Speaking of teles for jazz, anyone try a PRS NF 53?

[jzucker]

Just a moment...

[mr. beaumont]

Something about PRS's aesthetics are just off-putting to me. My loss, they make outstanding guitars.

[DMgolf66]

Something about PRS's aesthetics are just off-putting to me. My loss, they make outstanding guitars.

Agree, i want to like them, but just dont.

[Doug B]

I don't like their purple quilted tops etc, but if it's a natural wood grain, they do sound good. very well made as well.

[mr. beaumont]

Do these have a 2 barrel saddle design? That's interesting...no wound G on these I guess.

[Stringswinger]

Do these have a 2 barrel saddle design? That's interesting...no wound G on these I guess.

There will be aftermarket replacements for the dozen or so cats who would put a wound G string set of strings on one of these.

[Oscar67]

I’m a diehard PRS groupie but the NF53 is one of their models that just leaves me kind of meh. I have a feeling they may not be selling ‘em that much because there seem to be some really good deals out there.

[jzucker]

Do these have a 2 barrel saddle design? That's interesting...no wound G on these I guess.

most of the guys I've seen playing jazz on teles aren't using a wound g anymore

[Stringswinger]

most of the guys I've seen playing jazz on teles aren't using a wound g anymore

My experience with jazz on a solid body is that the extra sustain of a solid body obviates the need for heavy strings. I used 12's on solid body guitars (for jazz) for many years thinking it was necessary to get a good jazz tone. As advancing age has forced me to use lighter strings, I have found that I can get pretty much the same tone with 10's (which generally come with an unwound G). That said, one must change to a lighter touch with lighter strings. And with advancing age, that lighter touch is a good idea in any case.

Two things:

1. Some players will still prefer the feel of heavier strings and;

2. Some guitar/pickup designs will need a string set with a wound G to either intonate correctly or have balanced volume across all strings.

[mr. beaumont]

I keep one tele with heavy strings and one without. I like to have options

Though I do play the lighter stringed one more often.

[Woodstove]

I keep one tele with heavy strings and one without. I like to have options

Though I do play the lighter stringed one more often.

Likewise. I have a fender tele with Ti 12's and my new Soloway Gosling "tele" with Elixir optiweb 9-11-16-26-36-46. this guitar begs for a very light touch and rewards it.

[nevershouldhavesoldit]

My experience with jazz on a solid body is that the extra sustain of a solid body obviates the need for heavy strings. I used 12's on solid body guitars (for jazz) for many years thinking it was necessary to get a good jazz tone. As advancing age has forced me to use lighter strings, I have found that I can get pretty much the same tone with 10's (which generally come with an unwound G). That said, one must change to a lighter touch with lighter strings. And with advancing age, that lighter touch is a good idea in any case.

Two things:

1. Some players will still prefer the feel of heavier strings and;

2. Some guitar/pickup designs will need a string set with a wound G to either intonate correctly or have balanced volume across all strings.

I've used a Tele of one kind or another on many jazz and commercial gigs since 1969. In addition to doing the job very well, a Tele is a lot easier to keep intact and to drag around the city and the stage than a big archtop. Assuming the pickups aren't firmly in the Tele twang camp, that PRS NF53 would be high on my list if I were still playing a 6 string. I used 2 PRS customs (a blue 22 and a red 24) in the late '80s and early '90s for almost all of my gigs because they sounded great everywhere on everything and were gorgeous, reliable, incredibly well made, and just plain elegant.

I still use heavy flats on both archtops and solids because they allow lower action than light ones with a proper setup, and I prefer the way they feel. I'm very used to them because I've been playing on them since I got my first good electric in 1960. Fortunately, I've been free of joint disease and able to maintain my hand strength through 60+ years of active gigging. I use a very light touch both because I think it sounds better and because it allows me much more control of my tone. I can vary it widely through hand position, effort, choice of picks, choice of pick or fingerstyle etc. Further (all other things being equal), almost all solid bodies sustain longer than almost all archtops, and thinner strings sustain longer than thick ones because there's less mass to keep in motion. So in general, I think that heavier strings give most solid body guitars a sonic envelope (attack-sustain-decay-release) that's more like that of an archtop.

[jads57]

Leave it Paul Reed Smith to re invent the Model T. He definitely has done that with the 50’s Gibson Doublecut Jr.
I think he’s found the way to modernize older tried and true designs with modern twists to appeal to a rather conservative crowd.

And while he’s done a really admirable job of it, just like many of the modern bolt on makers like Tom Anderson guitars. They are probably a bit too perfect and lack the quirks we love about the originals,when you find the ONE!

In fairness besides bespoke luithier offerings, most factory guitars are mainly CNC produced. And that a good thing for overall quality, and consistent feel..

[WilliamScott]

The guitarist in a group I play bass in uses the PRS NF53. It sounds great. He's big on effects though.

[Mick-7]

Something about PRS's aesthetics are just off-putting to me. My loss, they make outstanding guitars.

Just admit it, it's those damned birds on the fretboard, isn't it?

[Cunamara]

Other than the occasional odd colors, PRS guitars are usually beautifully finished. Even their SE series guitars tend to look pretty good. I don't like the headstock design, much more than the Heritage design (although nobody seems to chastise PRS nearly as strenuously as they chastise Heritage). And they sound great. There is a performance on YouTube with John McLaughlin, Jean-Luc Ponty and Zakir Hussain performing "Lotus Feet" and I don't think Johnny Mac has ever had such a good clean tone as he does there on that PRS.

As far as most jazz players using Telecasters not using wound Gs, I suppose that's true. Ed Bickert wasn't using a wound G on his Telecaster 30 years ago- he used Ernie Ball .010s. His tone seemed to be fine.

I didn't even know this model of PRS existed. The aesthetic thing I am having trouble with is the maple fingerboards, which generally speaking I don't care for visually. I also don't care for them as a tactile thing, not liking the feel of finished wood under my fingertips. I have a roasted maple neck on one of my Telecasters, which is unfinished front and back. That one feels great in the hand and under the fingers, even if I'm still not wowed by the maple fingerboard look. Roasted maple tends to be a bit darker looking than regular maple, so that helps.

[Doug B]

Just admit it, it's those damned birds on the fretboard, isn't it?

You could get moon inlays. They aren't as common as the birds, but PRS does make them. Besides, who looks at the fingerboard when playing?

Doug

[Doug B]

I didn't even know this model of PRS existed.

Its only came out 6-12 months ago.

Doug

[mr. beaumont]

Just admit it, it's those damned birds on the fretboard, isn't it?

The birds are a bit much, but for me it's the whole aesthetic...the super pointy headstock which clashes with the curves of the body, the highly figured woods and colored finishes are just over the top for me...the whole thing is just not my bag.

Now remember some years back when they did the first run of Miras and Starlas in the mahogany finishes? Those were cool.

[Jim Soloway]

Here's a pretty good review. I'd love try one but it's probably more than I would pay for a Tele.

[jzucker]

The birds are a bit much, but for me it's the whole aesthetic...the super pointy headstock which clashes with the curves of the body, the highly figured woods and colored finishes are just over the top for me...the whole thing is just not my bag.

Now remember some years back when they did the first run of Miras and Starlas in the mahogany finishes? Those were cool.

Meh, i think they look great. I really don't care about that aesthetic stuff anymore. I just want something that plays great, needs a minimum of periodic adjustment and doesn't hum or feed back when I play loud. These seem to fit the bill nicely. For $2k used, seems hard to beat.

[Cunamara]

You've become a pragmatist, Jack!

[jzucker]

You've become a pragmatist, Jack!

I've always been, I think. For years I played a PRS Swamp Ash Special on jazz gigs. It's a tool. Sure, it's nice to have a pretty guitar but the PRS NF guitar looks great to me.

[jamesego]

I played one for a bit at the local guitar shop. It had a wonderful and surprisingly authentic tone, and the neck profile was generous without being comical (not quite Nocaster girth). My only real objection was that it felt stiffer than most Teles I’ve played. Might have just been that particular guitar.

[jzucker]

I’m a diehard PRS groupie but the NF53 is one of their models that just leaves me kind of meh. I have a feeling they may not be selling ‘em that much because there seem to be some really good deals out there.

Where? The ones I've seen new are $2900-$3000