# PRS Private Stock 7 string-If you dont like this, somethings wrong with you!!!



## Riffer (Sep 29, 2009)

I was at the PRS Experience thursday, friday, and saturday and they had a Private Stock 7 string on display. It's basically one of the nicest and coolest 7's I've ever seen.


----------



## darren (Sep 29, 2009)

That headstock is horrible.


----------



## Brendan G (Sep 29, 2009)

WANT!


----------



## TomAwesome (Sep 29, 2009)

Most of it looks pretty nice, but I agree with Darren that the headstock is atrocious. It looks like it was free handed on a band saw.


----------



## SpaceDock (Sep 29, 2009)

Thats really cool, where was the pic taken? 


^I think your head is horrible JK


----------



## Mattmc74 (Sep 29, 2009)

Very bad ass! Headstock is a little weird but the rest of the guitar is pure win!


----------



## TomAwesome (Sep 29, 2009)

SpaceDock said:


> I think your head is horrible JK



No, you're right. Have you seen my avatar? My head really is horrible. It's round like a medicine ball, and I have a forehead like a billboard.


----------



## Riffer (Sep 29, 2009)

The headstock is a Dan Spitz PRS headstock just reversed. I agree to a point about the headstock but I can deal with it. The pictures were taken at the PRS Experience this past weekend. And noticed the awesome quilt PRS to the left of it. I work at PRS so I was at the event but I didnt take the picture.


----------



## hufschmid (Sep 29, 2009)

Looks cool but I dont like the headstock at all....


----------



## TimSE (Sep 29, 2009)

shame about the headstock. the body is killler tho


----------



## XeoFLCL (Sep 29, 2009)

Like every other person in this thread..

Hate the headstock. Needs a 4x3 headstock.




HOWEVER... The guitar itself is to die for. I want one


----------



## JJ Rodriguez (Sep 29, 2009)

The only thing I like about that guitar is the top. I'd probably put it VERY low on my list of thing's I'd actually spend $10-15k on, whatever it costs


----------



## Triple-J (Sep 29, 2009)

Riffer said:


> The headstock is a Dan Spitz PRS headstock just reversed. I agree to a point about the headstock but I can deal with it. The pictures were taken at the PRS Experience this past weekend. And noticed the awesome quilt PRS to the left of it. I work at PRS so I was at the event but I didnt take the picture.



I have a feeling it's the Spitz headstock cause it was made for him, he plays 7's now in his new band so it would make sense.


----------



## liamh (Sep 29, 2009)

I guess there's something wrong with me.
Dont like that, hideous headstock, boring finish and boring hardware.
The sc to the right of it however, is a beauty


----------



## zimbloth (Sep 29, 2009)

I concur with the majority here. Great looking guitar but that headstock is pretty wretched.


----------



## vampiregenocide (Sep 29, 2009)

I love it. I like the headstock too.


----------



## DevinShidaker (Sep 29, 2009)

I really don't understand how anybody could like that headstock, it completely ruins that guitar for me


----------



## JJ Rodriguez (Sep 29, 2009)

Yeah, looks like a Chibanez or Halo headstock or something  The rest of it is this classy looking thing, and the headstock looks like a jagged, pointy ice cream cake that's been left out in the sun too long.


----------



## BlindingLight7 (Sep 29, 2009)

I WANT!!!!!

....that headstock to be destroyed


----------



## Triple7 (Sep 29, 2009)

I pretty much agree with everyone else, beautiful guitar but the headstock should be a 4+3.


----------



## ajdehoogh (Sep 29, 2009)

That's a PRS?


----------



## Mwoit (Sep 29, 2009)

liamh said:


> I guess there's something wrong with me.
> Dont like that, hideous headstock, boring finish and boring hardware.
> The sc to the right of it however, is a beauty



+1

Maybe it's just the photos, but it just looks so uninspiring.


----------



## pink freud (Sep 29, 2009)

vampiregenocide said:


> I love it. I like the headstock too.


 

This. If the headstock had the same wood and finish as the body, it'd be even better.


----------



## Xaios (Sep 29, 2009)

That is among my least favorite PRS guitars everywhere. Their straight 6/7 headstock is just plain awful looking. Plus, the finish on that guitar is seriously plain. On a whole, it just looks cheap somehow. I wouldn't pay more than $1500 for it, even if I did have an inclination to own it.

I should also note that I'm not a huge fan of PRS' 4+3 headstock. Having seen the shots of Munkey's PRS 7 string, the 4+3 headstock on it looks really mal-proportioned to me.

Having said all that, those are exceptions more than rules. Their 3+3 headstock is perfect, and your typical PRS guitar is stunning.


----------



## djpharoah (Sep 29, 2009)

A normal 4+3 PRS Headstock would have made the guitar sooo much better. That headstock looks so bad on that guitar.


----------



## Niilz (Sep 29, 2009)

Xaios said:


> That is among my least favorite PRS guitars everywhere. Their straight 6/7 headstock is just plain awful looking. Plus, the finish on that guitar is seriously plain. On a whole, it just looks cheap somehow. I wouldn't pay more than $1500 for it, even if I did have an inclination to own it.
> 
> I should also note that I'm not a huge fan of PRS' 4+3 headstock. Having seen the shots of Munkey's PRS 7 string, the 4+3 headstock on it looks really mal-proportioned to me.
> 
> Having said all that, those are exceptions more than rules. Their 3+3 headstock is perfect, and your typical PRS guitar is stunning.



Hmm??? ...
I would buy that flamed maple top. That one is great!!!
...I agree with you about the strange seven-in-line headstock, but 4+3 is not that ugly - maybe you've just seen pictures with strange perspectives so far?

...I like it...


----------



## Customisbetter (Sep 29, 2009)

the only thing i like about it is the trem.


----------



## Xaios (Sep 29, 2009)

Niilz said:


> Hmm??? ...
> I would buy that flamed maple top. That one is great!!!
> ...I agree with you about the strange seven-in-line headstock, but 4+3 is not that ugly - maybe you've just seen pictures with strange perspectives so far?
> 
> ...I like it...



While the 4+3 headstock isn't nearly as bad as the inline 7 headstock, it still doesn't jive for me. On the top side, it drops off too fast and then straightens out and stays straight for too long. It should be a more gradual curve, like the bottom side. And the curve at the end of the headstock just doesn't look nearly as elegant as on a 3+3 PRS headstock.

Just niggles that bug me is all.


----------



## signalgrey (Sep 29, 2009)

darren said:


> That headstock is horrible.




this


----------



## GazPots (Sep 29, 2009)

Apart from the FAILstock it's lovely.


----------



## TMM (Sep 29, 2009)

darren said:


> That headstock is horrible.



+1 that's like sticking Mickey Rourke's head on Angelina Jolie's body.


----------



## Xaios (Sep 29, 2009)

That's no headstock, it's an ass-stock.


----------



## Empryrean (Sep 29, 2009)

If the tuners weren't so bass-phobic i would like it a lot more


----------



## Dusty201087 (Sep 29, 2009)

darren said:


> That headstock is horrible.



This


----------



## budda (Sep 29, 2009)

all these RHLC's complaining about the headstock 

i like it.


----------



## Randy (Sep 29, 2009)

I actually kinda like it too. 

I have a bigger issue with the lighting, as it makes the headstock look poorly finished and washed out.


----------



## Joose (Sep 29, 2009)

I liked the 7 string PRS Clint Lowery was using when he filled in with KoRn much better. I'd still play the shit out of that one though!


----------



## Rick (Sep 29, 2009)

darren said:


> That headstock is horrible.



This.


----------



## haffner1 (Sep 30, 2009)

I have to side with the minority here. I don't have much problem with the headstock really, but I have always liked a lot of the off the wall headstocks, as long as they don't cause neck dive. I would have to consider it somewhat of a win for PRS to even do an inline headstock of any kind, because they are usually so stuck in a rut when it comes to their designs- even if they are great guitars.


----------



## Semi-pro (Sep 30, 2009)

The guy who desidgned the headstock would be very upset about this thread It's so close to the Hufschmid shape (which is one of the coolest, made to be reversed!) but that tiny thing in the tip of it just ruins it all

The 4x3 looked nice though.


----------



## nordhauser06 (Sep 30, 2009)

darren said:


> That headstock is horrible.



Seriously.


----------



## nikt (Sep 30, 2009)

that's got to be this one:
PRS PRIVATE STOCK CUSTOM 24 7-STRING, CHARCOAL TOP / PEARL WHITE BACK FINISH WITH CASE - Elderly Instruments

with 4+3 headstock it would be the shit


----------



## Apophis (Sep 30, 2009)

Top is awesome, but headstock


----------



## loktide (Sep 30, 2009)

that headstock =


----------



## ralphy1976 (Sep 30, 2009)

haffner1 said:


> I have to side with the minority here. I don't have much problem with the headstock really, but I have always liked a lot of the off the wall headstocks, as long as they don't cause neck dive. I would have to consider it somewhat of a win for PRS to even do an inline headstock of any kind, because they are usually so stuck in a rut when it comes to their designs- even if they are great guitars.



i do agree with you there. I do not think it is an atrocity, but i think it clashes with the overall design of the guitar.


----------



## thinkpad20 (Sep 30, 2009)

don't like the headstock, and I don't like the flame... looks too ostentatious, too "zebra" like. But whatever....


----------



## maliciousteve (Sep 30, 2009)

I love it. Amazing.


----------



## hairychris (Sep 30, 2009)

Rosewood neck? Hope so!

But like a lot of other folks here I loathe the headstock. Trying to keep the 2 prong vibe of the 3+3 just... fails badly.

Note: I'm not a PRS hater at all (my CuRo24 AP is sex with strings) but I really do wonder sometimes.


----------



## ToniS (Sep 30, 2009)

Does this mean there's something wrong with me?


----------



## snuif09 (Sep 30, 2009)

i dont like prs =(


----------



## CrushingAnvil (Sep 30, 2009)

Why the fuck did they have to ruin that guitar with that lame headstock?

It looks like a 14 year old 'strictly-hevvy-metul' fan designed it


----------



## Sang-Drax (Sep 30, 2009)

darren said:


> That headstock is horrible.


----------



## ellengtrgrl (Sep 30, 2009)

darren said:


> That headstock is horrible.


 
+1 Geez! It looks like a mutant reverse headstock ESP!. The 4 + 3 headstock used on their other 7s looks worlds better, IMO.


----------



## synrgy (Sep 30, 2009)

darren said:


> That headstock is horrible.



I'm really glad you said it first. 

I completely agree.

Not that I wouldn't still consider giving up a testicle for the guitar.


----------



## Rick (Sep 30, 2009)

tongarr said:


> Does this mean there's something wrong with me?



No, just means that there's something horribly wrong with that headstock.


----------



## HumanFuseBen (Sep 30, 2009)

Headstock looks like Godzilla's jagged dick. Nice top, though!


----------



## Shawn (Sep 30, 2009)

Very nice but I don't like the headstock. They should've kept the original headstock.


----------



## Konfusius (Sep 30, 2009)

Sweet guitar. 
But ugliest headstock ever, if you like that thing, something is wrong with you.


----------



## Fred the Shred (Sep 30, 2009)

I've always loved the luxurious look of many PRS guitars, but I really hate to see that headtock there, to be honest. A pity, I must say.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Sep 30, 2009)

I can't see how they justified putting such a pointy headstock on such a curvy guitar. It's simply bad flow. Perhaps if they softened some of those sharp angles it would flow a hell of a lot better. 

I REALLY dig the color though.


----------



## Xaios (Sep 30, 2009)

Proof that reverse headstocks aren't always better. 

The biggest shame is that it wouldn't take much tweaking to make it a decently nice headstock, but they chose the worst angles imagineable for everything.


----------



## GazPots (Oct 1, 2009)

The headstock reminds me of one of those god aweful Chibanez guitars where the builder is obviously blind or completely retarded as the shape is all skewed and wonky.


----------



## Esp Griffyn (Oct 1, 2009)

The headstock looks like it was done in about 5 minutes, then scrawled on. Doesn't even look finished!


----------



## Harry (Oct 1, 2009)

Disgusting headstock, everything else is amazing.


----------



## Prydogga (Oct 1, 2009)

There might be something wrong with me  I don't really like it, the headstock is horrible and the pics probably don't do it justice, if I saw it in the pics that PRS have on their site I'd probably love it.


----------



## SamSam (Oct 1, 2009)

The head stock is dire, it looks like its been dragged through a building site and then left in the gravel pit for a week. 

Nice Top though.


----------



## Riffer (Oct 1, 2009)

Semi-pro said:


> The guy who desidgned the headstock would be very upset about this thread It's so close to the Hufschmid shape (which is one of the coolest, made to be reversed!) but that tiny thing in the tip of it just ruins it all
> 
> The 4x3 looked nice though.


 I'm pretty sure that Dan Spitz designed the headstock with us. I dont think it was just a private stock guy here who did the headstock. I should go tell them to look at this thread HAHA


----------



## Fred the Shred (Oct 1, 2009)

Riffer, please do PRS a favor and sneakily use a saw to hack that Chibanez like protrudence and reshape the headstock. What a horrible thing to put on such a lovely guitar, I must insist!


----------



## Cheesebuiscut (Oct 1, 2009)

Funny I like the headstock / whole guitar.

I saw a 6 string in line prs headstock a while ago that looked god awful but for some reason the 7 string inline sits well with me.

My brain registers it as a pointier ibanez / schecter hybrid looking thing.

If you don't try to look at it like a skewed prs headstock and just look at it for what it is it really doesn't look bad imo.


----------



## asmegin_slayer (Oct 1, 2009)

Its nice (headstock is fucking ugly). But not as nice as that one PRS 7 string with the floyd that was going for $30,000!!!!

Anyone has the pic of that?


----------



## TMM (Oct 1, 2009)

This is really the only way a PRS 7-string headstock should look:







The guitar in the OP is beautiful, except that headstock just looks distorted and ugly. It's like those USA Washburn Sonic 7 guitars - they look awesome, until you get to the headstock, and you wonder, 'what the hell were they thinking?'


----------



## ShadyDavey (Oct 1, 2009)

darren said:


> That headstock is horrible.



4+3 would look significantly better....



TMM said:


> This is really the only way a PRS 7-string headstock should look:



Yes, just like that


----------



## Xaios (Oct 1, 2009)

Okay, maybe it's just me, but from that angle it looks INFINITELY nicer than the other picture of the 4+3 headstock portrayed. Suddenly all the angles work.


----------



## rto666 (Oct 1, 2009)

TMM said:


> This is really the only way a PRS 7-string headstock should look:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
Agree!!!


----------



## Bobo (Oct 1, 2009)

I like the finish, but forget about that headstock, I think the body design in ugly. Honestly I'm just not a fan of any PRS body design I've seen....something is wrong with me I guess or maybe I'm not cool


----------



## iondestroyer1527 (Oct 2, 2009)

Bobo said:


> I like the finish, but forget about that headstock, I think the body design in ugly. Honestly I'm just not a fan of any PRS body design I've seen....something is wrong with me I guess or maybe I'm not cool



certainly not true, i will use this as my first opportunity to say "EPIC FAIL" on any forum i've ever posted on...UGLY


----------



## Nick (Oct 2, 2009)

darren said:


> That headstock is horrible.




i think it looks great



Xaios said:


> Okay, maybe it's just me, but from that angle it looks INFINITELY nicer than the other picture of the 4+3 headstock portrayed. Suddenly all the angles work.



agree


----------



## darren (Oct 2, 2009)

TMM said:


> This is really the only way a PRS 7-string headstock should look:



 Agree 100%! That's just perfect... although i'd prefer the string pull to be straighter.


----------



## possumkiller (Oct 2, 2009)

something is definitly wrong with me then


----------



## Jason (Oct 2, 2009)

darren said:


> That headstock is horrible.



Yep. I literally thought the headstock was a joke.


----------



## caughtinamosh (Oct 2, 2009)

I don't like the headstock. I _am, _however, quite partial to the 4+3 style.  I just wish that they could design it around a straight string pull, or at least straighter.


----------



## Sepultorture (Oct 3, 2009)

i do think the headstock looks kinda cool really

but it really doesn't suit a PRS axe, should be the regular headstock in 7


----------



## Riffer (Oct 24, 2009)

Here are way better pics from the Birdsandmoons forum.


----------



## Rick (Oct 24, 2009)

Riffer said:


> Here are way better pics from the Birdsandmoons forum.



Um, where?


----------



## bulb (Oct 24, 2009)

haha 80+ posts in and people are still complaining about the headstock, and you know what, im not the least bit surprised either, because that is probably one of the worst looking headstocks i have ever seen relative to how good the rest of the guitar looks.
this is like that whole hot chicks who date ugly guys kinda thing haha!
what the hell were they thinking!?


----------



## Rick (Oct 24, 2009)

Pretty much.


----------



## DevinShidaker (Oct 24, 2009)

it's like this guitar is a girl with a butterface. everything is great but her face.


----------



## guitarplayerone (Oct 24, 2009)




----------



## Stealthdjentstic (Oct 24, 2009)

envenomedcky said:


> it's like this guitar is a girl with a butterface. everything is great but her face.



Except that even a paper bag cant solve this


----------



## bulb (Oct 24, 2009)

Stealthtastic said:


> Except that even a paper bag cant solve this



...or could it? hmm...

(waits for someone who has paintshop skills to shoop it!)


----------



## JJ Rodriguez (Oct 24, 2009)

Instead of a hole cut out around the mouth, there will be 7 holes around the tuners.


----------



## HaGGuS (Oct 24, 2009)

Headstock fail.
What has been seen cannot be unseen.


----------



## Neil (Oct 24, 2009)

Cant help but notice it's missing a saddle screw lol

http://elderly.com/images/new_instruments/30N/PRSPS33_bridge.jpg


----------



## HaGGuS (Oct 24, 2009)

Neil said:


> Cant help but notice it's missing a saddle screw lol
> 
> http://elderly.com/images/new_instruments/30N/PRSPS33_bridge.jpg



Holy shit.
And how much do PRS charge for 1 of these things?
Missing bits.
And a headstock that looks half finished.


----------

