I think the "lawyer's guitar" thing started because they were a small US company which dared to launch a high-end, high-price instrument at a time when the guitar market pretty much meant Fender, Gibson and overseas imports. Of course not many people bought them, or could afford them, at first. And there was quite a lot of emphasis (especially in the early days) on how many "A"s there were in the maple tops. So they developed an exclusive, "furniture guitar" kind of image.
Eventually they ended up challenging the big boys - why them and not, say, Dean or Hamer? I think because they stuck to a couple of basic designs and didn't really try to follow trends or make guitars for specific genres of music. Plus a fair bit of luck.
And now they've reached a point where so many people play them that there isn't just one PRS image any more - the instruments haven't changed much, but the range of users has got much wider. It can't be a lawyer's guitar if a "cool" band is using it.
Personally I'm a little bit worried about the new ranges and designs they're introducing - it seems like they're starting to try to be all things to everyone, which isn't really what they're about. They've been pretty clever so far, using the SE range for different designs rather than just budget copies of the US models. But I wonder if they're going to end up like Fender, with a bewildering number of models at different prices so you'll need to read the small print to figure out where they're made.
Oh well, enough moaning. They don't care what I think.
