Author Topic: Washburn Paul Stanley Series (Read 2855 times)

hunter · « **on:** January 16, 2008, 09:47:31 PM »

Ohhh have you guys seen these ?

Seriously liking these looks, oh man, it looks like a better Les Paul, screaming for some Mules ...

Dakine · « **Reply #1 on:** January 16, 2008, 09:50:01 PM »

looks like a Dean Cadillac to me!

WezV · « **Reply #2 on:** January 16, 2008, 09:56:08 PM »

the front end reminds me of my stuff - which is obviously ravelle inspired

i have to say mine flows better!!! That thing looks kinda mishapen like a melty les paul. the cadilac is similar but has much stronger lines

very few new things in guitar design. best not to worry about it

Will · « **Reply #3 on:** January 16, 2008, 10:00:04 PM »

Sorry, don't like that really, good idea though I guess.

Do Caddy's have thick or thin bodies?

Philly Q · « **Reply #4 on:** January 17, 2008, 01:02:28 AM »

I think they're ugly. I read an interview where Paul Stanley was tw@tting on about what great new designs he'd come up with... but they're just wonky Les Pauls.

The top "half" of the body's too small - it looks shrivelled, like those 50-year-old plastic tuner buttons you see sometimes. The Ravelle, Cadillac and Wez's design all look better balanced. But the basic old Les Paul shape's better than any of them.

sgmypod · « **Reply #5 on:** January 17, 2008, 11:47:18 AM »

Prefer the Wez guitar(waiting to see what the padouk one turns out like)

But hasn't washburn copied a lot from these(and I prefer these)

indysmith · « **Reply #6 on:** January 17, 2008, 11:54:21 AM »

Those Paul Stanley's are mingers. Look like ravelles after a 20 year long heroin binge.

sgmypod · « **Reply #7 on:** January 17, 2008, 11:57:35 AM »

Quote from: indysmith

Those Paul Stanley's are mingers. Look like ravelles after a 20 year long heroin binge.

*LMAO*

WezV · « **Reply #8 on:** January 17, 2008, 02:52:50 PM »

i think the position of the 3 way switch is possibly the worst part of the washburn. i can cope with fugly design but bad design really annoys me.

FELINEGUITARS · « **Reply #9 on:** January 17, 2008, 05:16:02 PM »

I'll stick with the Iceman I think - more elegant!

Philly Q · « **Reply #10 on:** January 17, 2008, 05:28:09 PM »

Quote from: FELINEGUITARS

I'll stick with the Iceman I think - more elegant!

Thinking about it, the lower bouts of the Ravelle owe a hell of a lot to the Iceman shape. So we've almost come full circle.

There really are very few truly original guitar designs.

hunter · « **Reply #11 on:** January 17, 2008, 06:11:36 PM »

Errrmm, so seems I am the only one loving them ... well so be it, I have no taste then :?

WezV · « **Reply #12 on:** January 17, 2008, 06:16:39 PM »

Quote from: Philly Q

Quote from: FELINEGUITARS
I'll stick with the Iceman I think - more elegant!

Thinking about it, the lower bouts of the Ravelle owe a hell of a lot to the Iceman shape. So we've almost come full circle.

There really are very few truly original guitar designs.

i noticed that when doing mine... More organic and slightly castrated but very iceman like

dave_mc · « **Reply #13 on:** January 17, 2008, 06:17:23 PM »

i think they're alright. can't quite decide if i actually "like" them or not, but i don't hate them.

hunter · « **Reply #14 on:** January 17, 2008, 06:20:13 PM »

Well let's say like this, the real model is too much at almost 4,000 EUR, but the cheapo version, given that it's well crafted (like e.g. PRS SE) is in a fair price range.