Prs sc594

oldmansanj

Hi all!

im thinking of selling a few amps and guitars and getting a sc594 core. I’m going down the prs route as I’m finding I’m playing my sc245 more then my Gibsons and Guilds. The comfort in playing compared to my les Paul’s has sold me. If anyone has a sc245 and 594 do they feel very different in their neck profile? Mine is 2007 with a wide fat profile and it’s amazing. Equally my 245 is one of the only guitars that I have left stock. The guitar would be in drop c.

I can’t get out to try one very easily due to my job. So any thoughts I would appreciate it.

if it helps the stuff I like to play is metal  - Neurosis, mastodon, high on fire, slayer, monster magnet etc.

guitargeek62

They are bloody awesome guitars, though I'm not sure they'd be my first choice for drop C due to the shorter scale length!

I've played both the SC245 and the SC594, the latter has a slightly fatter neck but for me that was a positive. Tonally I much prefer the 594 to the earlier singlecut variations for most genres, although the SC250 and Tremonti models have their place too for more modern music.

It might be worth checking out the ESP Eclipse range too?

Jalapeno

Love my 594, neck is chunkier than I am usually comfortable with, but it's great !

webrthomson

The 594 neck profile is the fattest that PRS do - it's also asymmetric so D’ish at top verses C’ish at the bottom. For metal you’ve got two challenges – as already mentioned the scale length is quite short so you would probably need quite thick strings and the pickups are low wind version and consequentially low output.

I think you could clean boost them and get where you need, unless you are using something with shed loads of gain you are going to need more push that the pickups will give you stock

That said they are quality guitars and are pretty much the only PRS’s with the “right” control layout IMHO!

guitars4you

The 594 neck is slightly chunkier than the traditional wide/fat profile that they have offered for years

based on recent examples I've had and measured

Traditional wide/fat - .884" top nut end to .924"  12th fret
594 - .894" top nut end and 1.075" 12th fret

But retains that easy slick feel and playability that you'll find on a PRS

Collings

I've got a private stock 245 and a core 594 and as others have said the 594 is a fatter neck than the wide/fat / pattern neck on the 245. I prefer it over the profile of the 245 but both are great feeling.

HandwrittenHero

guitars4you said:

The 594 neck is slightly chunkier than the traditional wide/fat profile that they have offered for years

based on recent examples I've had and measured

Traditional wide/fat - .884" top nut end to .924"  12th fret
594 - .894" top nut end and 1.1075" 12th fret

But retains that easy slick feel and playability that you'll find on a PRS

1.1 at the 12th sounds insane! Don’t think R8s or original 58s measured go much over 1.02 for ones considered chunkier than average. I mean, with a 7 inch hand span I can still get my thumb hooked on bass side of a ‘59 neck to bend the G string at 18 with anything past that starting to hit heel issue. Gives me some puzzling!

webrthomson

HandwrittenHero said:

guitars4you said:

The 594 neck is slightly chunkier than the traditional wide/fat profile that they have offered for years

based on recent examples I've had and measured

Traditional wide/fat - .884" top nut end to .924"  12th fret
594 - .894" top nut end and 1.1075" 12th fret

But retains that easy slick feel and playability that you'll find on a PRS

1.1 at the 12th sounds insane! Don’t think R8s or original 58s measured go much over 1.02 for ones considered chunkier than average. I mean, with a 7 inch hand span I can still get my thumb hooked on bass side of a ‘59 neck to bend the G string at 18 with anything past that starting to hit heel issue. Gives me some puzzling!

The neck profile is based on one of PRS's 54 Les Pauls, probably explains why its thicker, there is one of the videos on their Youtube channel where he is talking about them designing it. It is surprisingly comfy to play though!

guitars4you

webrthomson said:

HandwrittenHero said:

guitars4you said:

The 594 neck is slightly chunkier than the traditional wide/fat profile that they have offered for years

based on recent examples I've had and measured

Traditional wide/fat - .884" top nut end to .924"  12th fret
594 - .894" top nut end and 1.1075" 12th fret

But retains that easy slick feel and playability that you'll find on a PRS

1.1 at the 12th sounds insane! Don’t think R8s or original 58s measured go much over 1.02 for ones considered chunkier than average. I mean, with a 7 inch hand span I can still get my thumb hooked on bass side of a ‘59 neck to bend the G string at 18 with anything past that starting to hit heel issue. Gives me some puzzling!

The neck profile is based on one of PRS's 54 Les Pauls, probably explains why its thicker, there is one of the videos on their Youtube channel where he is talking about them designing it. It is surprisingly comfy to play though!

sorry - slight error - 12th fret is 1.075"

imalrightjack

webrthomson said:

The 594 neck profile is the fattest that PRS do - it's also asymmetric so D’ish at top verses C’ish at the bottom. For metal you’ve got two challenges – as already mentioned the scale length is quite short so you would probably need quite thick strings and the pickups are low wind version and consequentially low output.

I think you could clean boost them and get where you need, unless you are using something with shed loads of gain you are going to need more push that the pickups will give you stock

That said they are quality guitars and are pretty much the only PRS’s with the “right” control layout IMHO!

I think the pickups actually take gain really well. Possibly not enough for really brutal sounds but certainly did thrash, etc. well enough with the right amp settings. 

If you get one and switch the pickups, let me know, as I’d like a set!

Fortheloveofguitar

I’m really keen on getting an S2 SC594

Looks to be a lot for the money 

Blueingreen

I have the Semi Hollow SC594.  When I bought it my biggest worry was that I'd find the neck too big - generally my preference is for smaller necks (eg when I bought my 339 I chose the smaller of the two available neck profiles).  It did feel a little bulky at first but I got used to it in days.  I've owned my fair share of good guitars and if I had to rate them for fit, finish and playability the SC594 would come out on top.

oldmansanj

Cheers mate that really helps. Thanks for all the responses 

Philly_Q

Fortheloveofguitar said:

I’m really keen on getting an S2 SC594

Looks to be a lot for the money 

I'm interested to try one, mainly due to the slightly bigger neck - "wide fat" is "a bit too wide and not fat enough" as far as I'm concerned.  They look good, but I wish they'd gone for a plainer look without birds or binding.

I prefer the confusingly-named S2 McCarty Thinline, looks-wise, but it has a thin neck.

webrthomson

imalrightjack said:

webrthomson said:

The 594 neck profile is the fattest that PRS do - it's also asymmetric so D’ish at top verses C’ish at the bottom. For metal you’ve got two challenges – as already mentioned the scale length is quite short so you would probably need quite thick strings and the pickups are low wind version and consequentially low output.

I think you could clean boost them and get where you need, unless you are using something with shed loads of gain you are going to need more push that the pickups will give you stock

That said they are quality guitars and are pretty much the only PRS’s with the “right” control layout IMHO!

I think the pickups actually take gain really well. Possibly not enough for really brutal sounds but certainly did thrash, etc. well enough with the right amp settings. 

If you get one and switch the pickups, let me know, as I’d like a set!

Yeah boosting them with a clean boost you can just about get there, they just dont sounds as good as my Feline with Oil City PAT 63's though - those pickups are immense I was genuinely gob smacked by those with a clean boost - they can happily go toe to toe with actives.

I know that using PAF style pickups for metal is not really the done thing, but some of them sound good

Jalapeno

Here's mine - Autumn Fireburst .....

TTBZ

webrthomson said:

imalrightjack said:

webrthomson said:

The 594 neck profile is the fattest that PRS do - it's also asymmetric so D’ish at top verses C’ish at the bottom. For metal you’ve got two challenges – as already mentioned the scale length is quite short so you would probably need quite thick strings and the pickups are low wind version and consequentially low output.

I think you could clean boost them and get where you need, unless you are using something with shed loads of gain you are going to need more push that the pickups will give you stock

That said they are quality guitars and are pretty much the only PRS’s with the “right” control layout IMHO!

I think the pickups actually take gain really well. Possibly not enough for really brutal sounds but certainly did thrash, etc. well enough with the right amp settings. 

If you get one and switch the pickups, let me know, as I’d like a set!

Yeah boosting them with a clean boost you can just about get there, they just dont sounds as good as my Feline with Oil City PAT 63's though - those pickups are immense I was genuinely gob smacked by those with a clean boost - they can happily go toe to toe with actives.

I know that using PAF style pickups for metal is not really the done thing, but some of them sound good

I tend to prefer lower output/PAF style pickups for heavier stuff too - they have more dynamics and headroom I think and you can always boost with a drive pedal when you want to hit the front of the amp harder. 

Re the downtuning Leon Todd (youtuber) has his SC245 in drop C for his band Ragdoll so it should be alright!