guitarsrock5
New member
whats the difference between a bolt on neck and a neck through guitar?
whats the difference between a bolt on neck and a neck through guitar
- Thread starter guitarsrock5
- Start date
guitarsrock5
New member
Re: whats the difference between a bolt on neck and a neck through guitar
cause i need to decide to get the jackson ke3 a bolt on or the rr5 a neck through.
cause i need to decide to get the jackson ke3 a bolt on or the rr5 a neck through.
Stringmachine
New member
Re: whats the difference between a bolt on neck and a neck through guitar
Check out this link:
http://www.edromanguitars.com/tech/neckconstruction.htm
Check out this link:
http://www.edromanguitars.com/tech/neckconstruction.htm
Stringmachine
New member
Re: whats the difference between a bolt on neck and a neck through guitar
Now remember that is just his opinion on the subject. Try it out yourself and see what you prefer. That's the only thing that matters.
Now remember that is just his opinion on the subject. Try it out yourself and see what you prefer. That's the only thing that matters.
JammerMatt
New member
Re: whats the difference between a bolt on neck and a neck through guitar
Man, you could be about to open the flood gates on this one. So, I'll be the first. I suppose besides the obvious, you can expect a difference in sound, sustain, resonance, weight, balance, the list goes on and on and can be as important and/or unimportant as you want to make it.
However, here are my observations as I have a bolt, a set neck (Les Paul type) and a neck-thru (Jackson type):
The bolt on is just that, and I think will typically have less sustain than the other types, but that can also be dependent on how "tight" the neck is at the pocket of the body. A Tom Anderson with a super tight pocket will advertise itself as sustaining just as well as anything else. Also, the bolt neck tone will have a greater dependency on the body wood, and less dependence on the neck wood, which some people prefer. Also a plus on the bolt side is that if you don't like your neck, or if it ever gets damaged, you can get a new one. You can also shim it to change the angle.
For a neck-thru, the construction (as far as I know, but I could be off) consists of a neck running full length, with the body basically composed of wings on each side, or the body might be slotted to let the neck run through, like a rabbet joint. The pickups mount more or less on the neck that runs through the body. This has the effect of the neck wood having a greater impact on the sound. This is for better or worse, but in my experience lends itself to greater sustain since the guitar is so tight (no energy lost to "rattles" between the neck and body), and a brighter sound since the necks are typically maple. Neck thrus seem to have greater reasonance, for better or worse. The downside to neck-thrus to me are that you can't replace the neck, and that since they have great resonance and sustain, all your mistakes show up to a higher degree.
I think of the set neck as the middle ground I guess.
If it makes any difference, my next axe will be a bolt because I'm sloppy.
Just my thoughts/observations. If I'm wrong on some of the technical aspects, please feel free to correct, and my apologies of course.
Man, you could be about to open the flood gates on this one. So, I'll be the first. I suppose besides the obvious, you can expect a difference in sound, sustain, resonance, weight, balance, the list goes on and on and can be as important and/or unimportant as you want to make it.
However, here are my observations as I have a bolt, a set neck (Les Paul type) and a neck-thru (Jackson type):
The bolt on is just that, and I think will typically have less sustain than the other types, but that can also be dependent on how "tight" the neck is at the pocket of the body. A Tom Anderson with a super tight pocket will advertise itself as sustaining just as well as anything else. Also, the bolt neck tone will have a greater dependency on the body wood, and less dependence on the neck wood, which some people prefer. Also a plus on the bolt side is that if you don't like your neck, or if it ever gets damaged, you can get a new one. You can also shim it to change the angle.
For a neck-thru, the construction (as far as I know, but I could be off) consists of a neck running full length, with the body basically composed of wings on each side, or the body might be slotted to let the neck run through, like a rabbet joint. The pickups mount more or less on the neck that runs through the body. This has the effect of the neck wood having a greater impact on the sound. This is for better or worse, but in my experience lends itself to greater sustain since the guitar is so tight (no energy lost to "rattles" between the neck and body), and a brighter sound since the necks are typically maple. Neck thrus seem to have greater reasonance, for better or worse. The downside to neck-thrus to me are that you can't replace the neck, and that since they have great resonance and sustain, all your mistakes show up to a higher degree.
I think of the set neck as the middle ground I guess.
If it makes any difference, my next axe will be a bolt because I'm sloppy.
Just my thoughts/observations. If I'm wrong on some of the technical aspects, please feel free to correct, and my apologies of course.
JammerMatt
New member
Re: whats the difference between a bolt on neck and a neck through guitar
Thanks for the link Stringmachine. I guess I did get some of that right. I don't know how he can say the set neck is bad, though. A million-zillion LP's can't be wrong. But, personal taste I guess. Of course cost is a big ticket item, too.
Thanks for the link Stringmachine. I guess I did get some of that right. I don't know how he can say the set neck is bad, though. A million-zillion LP's can't be wrong. But, personal taste I guess. Of course cost is a big ticket item, too.
guitarsrock5
New member
Re: whats the difference between a bolt on neck and a neck through guitar
i understand now the difference i think im going to get the ke3 cause im clumsy too and i like wammy bars
i understand now the difference i think im going to get the ke3 cause im clumsy too and i like wammy bars
Stringmachine
New member
Re: whats the difference between a bolt on neck and a neck through guitar
Mr. Ed Roman sure got his views on things!
JammerMatt said:
Mr. Ed Roman sure got his views on things!
guitarsrock5
New member
Re: whats the difference between a bolt on neck and a neck through guitar
when i have a bolt on and break the neck i could just replace it.
when i have a bolt on and break the neck i could just replace it.
Stringmachine
New member
Re: whats the difference between a bolt on neck and a neck through guitar
True! :laugh2:
guitarsrock5 said:
True! :laugh2:
big_black
Opaqueologist
Re: whats the difference between a bolt on neck and a neck through guitar
Do you do that often? I plan on never breaking a neck...I play mainly SGs so I got my fingers crossed :smack: . If I had a choice and liked both guitars equally, I think I would lean toward the neck-through. Sustain-wise I would think it would beat out any bolt-on.
guitarsrock5 said:
Do you do that often? I plan on never breaking a neck...I play mainly SGs so I got my fingers crossed :smack: . If I had a choice and liked both guitars equally, I think I would lean toward the neck-through. Sustain-wise I would think it would beat out any bolt-on.
LBeast
New member
Re: whats the difference between a bolt on neck and a neck through guitar
A setneck is what a Les Paul is. It is a glued in neck and, therefore, does not run the entire length of the guitar from the headstock to the bottom side of the body, like the neck through does. Sustain would be the main reason to get a setneck or neck through guitar IMO. I have both a setneck and bolt ons and find that the setneck has a little more sustain than the bolt ons, but as many opinions are, where sound is concerned, it is all in the ear of the beholder.guitarsrock5 said:
