another reason i'll never own a vintage guitar

When finding out why the PRS McCarty 594 guitars have 594 in the model name, that started me down a rabbit hole.

According to Paul Reed Smith himself, the 594 comes from a 1959 four-knob guitar where the scale length was measured at 24 and 19/32". If you divide 19 by 32, that's 0.59375. When you round that number up, it's 0.594, hence the scale length of a McCarty 594 model is 24.594".

Okay, great. Good to know. But as I kept reading on from place to place across the internet about scale lengths and such, those vintage electrics are just... ugh.

The way scale length is supposed to be determined is by measuring distance from the inside of the nut to the center of the 12th fret, then multiply that result by 2.

An Epiphone Les Paul obviously has a 24.75" scale length, and if measure it yourself to be sure, it will be exactly that. No question about it. Both octaves (from fret 1-to-12 then 12 to the end) will intonate with no problems. Scale length is a true 24.75", and fret spacing was measured using the twelfth root of two method. Yep, all good.

For old stuff, that used the dreaded Rule of 18 measurement method. Rule of 18 means calculating fret spacing by dividing the scale length minus the distance from the nut to the previous fret by 18.

Why is Rule of 18 dreaded? Intonation gets all wonky the further up the fingerboard you go. On an acoustic guitar, almost nobody notices this because most don't play beyond the 5th fret. But on an electric, oh yeah, you will hear those slightly-off notes higher up the fretboard. It absolutely does not matter how perfect you set your intonation. That fret spacing will never be right. It is an unfixable problem on many vintage electrics.

Fender never did the Rule of 18 fret spacing thing as far as I'm aware. Gibson, however, did. And so did a lot of other guitar manufacturers from decades ago.

I have heard (but can't confirm) that Gibson guitars from 2019 onward all now use the twelfth root of two measurement method for fret spacing, so that's good.

I understand better now why some guys like PRS so much

This isn't about tone, but rather modern guitar construction that fixes a very old (to the point of almost ancient) problem.

If you want that vintage Gibson Les Paul feel WITHOUT the intonation weirdness, a McCarty 594 single cut even in import SE flavor fits the bill very nicely. You will get that vintage Gibson 24 and 19/32" scale length of a '59, but with frets that have none of that Rule of 18 impossible-to-intonate-correctly spaced crap going on.

I'm not saying the McCarty will sound exactly like a vintage '59 LP. Not at all. But as I've said many times before, the #1 thing that matters on a electric guitar is the neck. If that's not right, the guitar is junk. PRS gets necks right where shape, feel and intonation are concerned.

Even if you were to go with the lowest priced PRS, the SE CE24 bolt-on with 25" scale (arguably more "Fendery" than "Gibsony"), that neck will still be correct.

What about actual modern-vintage Gibson?

The LP which Gibson makes that fits this description is the Gibson Les Paul Standard 50s Faded. The faded appearance is actually a benefit because it's not overly shiny, so don't be put off by that.

Yeah, it's good. Looks right and definitely sounds right. But Gibson describes the neck as "rounded 50s-style". That does not tell me much. LP fans know there's a distinct feel difference between the '58 and '59 profile.

In other words, the only way to know what the neck feels like for sure is to go try one. And that's assuming there's one within a reasonable distance of your location where you can go and do that.

If there isn't, that's where the PRS presents an easier buying decision - and I'm not talking about price. The McCarty 594 is more likely to have the better-feeling neck for your hands.

Can I guarantee that? No. What I am saying is that if you're specifically chasing after a comfortable '59 feel, the McCarty is probably the safer purchase.

Modern electrics are better - if you can skirt around modern QC problems

I've heard others spin long yarns about how vintage electric guitars are "so much better", but I've just given you a very solid reason not to go vintage, at least on the Gibson or Gibson-like side of things.

The trick of it all with modern electrics is finding something that doesn't suffer from crippling QC issues that so many guitar makers have.

From what I understand, PRS does well both for American and import models. And as I said recently, ESP LTD also does well, and Epiphone has also greatly improved with pretty much everything they make.

As for the vintage stuff - and I mean any vintage electric even for ones without intonation issues - nope, not touching that. The oldest guitar I've ever bought is an '89 Squier II Stratocaster, and that's only because that's my first guitar (which I still own). At the time I write this, that guitar is 35 years old. Before purchase, I knew every possible issue it would have, so I was okay buying it. That is the only exception I've ever made for buying an old electric.

Modern isn't bad. You just have to find the right one. For a lot of players that want the right blend of old + new with the correct feel, PRS McCarty 594 or SE CE24 would absolutely work for them.

I might even get one myself at some point.

Published 2024 Aug 13