The Official BKP "Bolt-On vs. Set-Neck vs. Neck-Thru" Thread

[Nephilim]

I just thought I'd start this thread, hoping it will become a super-thread of knowledge for all them clueless people (myself included) who really want to know the advantages and disadvantages of these different neck types.

From what I've learnt, a bolt-on can have as much good sustain as a neck-thru if moulded and fitted correctly. So I think it would be great for the people, who have had experience with these matters, to please post their opinions on the matter.

After looking around the BKP Forum, I've come to see that the forum is full of very down to earth people consisting of experienced guitar players, amp builders, luthiers, etc. that are here to help their fellow man, and not go into that childish debate you see on other forums. So hopefully, this thread will be a help to all those who have no clue and want honest opinions from people who aren't like: "I own a neck thru, so it obviously must be better than your bolt-on" It's kind of like the: "My dad's TV is bigger and better than your dad's" lol.

A few questions of my own I'd like to ask. And I think a few other people would like to know this. If we use 2 tonewoods - e.g. Alder & Maple - We know that Maple is very bright and Alder is in the middle, right? Now we see these 2 combo woods used in a lot of metal guitars these days, so I want know. How would a Maple Neck-Thru with Alder wings compare to a Maple Bolt-On/Set Neck with Alder Body. You see a lot of metal guitars (especially Jackson and ESP) with the maple neck-thru; but wouldn't that be unlawfully bright, seeing as your pickups are mounted into the very bright maple, comapared to the in-between Alder? I'm not talking about the Strat, btw. I'm talking abou the more chuncky guitars you see metal players play, such as the Soloist, Randy Rhoads V, etc.

Please post your experiences and help out clueless people like me, haha.

[Transcend]

Im pretty sure this was covered a year or so ago in a kind of mythbusters fashion

[darkbluemurder]

From a service standpoint the bolt-on has the advantage should ever something happen to the neck it can be easily replaced whereas a neck break on a neck-through could lead to a total loss.

From a tonal standpoint it is very difficult to tell because noone is going to first bolt a neck to a body and then have it set or vice versa so these are all isolated comparisons. You will most likely not get more than rough tendencies.

Cheers Stephan

[gwEm]

well, you know what - i like all three :))

bolt-on gets a bad rep from cheaper guitars, but as soon as you play a good strat or tele you know theres nothing wrong with that approach.

[Dr.Pain]

I don't think it matters too much.  It's a personal thing as to what you like.  I have a neck through 7 string and a bolt on with an agathis body.  The bolt on isn't junk compared to my 7 string though.  It's a lower product level but I find my bolt on sounds good.  The 7 is better overall but it did cost me more and it's got a c-pig.  It does have better sustain being neck through, more output because of the c-pig but it does put out a lot more bass because of this.  Too the point where it took some tweaking to make it sound good.

Next week I get a set neck with EMG 81/85 so something else that will sound different again.  I like the two guitars I have now.  Both are different.  I play metal so really want to hear the new toy to compare the three so it will be interesting. 

I think if they make you smile when you play them then who cares what the construction is, just enjoy them  :D

[Nephilim]

I guess I've just read to many treads on other sited badmouthing Bolt-Ons. but you might be right about it's the cheaper guitar curse that have made people moan about it. I'll be playing metal music btw. You see most bands playing neck thru metal these days, but then I saw something...On Trivium's Like Light To Flies video, you see Corey playing a Bolt-On guitar, and you can't say triviums tone aint metal. So this has made me re-evaluate my decision making.

It's a Warmoth Custom vs. An already made guitar that I was torn between. The Warmoth would have given me more customizing options to make it 'my' guitar. You think A Bolt-On/Alder Body/Naple Neck/Holy Diver Warmoth would be metal enough for BFMV style music but with the added versatiltiy of playing Satriani, Friedman, etc?

[dave_mc]

yeah good bolt-ons are great

i like all 3 for different things

[MisterMuncher]

As with a millionbillion Guitar things, the method matters less thanthe quality. A shitety join of any kind is still a shitety join.

[Philly Q]

It's certainly a case where nothing's "better" or "worse", just different.

Most of the time my favourite guitars are set-necks, but I go through Fender phases occasionally.  

To my shame, I must admit I have never owned a neck-thru, despite 30 years of GASing over old BC Riches, Yamaha SG2000s and Wahburn Falcons.  :oops:

[MDV]

Theory - well made examples of each are as good as each other. Bolt ons need to be secure, interferencefit wood to wood contact. If the grains of the pocket and neck lock into each other properly and the screws are secure and tight then they'll vibrate as one peice. Sets need to also be wood to wood contact and the glue absorbed into the surface of the wood, none filling space between the wood, and its the same story.

Practice - through necks tend to allow more low end and fundamentals to come out over the vast majority of bolt ons and set necks even when well made and as a result they sound a bit different (beefier, deeper) anyway, even compared to well made bolt ons and throughs, and in practice not that many bolt ons and probably fewer set necks are really well put together. A poor bolt on decouples the neck from the body slightly which causes a more mid-focussed resonance (which is actually circumstantially desireable and many would argue is an important part of a strat or teles sound) since they each resonate seperately at higher frequencies (as the two parts are smaller than the whole), and with a loss of sustain, and a badly made set neck with glue in gaps has its low end punch and top end diminished and you get a dull woofy sound, and less sustain because the glue is terrible at transmiting vibration (but it is still secure so the kinda spanky, middy sound from two seperated resonances from the neck and body isnt so prevelant as it is with a poor bolt on).

Theres also set-through, where you basically have a set neck where the neck extends all the way to the bridge, at about half the thickness of the body. In theory it should be a really good construction; in practice the small handfull of guitars I've played with this construction have been bizarrely gutless, thin and tiny sounding, with bad note definition.

[38thBeatle]

I would only add to the sensible points made above by suggesting that a good bolt on with be "better" than a poor glued in neck and vice versa. I don't have a neck thru but I wouldn't like to say that the two methods are preferable other than the obvious changeability of bolt-on necks.
Out of curiosity, I have a Taylor acoustic that has a bolt on neck and it has a rich tone that sustains beautifully and every bit as well as my other more conventional acoustics. The neck fitting is just one part of the tonal characteristics of the guitar in my opinion. I know I am not adding much to the debate but I thought I'd chime in to get my post total up a bit.

[tomjackson]

I usually associate bolt on necks with a faster attack with less sustain and set necks with a slower attack and longer sustain.

It's like because the bolt on is less connected to the body it vibrates the neck more and being less mass it does it quicker.  With the set neck the strings vibrate the whole guitar, it takes a little longer to get going but when it does it lasts longer.  No idea if it's the case but it's how it works in my head.

It's really hard to isolate one thing though and hard to generalise, bolt on necks often have maple fingerboards which has a much faster attack than, say rosewood.  I've not tried a through neck but opinions on them will be partly obscured by the fact they are often down tuned with heavy strings.

What I really like are set necks that through the choice of materials are the best of both worlds, that have a really zingy fast attack, lots of brang but nice deep tone and long sustain.  Thinner mahogany bodies seem to have this and stainless steel frets help, certain choices can bring back some of the characteristics lost by changing neck types.

[Ian Price]

Bolt on, set and neck-thru has never really bothered me too much to be honest. If I like the guitar, it plays well and it sounds good then it doesn't really matter. Not sure if it is coincidence or not but I am a Fender man through and through and have ended up regretting selling every Strat or Tele that I have ever sold. I haven't felt the same regret when selling set neck guitars (apart from the 335 :( ).

[Kiichi]

In the end, as many said, if they are done well, they are all good. If they arenīt they may still offer the sound you want. It really is a matter of taste.
With the neck through you probably have the highest chance of getting a quality thing, but then again neck through guitars are usually in a price range where the alternatives are great too.

For me the biggest differene is playability. With a lot of guitars the bolt on restricts your upper threat acces the most. Though this does not have to be the case (some bevel and all) in my experience it is mostly that way. Gotta try.

Tonewhise I can only confirm MDVs post by my (limited) personal experience. I just got a neck through (five pice maple mahahony, mostly maple) les paul style with mahahony wings. Although in this construcion the neck wood is supposed to have the biggest influence on the tone this thing sounds a lot darker than my pure mahagone bodyd Dean Vendetta 1.7. Wood quality probably has something to do with it to, but still.

[Telerocker]

Bolt on, set and neck-thru has never really bothered me too much to be honest. If I like the guitar, it plays well and it sounds good then it doesn't really matter. Not sure if it is coincidence or not but I am a Fender man through and through and have ended up regretting selling every Strat or Tele that I have ever sold. I haven't felt the same regret when selling set neck guitars (apart from the 335 :( ).

My favorite guitars are bolt-ons. Mostly Fenders. But it depends all on the music you play and if you feel comforable with the guitar. I think I can express myself better with Fender-types guitars then with Les Paul-ish. But, I had a Yamaha SG700 which I quite liked, apart from the weight.