Results 1 to 17 of 17

Thread: " DREAM GTRS " SHOW AND TELL

  1. #1

    " DREAM GTRS " SHOW AND TELL

    I am dreaming up specs for a PS Angelus order. Please share your pics, thoughts, insights, sound clips, dream specs.....whatever you got.- Thankyou -

  2. #2
    If I was building my dream acoustic?

    Hmmmm...

    As little finish as possible, no inlay, Robson tuners, bone nut, ultra-straight wood grain on everything, spruce top, Brazilian back and sides, dead quarter-sawn pernamboco neck, black Brazilian Rosewood fretboard (also dead quarter-sawn), and no truss rod.
    One Life

  3. #3
    10 o' Clubs & GC SalesRep OsirisProtocol's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Buffalo/New York
    Posts
    96
    I would go with an Angelus body. Rosewood back and sides with an Engleman Spruce top. One piece Pernambuco neck with a Brazilian Rosewood fingerboard and bridge. Bone nut and saddle. Medium jumbo frets with pearl 20th Anniversary birds (my favorite inlay ever!). Simple abalone and ebony rosette. Nitro finish.
    -Denny
    BAM Survivor

  4. #4
    A♥ hoards guitars A♥ rugerpc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    deep in the raspberry...
    Posts
    3,415
    I'm digging' the Celtic knot inlays...
    Thbbbbbt...
    Check it out: Phillybri used to have a band: Resonance But he's soooo over them now!
    Lexicon
    sɹǝqɯǝɯ uɐıןɐɹʇsnɐ oןןǝɥ

  5. #5
    Maple back, sides, neck, ebony board and bridge. Tonare grand shape. Carbon fiber neck reinforcement.

    Simple, great sounding axe.

  6. #6
    Ok, here we go! These are the specs: PS grade flamed Koa top, back, and sides- PS grade flamed curly maple neck ( stained to match the rusty natural Koa )- wide neck profile- ebony tailpiece, fretboard, headstock overlay, and truss rod cover- yes to the truss rod ( we haven't seen a 30 year old PRS acoustic yet and wisdom says better safe than sorry especially with a curly maple neck )- natural curly maple body binding- natural curly maple/ green abalone/ natural curly maple rosette- green abalone purfling on the top and back, also around the headstock and fretboard- green abalone birds and headstock eagle with gold outlines- gold side dots- gold robson tuners with ebony buttons- bone nut and bridge- green abalone inlay ebony bridge pins- PRS pickup system- V12 finish- ebony heel cap with the 24th fret owl inlay also in green abalone with gold outlines- and, most importantly, "PSALM 92" signed on the back of the headstock with the PS#.........sweet!!!

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by CHARISMAFIRE View Post
    Ok, here we go! These are the specs: PS grade flamed Koa top, back, and sides- PS grade flamed curly maple neck ( stained to match the rusty natural Koa )- wide neck profile- ebony tailpiece, fretboard, headstock overlay, and truss rod cover- yes to the truss rod ( we haven't seen a 30 year old PRS acoustic yet and wisdom says better safe than sorry especially with a curly maple neck )- natural curly maple body binding- natural curly maple/ green abalone/ natural curly maple rosette- green abalone purfling on the top and back, also around the headstock and fretboard- green abalone birds and headstock eagle with gold outlines- gold side dots- gold robson tuners with ebony buttons- bone nut and bridge- green abalone inlay ebony bridge pins- PRS pickup system- V12 finish- ebony heel cap with the 24th fret owl inlay also in green abalone with gold outlines- and, most importantly, "PSALM 92" signed on the back of the headstock with the PS#.........sweet!!!
    Sounds like it'll be really nice, Charismafire!

    Mine's not going to have the truss rod. I chose the carbon fiber.

    I don't actually care what happens in 30 years, since I will be quite dead. However, I'm pretty confident that the carbon fiber neck reinforcement will be just fine not only in 30 years, but in 500 years. It's pretty inert stuff, and much stronger than steel truss rods.

    However, the good thing about a truss rod isn't its ability to age, it's the ability to be adjusted, and if you need that capability, it's the way to go.

    I've had a lot of great acoustics, and one of the reasons I think my own Tonare Grand's sound was superior to anything else I ever owned (including Collings, Taylors, Larrivees, high end Martins going back to the late 60s, etc.) is because there isn't a hunk of ringy metal inside the neck. But that's just a guess.

    Old Martins (pre-1985) didn't have adjustable truss rods, starting in the 30s they used a non-adjustable "T-bar" neck reinforcement. These obviously include the famous and sought-after Pre-War Martins, and they age just fine. Martin used to put them on a jig to straighten the neck if it went out of alignment (happened to me once), but the instruments aged very nicely.

    Again, your guitar sounds like it's going to be magnificent, just wanted to take minor issue with the neck reinforcement thing.

  8. #8
    Oh it was a hard decision, still is really. I agree that it may never need adjusted, but it beats gtr surgery. Will it affect the sound? Sure! Everything affects the sound. I don't believe that I will notice much, but german shepherds and Paul ( w. wonka ) Smith might. Thankyou for all your feedback though. Thats what this is all about.

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by CHARISMAFIRE View Post
    Oh it was a hard decision, still is really. I agree that it may never need adjusted, but it beats gtr surgery. Will it affect the sound? Sure! Everything affects the sound. I don't believe that I will notice much, but german shepherds and Paul ( w. wonka ) Smith might. Thankyou for all your feedback though. Thats what this is all about.
    Well, you're right about maybe not noticing, and of course, they all sound a little different anyway! So it's hard to pin down what's causing what.

    I really didn't start thinking about acoustic guitar construction much until I got into Taylors back in the 90s. I had a couple of 810s and 900 series as well. They were beautiful, but of course, they have both the truss rod and the bolt in neck. And on all three guitars, I began to notice something a little odd in the overtones on certain notes that I couldn't quite put my finger on but I thought I heard a metallic sound. Could be my imagination, could just be those guitars. I can't prove that it did matter, obviously I'm guessing. This was before the NT necks, by the way.

    Switching to Collings was a big improvement. Of course, this could simply mean that I prefer the sound of a dovetail or set neck join to a bolt-on, which also holds true in the electric guitar area for me.

    My Tonare was shockingly wonderful sounding, and so sensitive and woody right from day one, that it blew my mind. It's possible, maybe even likely, that the truss rod model will sound the same. But I just don't want to mess with a good formula, so I'm sticking with the carbon fiber.
    Last edited by LSchefman; 07-30-2012 at 10:13 AM.

  10. #10
    OK!!!...............After more deliberation and debate on the matter, I have thought it over and reconsidered. YES, I will be going with the strength rod after all. The neck, even though curly maple is not as stable as mahogany, simply cannot move with the strength rod. As far as I know, PRS started offering the truss rod because some players wanted to adjust the relief/action to their tastes, NOT because of any instability. Every PRS acoustic comes with low, playable action from the factory already. So I see no need for the adjustment. Also you are correct about the weak point not being the neck but the bridge. I would also add the neck joint itself to that. However, with the solid dovetail neck joint they use, and the well glued bridge/tail set behind an x-brace that supports the tension of the strings on the top before the bridge, I don't see how in 100 years anything on the guitar could move. As long as the instrument isn't subject to traumatic temperature and humidity extremes, its perfect playability should theoretically endure. With the reinforcement rod only available on private stock and collection gtrs, I think I would be foolish to pass on this option. If the truss rod were somehow superior, then the higher end PRS gtrs would have them too. Or even more so, if the carbon strength rod were inferior, we would never see them as a private stock spec, and we likely would not see them at all. So YES to the carbon fiber after all. THANKYOU MAN...............peace
    Last edited by CHARISMAFIRE; 07-31-2012 at 08:10 PM. Reason: BAAD SPLLING

  11. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by CHARISMAFIRE View Post
    OK!!!...............After more deliberation and debate on the matter, I have thought it over and reconsidered. YES, I will be going with the strength rod after all. The neck, even though curly maple is not as stable as mahogany, simply cannot move with the strength rod. As far as I know, PRS started offering the truss rod because some players wanted to adjust the relief/action to their tastes, NOT because of any instability. Every PRS acoustic comes with low, playable action from the factory already. So I see no need for the adjustment. Also you are correct about the weak point not being the neck but the bridge. I would also add the neck joint itself to that. However, with the solid dovetail neck joint they use, and the well glued bridge/tail set behind an x-brace that supports the tension of the strings on the top before the bridge, I don't see how in 100 years anything on the guitar could move. As long as the instrument isn't subject to traumatic temperature and humidity extremes, its perfect playability should theoretically endure. With the reinforcement rod only available on private stock and collection gtrs, I think I would be foolish to pass on this option. If the truss rod were somehow superior, then the higher end PRS gtrs would have them too. Or even more so, if the carbon strength rod were inferior, we would never see them as a private stock spec, and we likely would not see them at all. So YES to the carbon fiber after all. THANKYOU MAN...............peace
    I think you made a good choice. Seriously.

  12. #12
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    1,500
    I have a 2010 Angelus Private Stock with no truss rod. Very thick neck, with a Santana-like headstock. I've commented in the past that the neck profile and headstock are virtually identical to a Santana 1.

    Just yesterday I changed the stock strings (which I guess were 11's) to 8's, since the action was a bit too tough for me. It worked perfectly with the 8's.....very low action, no fret buzz, no issues whatsoever.

    I thought this was relevant, since many guitars with a truss rod would probably have required a tweak once 11's were changed to 8's. In my case, the 8's resulted in action that was comparable to my lowest action electrics, and absolutely no fret buzz or strings touching the frets unintentionally.

    Subjectively, the outcome was a tone that was a bit to "tinny" for me compared to the depth of tone that the stock strings had. But, these were extra slinky Ernie Balls...they weren't even strings that were "acoustic preferred".

    So..I will change back to "9's" this weekend, in anticipation of the best compromise between tone and action. But, I thought it might be relevant to note that even a major change in string gauge didn't impact at all on the neck, and absolutely no adjustments were necessary. As a matter of fact, playing all the strings at all frets all the way up the neck....I could see where this guitar could even accomodate 7's without any potential fret buzz or related issues.

    So...score one for the absence of a truss rod. Hope this wasn't a derail to the thead's original intent.

  13. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by docbennett View Post
    I have a 2010 Angelus Private Stock with no truss rod. Very thick neck, with a Santana-like headstock. I've commented in the past that the neck profile and headstock are virtually identical to a Santana 1.

    Just yesterday I changed the stock strings (which I guess were 11's) to 8's, since the action was a bit too tough for me. It worked perfectly with the 8's.....very low action, no fret buzz, no issues whatsoever.

    I thought this was relevant, since many guitars with a truss rod would probably have required a tweak once 11's were changed to 8's. In my case, the 8's resulted in action that was comparable to my lowest action electrics, and absolutely no fret buzz or strings touching the frets unintentionally.

    Subjectively, the outcome was a tone that was a bit to "tinny" for me compared to the depth of tone that the stock strings had. But, these were extra slinky Ernie Balls...they weren't even strings that were "acoustic preferred".

    So..I will change back to "9's" this weekend, in anticipation of the best compromise between tone and action. But, I thought it might be relevant to note that even a major change in string gauge didn't impact at all on the neck, and absolutely no adjustments were necessary. As a matter of fact, playing all the strings at all frets all the way up the neck....I could see where this guitar could even accomodate 7's without any potential fret buzz or related issues.

    So...score one for the absence of a truss rod. Hope this wasn't a derail to the thead's original intent.
    Very interesting points, "Destroyer."

    I have a suggestion about stringing the guitar, since you're into experimenting a little: obviously as you know, you're not going to get your best tone out of electric guitar strings, but you might want to experiment with a softer feeling acoustic guitar string like a silk & steel. The string tension is lower, and they are definitely a lot easier to get used to.

    The tone will also be a little softer, but will be better with an acoustic than you're going to get with an electric guitar string.

  14. #14
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    1,500
    Quote Originally Posted by LSchefman View Post
    Very interesting points, "Destroyer."

    I have a suggestion about stringing the guitar, since you're into experimenting a little: obviously as you know, you're not going to get your best tone out of electric guitar strings, but you might want to experiment with a softer feeling acoustic guitar string like a silk & steel. The string tension is lower, and they are definitely a lot easier to get used to.

    The tone will also be a little softer, but will be better with an acoustic than you're going to get with an electric guitar string.
    Thanks for the recommendation Les....any preferred brands or are they mostly similar?

  15. #15
    Senior Member veinbuster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    GTA, or PA, or vacation
    Posts
    2,364
    I've been using Martin silk and steel on one of my acoustics for years.

  16. #16
    I've used Martins in the past, but I'd also try D'Addarios, simply because I've found their regular acoustic strings seem to last a little longer.

  17. #17
    Thanks fellas. the baby should be due 9 months. When she comes, I will most certainly post pics or possibly sound clips or youtube vids for everyone. Looks like all the shell is going to be green paua heart instead which is likely to be even more dazzling. They are very similar, and of the same genus. I can NOT make it to the experience, but I wish y'all the best... I'm sure it will be a hoot! Everyone please do me a favor and tease Paul for me. When I met him he still had the long hair, and if you put on him a purple coat with tails and a top hat, the man would be Willy Wonka! Hence my nickname for him: " Paul ( Wonka ) Smith "!!!!!!!!!!!!! man, sometimes life is so fun

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •