course in the extremely rare case that another person has the exact same personal preferences and tech specs as the featured artist.
I would agree completely with you if a person is seeking just the look and overall design however.
I build custom fishing rods in my spare time and fishing rod manufacturers have signature models that have the exact specs built for that specific anger but those specs don't fit anybody else to perfection except that specific signature angler. People will buy it for the name that printed on the rod and that's their right but any smart angler will have a rod custom built to their exact specs not somebody else's.
This design feature on the PT Sig v2.0 has yet to be elaborated on...I for one am very interested in hearing what the thought process was to drift from 1.650"I like it! Finally a 1.687 neck that doesn’t have to be custom ordered!
Yeah! It’s a really unique but super comfortable neck, feels close to both my old strat and my cactus green classic. When I showed John the cactus green guitar, he felt the neck and said “I think I hand shaped this”, back then in the old factory I guess he used to go into the shop on weekends and sometimes just go at necks and contour them himself. So this is the neck that was digitized for this guitar. And just coincidentally it feels really similar to my old Strat as well, Which wasI like it! Finally a 1.687 neck that doesn’t have to be custom ordered!
actually the V63 is the ML. There’s some confusion on that but the ML Classic was renamed V63.Another question for Mr. Thorn. Kind of curious why the V63 was selected vs. the ML pickup (or V60 or V70). Personal choice?
This design feature on the PT Sig v2.0 has yet to be elaborated on...I for one am very interested in hearing what the thought process was to drift from 1.650"
Yeah it’s true, the window cover protects the pick up nicely, it’s aesthetically super cool, and it’s sonically identical to an open coil pick up. As far as direct mounted versus ring mounted, mostly aesthetic choice, I grew up playing guitars with rings… I always like the way a humbucker looks in a ring- And it also set the guitar apart, back when I first started using them on my original signature model. But I have had a direct mounted pick up howl before. Add high gain that can sometimes resonate with the body in a way that can be sort of like a low feedback. I’ve only had that happen on one guitar and at high gain settings, but still, this avoids that and like I said it’s just aesthetically really cool I think having a ring. It’s sets the guitar apart in the Suhr line and you know it’s mine right awayThe pickguard / bridge pickup mounting design is cool.
@sinasl1 Was this done for aesthetic reasons or is there something about a ring mounted bridge pickup you prefer to a pickguard mounted bridge pickup?
And on a personal note for that matter, the pickup itself deserves mentioning. No idea what it sounds like but just the design of "metal cover on the sides but no metal plate between the magnets and strings" seems like a best-of-all-worlds kind of design. The metal sides protect the copper windings, and it also keeps strings from catching on the plastic covers during aggressive trem bands, but the metal plate being cut out from the top means there's no metal cover between the magnets and strings to dull the tone. Very cool, very smart design.
Yeah that’s true. Could do it with one and it would be cool too!Congratulations Pete!
Personally I love tort pickguards, Inca would look killer with the right shade of tort
Great looking guitar! Just when I thought I had everything I needed.Yeah that’s true. Could do it with one and it would be cool too!
I'm not disputing anything. But it doesn't change my words. Perhaps that's where his sig has always had the bridge PU, but it does appear further from the bridge than you typically see on most HSS guitars. That's just a factual observation. Not sure why that's controversial. And no one addressed why that would be. I was just interested in the 'why'.The guy you're responding to is John Suhr. I would trust his statement
If the man who designed and built the guitar (and many thousands of others) tells you that what you think you see is not true, how can that be a "factual observation"? Nothing controversial ... simply wrong.I'm not disputing anything. But it doesn't change my words. Perhaps that's where his sig has always had the bridge PU, but it does appear further from the bridge than you typically see on most HSS guitars. That's just a factual observation. Not sure why that's controversial. And no one addressed why that would be. I was just interested in the 'why'.
I'm not disputing anything. But it doesn't change my words. Perhaps that's where his sig has always had the bridge PU, but it does appear further from the bridge than you typically see on most HSS guitars. That's just a factual observation. Not sure why that's controversial. And no one addressed why that would be. I was just interested in the 'why'.