New Les Paul Triple Stain

ArthurGuinness

Seen this on another forum, what do you all make of it, PRS Springs to mind. Apparently another GC limited run costing $2700

population

That is pure PRS!!!

population

Actually it has a touch of the Joe Perry LP off it as well

punchdrunk

yeah it looks like the kind of thing an investment banker would "rock out" on at the weekend in his "totally ironic" 80's cover band....

if you gave me that for free that i'd sand it down
and then dump the awful gold hardware which will look like ****e in three years
when it starts to tarnish or the plating gets worn from Johnny NAMA polishing it in the dark at night...

Paolo_M

population wrote: »

Actually it has a touch of the Joe Perry LP off it as well

Would already own one of those if it wasn't a signature model. I saw Joe Perry play one on the MTV awards years ago and immediatley wanted one, but I can't bring myself to buy a signature model anything. At one point I even looked into having the sig removed. Pitty the finish isn't available in the standard range.






Not so gone on this new finish though, your banker comments are spot on!!

Seziertisch

Paolo_M wrote: »

Would already own one of those if it wasn't a signature model. I saw Joe Perry play one on the MTV awards years ago and immediatley wanted one, but I can't bring myself to buy a signature model anything. At one point I even looked into having the sig removed. Pitty the finish isn't available in the standard range.






Not so gone on this new finish though, your banker comments are spot on!!

Isn't a Les Paul already a signature model? Or do you just draw a line when it comes to double signature model?

Paolo_M

Seziertisch wrote: »

Isn't a Les Paul already a signature model? Or do you just draw a line when it comes to double signature model?

Nope, Les Paul is line of guitars originally designed by Les Paul, and Gibson (though I believe the rejected his first designs!!) used his name for the range.

Quattroste

Paolo_M wrote: »

Not so gone on this new finish though, your banker comments are spot on!!

The Banker comment sounds like someone is jealous that they can't afford to buy the expensive guitars. Hah and no, I'm not a banker. (or something that sounds like banker )

I don't like that finish much either and it does reek of PRS. Ah well.

dermo909

I hate it that people think PRS guitars are for bankers. I'm not a banker, earn minimum wage and I'm on my second one. There are Gibson and Fender guitars that cost just as much and are badly made. When you spend good money on a PRS you get a good guitar which may not be the case with the other two!

Seziertisch

dermo909 wrote: »

I hate it that people think PRS guitars are for bankers. I'm not a banker, earn minimum wage and I'm on my second one. There are Gibson and Fender guitars that cost just as much and are badly made. When you spend good money on a PRS you get a good guitar which may not be the case with the other two!

All the PRSs I have played have been fine guitars but I never saw anything to them that justified the extra cost. I also know a couple of guys that own one but have gradually drifted away from them and back to the old staples like a Strat or a Les Paul. For me the PRS is neither here nor there between a Fender and a Gibson. I feel it is a bit of a case of jack of all, master of none. If you are after a double humbucker guitar, it might take a bit of looking but some of the newer Gibsons really are cracking guitars.

That said, they are handsome instruments, and credit where credit is due, they have come up with a new body shape which manages to look respectable considering that most attempts at new guitar shapes are seriously ugly.

mloc

Seziertisch wrote: »

some of the newer Gibsons really are cracking guitars.

Have Gibson gotten over the QC problems that were plaguing them a few years back? They seemed to go through a bit of a rough patch, would be nice to hear they are back to form.

boycey

This is what us bankers rock out on.....:p

darrenw5094

The Gibson looks like the PRS Eagle model colour that retails at zillions.

Is that only difference with a standard Les Paul.....the maple cap finish??

gizmo

Not liking the gold hardware at all to be honest. The PRS standard (or Tremonti sig) in Charcoal Burst with its chrome hardware and recessed knobs would be far more my cup of tea.

darrenw5094

Seziertisch wrote: »

All the PRSs I have played have been fine guitars but I never saw anything to them that justified the extra cost. I also know a couple of guys that own one but have gradually drifted away from them and back to the old staples like a Strat or a Les Paul. For me the PRS is neither here nor there between a Fender and a Gibson. I feel it is a bit of a case of jack of all, master of none. If you are after a double humbucker guitar, it might take a bit of looking but some of the newer Gibsons really are cracking guitars.

That said, they are handsome instruments, and credit where credit is due, they have come up with a new body shape which manages to look respectable considering that most attempts at new guitar shapes are seriously ugly.

PRS don't try to be Fender or Gibson. They are their own guitar. Build quality, versatility, you would find it hard to get a better guitar. PRS 513, possibly the most versatile sounding guitars around today.

Newer Gibsons are not cracking guitars. Some of their recent efforts are cringe worthy.

Seziertisch

darrenw5094 wrote: »

PRS don't try to be Fender or Gibson. They are their own guitar. Build quality, versatility, you would find it hard to get a better guitar. PRS 513, possibly the most versatile sounding guitars around today.

Newer Gibsons are not cracking guitars. Some of their recent efforts are cringe worthy.

I know a couple of guys that own PRS and newer Les Pauls and if asked to pick they would choose the Gibson every time. This is also reflected in what they play most often.

All I can say is that of the newer Gibsons I have played there have been some really nice guitars in there. I was in Waltons one day and tried quite a few, none were turkeys, and some were really, really nice. I'm sure there is greater uniformity in PRS guitars but as I said, any that I have played have been good but not so much better than everything else to justify the price difference. And if given the choice between those really nice Les Pauls I played and a PRS I would also go for the Les Paul every time.

darrenw5094

PRS brand new off a UK site for well under €2000 if you look around.
I have sold a used PRS CU22 for €1200 on adverts with the '10 Top' and bird inlays.

Some people are born and bred Gibson. I own a '93 Gibson Les Paul Standard and a Bacchus Les Paul Goldtop '59 and like them both. I remember before the net came along, a Gibson Les Paul Standard retailing @ €3300 in my local store. :rolleyes:
But the better guitar between the two has to be PRS.

Seziertisch

I think PRS's association with Creed and Nickelback have probably made them untouchable for a lot of people.

darrenw5094

Seziertisch wrote: »

I think PRS's association with Creed and Nickelback have probably made them untouchable for a lot of people.

At least they don't have a sig model....:D

A lot of the Nu-metal guys using, misusing and under-using them.
Look classy though with the Bird inlays.

gizmo

Wrong on both counts folks. There is a "Creed" signature in the form of guitarist Mark Tremonti's model. Said model is, however, not only one of their best selling signatures but also an absolutely beautiful piece of gear.

And and on a side note, to dismiss Tremonti's playing just because of his association with Creed is absolute idiocy.

darrenw5094

Yep my mistake.

But he is a savage guitar player though.