Theory about what people don't understand about PRS...

jdel77

Member
Messages
10,633
This is in part a direct response to the other thread doing the rounds on why people don't like PRS...

As someone who grew up on Kramer, Fender, Gibson, Rickenbacker, my perception of PRS guitars was they were for dentists and lawyers who have more money than they know what to do with. The usual misconception.

However, about 7 or 8 years ago, I played a few early 90's PRS and took the time to research Paul and his company.
I realised Paul's beginnings in creating guitars was humble and extremely working class. There was no ego or sense of superiority. I firmly believe Paul created his guitars with passion, pride and ultimately, versatility.
His target market was the average person working an average job, who would religiously scrimp and save to buy one guitar that could cover a lot of bases. And to respect that, Paul made guitars as best as he could, with zero shortcuts. I would imagine in the mid 80's, if you had sacrificed for months to afford one good guitar, Paul would want it to be one of his.

As time went on, PRS would then cater to the crowd that grew up with their one (or two, if you were lucky) Annapolis made instruments. By that time, maybe you had some more disposable cash and could afford a higher end example. However, my real love for PRS is with those early Annapolis short heel/sweet switch guitars. These are the ones PRS staked his reputation on in the beginning, for players whose money was precious and limited, so these guitars had to count.

I love these old videos. They nail what PRS was about.



 
Last edited:

Funk'n Metal

Member
Messages
293
I think they're ugly. But I also think most BC Rich guitars are pretty. The only PRS's I own are \m/ pickups. Which are absolutely bad ass if you want clean metal. The doctor/dentist weekend warrior crowd spills into a lot of other hobbies, too. Pretty sure they're the reason Harley Davidson offered me 40% more than I paid for my softail a year after I bought it brand new back in the 90s.
 

D K Souther

Platinum Supporting Member
Messages
987
I was skeptical when I was younger but then I played one around 1994. I dreamed of owning one. Now in my 40s I own 2 a 94 custom 22 10-top and a 2004 single cut trem 10-top. They are such great guitars. They play and sound wonderful. I have a few other guitars but the PRS guitars are my favorite. Paul Smith has never rested on his laurels. He continually innovates and improves. He figured out a way to stay self owned even with massive growth. Also he will always have a place in my heart as he figured out a way to keep everyone employed during the pandemic.
 

Yamaha 350

Member
Messages
9,228
This is in part a direct response to the other thread doing the round on why people don't like PRS...

As someone who grew up on Kramer, Fender, Gibson, Rickenbacker, my perception of PRS guitars was they were for dentists and lawyers who have more money than they know what to do with. The usual misconception.

However, about 7 or 8 years ago, I played a few early 90's PRS and took the time to research Paul and his company.
I realised Paul's beginnings in creating guitars was humble and extremely working class. There was no ego or sense of superiority. I firmly believe Paul created his guitars with passion, pride and ultimately, versatility.
His target market was the average person working an average job, who would religiously scrimp and save to buy one guitar that could cover a lot of bases. And to respect that, Paul made guitars as best as he could, with zero shortcuts. I would imagine in the mid 80's, if you had sacrificed for months to afford one good guitar, Paul would want it to be one of his.

As time went on, PRS would then cater to the crowd that grew up with their one (or two, if you were lucky) Annapolis made instruments. By that time, maybe you had some more disposable cash and could afford a higher end example. However, my real love for PRS is with those early Annapolis short heel/sweet switch guitars. These are the ones PRS staked his reputation on in the beginning, for players whose money was precious and limited, so these guitars had to count.

I love these old videos. They nail was PRS was about.




Gibson people pay 3000 dollars. Nothing is said. PRS player pay's 3000 dollars and the suddenly they become a dentist or a lawyer, CEO etc.. :spit
 
Messages
654
As someone who grew up on Kramer, Fender, Gibson, Rickenbacker, my perception of PRS guitars was they were for dentists and lawyers who have more money than they know what to do with.
Paul's beginnings in creating guitars was humble and extremely working class. His target market was the average person working an average job, who would religiously scrimp and save to buy one guitar that could cover a lot of bases

I'm very perplexed that you believe that actually PRS are guitars for lawyers and dentists and that only in the past Paul keep in his mind the working class as reference.

Based on 2021 official catalogs
Lowest price
(don't come here to talk to me about Squier/Epiphone because I'm talking about guitars with the mother-brand on the headstock):
PRS SE Standard 24: $579
Fender Strat Player: $800
Gibson Modern Les Paul Special Tribute: $999

Cheapest made in USA:
Gibson Modern Les Paul Special Tribute: $999
PRS S2 Standard 22 (and also 24): $1069
Fender Strat American Performer: $1299

Iconic model at lowest price:
Fender Strat American Professional II: $1499
PRS CE 24: $1999
Gibson Les Paul Original Standard: $2699

Honestly, the prices all seem very similar to me and Gibson leads the final block, so I don't get the definition "for lawyers and dentists".

There was no ego or sense of superiority.
Such a phrase implies that now PRS builds guitars with ego, but how do you define the character of an entire multinational company? this stuff makes me smile.

My opinion: guitarists are very traditional people (see the Gibson volute question), which leads them to remain static on some brands. Also, a great job for Fender and Gibson was done by the famous guitarists of the golden era, when PRS did not exist.
There are no other explanations, after all, every time I run into someone who doesn't like PRS and ask them for explanations, they always answer me with vague phrases like "I can't stand them" or "those are not made for me"
 
Last edited:

64 Tele

Member
Messages
862
Look at the string orientation thru the nut to tuners (nearly completely straight pull), decreased head stock angle and their effect on tuning stability.
Then try one of their trems and compare to a Fender or Gibson (especially tuning stability).
Those three things alone sold me on PRS.
 

sanhozay

klon free since 2009
Gold Supporting Member
Messages
12,252
my theory is chicken littles & henny penny's have found a way to thrive and provide unsolicited, uniformed opinions by trolling the internet. see, I just did it.

I've been sold on PRS since about 1990 when I heard live at liberty lunch.
 

Austin_Taunt

Silver Supporting Member
Messages
1,847
This is my 513. I do like the top but I honestly think it looks goofy. It’s my best guitar. It covers any genre and the perfect guitar for me to play in a cover band. It’s worth every penny I gave for it. I would not sell it for $3500. I don’t know if I would for $4000. PRS got it right with this particular guitar. It’s amazing and I’m glad it mine. I wish it looked like a tele or LP tho lol


 




Trending Topics

Top Bottom