Debate: Bolt-on vs. set necks

[Dr. Lo]

Imagine 2 Les Paul style guitars, each with a mahogany body and maple top, a mahogany neck with rosewood fretboard, a tune-o-matic bridge, and identical pickups. However, one guitar has a bolt-on neck (nice, tight fit) and the other has a set (glued) neck. Would they sound noticeably different???

 

[tubeman87]

Re: Debate: Bolt-on vs. set necks

Maybe, it would depend on the cuts of wood, and the amount of glue used, too much can kill the sound IMO. I have both bolt on and set neck guitars, and I really don't pay to much attention to it.

 

[JB_From_Hell]

Re: Debate: Bolt-on vs. set necks

The set-neck SHOULD sound warmer. All the set-neck guitars I've owned have had a warmth that's inherent of the design, but I've never seen two guitars who were similar enough (save for the neck attachment) to really apples and apples compare.

 

[big_black]

Re: Debate: Bolt-on vs. set necks

Yes. I've never owned the same model guitar with each neck joint...but in my experience (owning both types), I would say the bolt-on will tend to be more be more crisp and snappy (wood-to-wood contact), the set-necked may be more warm and not quite as "pointed" from the glues used in the neck joint.

 

[I_M_Ken]

Re: Debate: Bolt-on vs. set necks

well, IMO if the bolt on neck fits really tighly and snugly in there and the set neck is glued properly. they both would probably sound the same if every other part is the same.

 

[ex-250]

Re: Debate: Bolt-on vs. set necks

theoretically yes, but itd be hard to get a real objective analysis as the vast majority of bolt on guitars are made from bright woods like alder/maple, whereas the vast majority of set neck guitars are mahogany/mahogany or mahogany/maple. so of course more bolt on guitars you find are gonna be snappy and the set necks are gonna be warmer

 

[The Golden Boy]

Re: Debate: Bolt-on vs. set necks

Honestly, I wouldn't get wrapped up in how it's constructed or what construction method is "better." If it's a well put together guitar and the neck isn't going to fall out or the joint isn't going to slip- find the guitar you like and play that.

 

[Pierre]

Re: Debate: Bolt-on vs. set necks

In my experience, the set neck would sound less big. More hi fi, and especially, smoother (i.e a slower attack. I don't EXACTLY know why, but I'm pretty sure that's the way it is).

If you want a really musical, smooth beautiful sound, you're better off with a setneck basically. Not to say that bolt ons don't sound great, but it's a different type of sound really.
I find the bolt on sound to be more aggressive sounding.
Keep in mind that the difference CAN be subtle. So many things are involved that it's hard to pinpoint exactly what does what...

 

[SonofaMitch]

Re: Debate: Bolt-on vs. set necks

IMO setneck is by far the superior construction method tonally speaking, out of all my instruments i have one bolt-on guitar...i love the sustain given by setneck instruments,..and by neck-thru, i prefer that over the "quack" that is more pronounced on bolt-ons and the lack of sustain just bothers me...thats why i only have one haha

~Mitch~

 

[big_black]

Re: Debate: Bolt-on vs. set necks

IMO setneck is by far the superior construction method tonally speaking, out of all my instruments i have one bolt-on guitar...i love the sustain given by setneck instruments,..and by neck-thru, i prefer that over the "quack" that is more pronounced on bolt-ons and the lack of sustain just bothers me...thats why i only have one haha

~Mitch~

Buy / make a quality bolt-on and you see that a set-neck does not necessarily offer more sustain. The glue tends to have a deadening affect in my experience. I love my Baily aluminum necked because it offers some of the sustain enhancements neck-through offer, but it's also a bolt-on so NO glue is used. Direct wood-to-wood (metal-to-wood) contact is always best IMO.

 

[WhoFan]

Re: Debate: Bolt-on vs. set necks

best set neck style of construction i was told is where you extend the neck wood into the body as far as you can to the bridge area... but not all the way thru like a normal Neck Thru would be like. Just to the bridge area. Just so the strings at the bridge are vibrating the neck wood.... kind of at both ends of the neck board... This construction theory makes sense to me..

An LP with a bolt on neck i would play if it sounded good... i one day may just build such a beast..... we will see... I like bolt ons and have no trouble with them.. but like a lot of players i like glued in neck LP's because that is just how they are made and loved by most.

 

[I_M_Ken]

Re: Debate: Bolt-on vs. set necks

IMO setneck is by far the superior construction method tonally speaking, out of all my instruments i have one bolt-on guitar...i love the sustain given by setneck instruments,..and by neck-thru, i prefer that over the "quack" that is more pronounced on bolt-ons and the lack of sustain just bothers me...thats why i only have one haha

~Mitch~

yeah i;d have to disagree with this as well.
if a bolt in is fitted tightly and very well into its pocket, then honestly there wouldnt be much difference tonally if every single part used is the same.
same goes for sustainability. plus how long do you want to sustain a note?

stand there play a note and wait for 20 secs? haha

 

[big_black]

Re: Debate: Bolt-on vs. set necks

best set neck style of construction i was told is where you extend the neck wood into the body as far as you can to the bridge area... but not all the way thru like a normal Neck Thru would be like. Just to the bridge area. Just so the strings at the bridge are vibrating the neck wood.... kind of at both ends of the neck board... This construction theory makes sense to me..

That's how my aluminum necked is built. The neck extends to the bridge, and the bridge bolts to the neck with the body wood sandwiched in between.

 

[Ken]

Re: Debate: Bolt-on vs. set necks

plus how long do you want to sustain a note?

stand there play a note and wait for 20 secs? haha

Go get a sandwich, come back, still ringing...

 

[I_M_Ken]

Re: Debate: Bolt-on vs. set necks

hehe, i dont even think the Fernandes sustainer can do that!
haha. but worth a try? :laugh2:

 

[big_black]

Re: Debate: Bolt-on vs. set necks

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wz-KfcpISAU :laugh2:

 

[BluesGuyJ]

Re: Debate: Bolt-on vs. set necks

Bolt ons I have had:
Ibanez JS1000BP
Ibanez RG7620
Fender HW1

Set necks:
PRS McCarty
Gibson SG.

I feel thatset necks attribute to better sustain and thickness of tone. I feel that bolt ons are weak acousticaly and do not work well with low gain as much as a set neck guitar. I feel that my PRS and Gibson work really well with my crunch channel while the Ibanez and Fender worked poorly. They sounded thin, weak and had no sustain/punch/thickness.

Perhaps this difference was also do to the different bridges? We also need to think of floating bridges compared to set/stop tail/ABRs.

 

[I_M_Ken]

Re: Debate: Bolt-on vs. set necks

well, my ibanez rg550 (1987) sounds good acoustically. even better than my friend's PRS (not sure which model). but again like you said, the floating bridges do thin out your tone as compared to others like tunomatics

 

[some_dude]

Re: Debate: Bolt-on vs. set necks

All things being equal I don't think there'd be as much difference as most people would think there would be.

 

[Zerberus]

Re: Debate: Bolt-on vs. set necks

IMPO:All things being 100% equal and in a perfect world,

The bolt on will have a faster, "snappier", more articulate attack and will be tonally "neutral". Some will consider this neutrality "bright"

The set neck will have a slightly more sluggish response due to the glue in the joint hindering the transfer of vibration slightly, and will have attenuated highs compared to the bolt on.

A neckthru will have a strong low midrange spike which will not increase sustain but will give that impression psychoacoustically. Also mildly attenuated highs (notably less than a set neck, though), and the response will be pretty much halfway between the bolt on and the set neck as a result of the larger surface area of the body wing/neck joint reducing the effects of the glue joint itself. The faster response and "amped" mids are a direct result of the neck going all the way through as one piece, causing the vibrations to hit the bridge (response improvement) and butt end of the guitar (midrance accentuation) before they spread to the wings.

These differences will be both audible and and in feel, and will be noticed. But they will not be immense as some make it out to be, but more in the direction of an extreme pickup swap or a bridge swap from their total impact. Again, audible and tangible, but not necessarily a "make or break" factor. A change of body wood or neck would have significantly more impact.

In pure theory, if truly 100% identical and built correctly, the bolt on will actually have just minimally more sustain because of the glue´s dampening effect present in both the set neck and the neckthru. In practice and our more than slightly flawed world: all 3 suck /rule just as much as each other