Bolt on vs. set neck joints. Does it matter??
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 6 ก.ย. 2024
- He I give a brief overview on the differences between different types of neck joints. I weigh in on the long debate of set neck vs. bolt on.
Keep the discussion clean a civil. I dont tolerate name calling for abuse.
Sorry the video cuts off at the end. Im just blabbering at that point anyway. visit me at www.benfordguitars.com or on Facebook at BenfordGuitars
![[Re:all TREASURE] EP.6 in 방콕ㅣ🚩 쩡캠의 방콕 투어 빵 마이 와이 👍](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/uyFw-nItA_s/mqdefault.jpg)
Nice video. Really fun to see how tight that neck joint is even without being bolted in.
The longer I've played, I'm agreeing with you. I also like the versatility of being able to replace bolt-on necks. I also love the feel of a neck with just some finish on it, no pain. Perhaps the set necks look bettter, but who really notices and who really cares. Thank you for the video.
I agree. It is not so important what style of neck joint you use, it matters how well its made... weather it be bolt on, set or neck through, I've seen great guitars and junk guitars from each type.
definitely right, there are a lot of artists that use set necks but some people who use bolt ons have some of the best tones ive ever heard
In my opinion there is a difference in sound, I prefer bolt on. Plus you can try different settings, and have alternatives when it comes to set up and repair
Cool, that's "Faith, Hope, Love" by King's X that's playing in the background. An album every guitar enthusiast should hear at least once. Sorry for the off topic remark. 😉
turning people on to great music is never off topic.
I think if you are wondering how it affects the tone or the sustain of the guitar it is more about the the density and girth of the wood than the neck joint. Les Paul glued in neck are mahogany necks with a mahogany body. Strat necks are mostly maple bolt on to an alder body. Not to mention the girth of the Les Paul body compared to a strat. Two different animals no matter how the neck is joined as long as it is a proper tight neck joint..
Thats true to a point. Lets not forget that the scale length plays a role as does the type of bridge and how its mounted to the guitar. But your right, comparing neck joints on two completely different guitar designs is pointless.
Neck through is always my favorite! 😀
Great upper fret access for sure!
The consensus is bolt-on is actually superior. Probably not enough to matter, but even a micro thin glue layer dampens sound vibrations. Bolts pull the neck tighter to the body for increased vibration transfer.
If you hear no noticeable difference, then you haven't gained anything by glueing your bolt-on neck in...but you have lost the ability to micro-tilt (shim) or swap the neck out, or even sell the guitar.
Gibson, etc are great sustaining/resonant guitars, but that has to do with the sum of their parts (woods, design, etc), not the neck attachment.
What about a glued bolt on?
I think it does not matter for tone if you had the same type of wood for the neck and then compared them. For some people the feel is better with neck through, but if a bolt on is built right it could feel just as good as a good set neck. Bolt on necks are always easier to fix unless the action adjustment parts are broken and I know from seeing and hearing stuff from guitar techs and reading stuff online. One of my guitars which has a neck through neck can not be fixed to my liking even though the warp the neck has is little. My custom guitar I will one day get will definitely have a bolt on neck. The most expensive guitar (rg2228 first edition with emgs) I have has a bolt on neck which feels solid on the guitar.
I have a guitar that came with bolt on.
First thing i did was losen the screws 1/4th turn under full string pressure to have the neck set tight as gets.
Then i played with it till i got used to the new tone and sustain coming from that.
Then i glued the neck in (which, not being a luthier by far was an ordeal lin itself, but thats for another post). The guitar got even more sustain from that and a different change in tone. The tone became warmer and softer by quiet a bit actually.
As long the neck was bolted the guitar was way to snappy for me and i rolled down the tone knob all the time. Now its all soft and mellow with good everything ... highs, lows, mids, overtones you name it.
So in this case setting the neck dramatically improved the guitar.
For me.
If someone actually wanted that almost Tele like snappy sound then of course, assements would have been different. Also theres lots of guitarists out there that dont want alot of sustain.
My thoughts exactly THANK YOU. I was a die hard set neck guitar buyer Until I started playing Ibanez guitars. The Majority of Ibanez RS and S series guitars are bolt on, but i am going to reference the Destroyer for this example. I have owned both DT 200 with bolt on neck and a DT420 with a set neck. as well as a couple of S series. I got just as much Sustain of the DT 200 and S series as i ever did with the set neck DT420 and I payed a lot more for that DT420. So just like you said in the vid , it's not rather the neck is bolt on or set neck its how well the neck joins the body. So save your selves some money people and just check the neck joint when your buying.
+Claude “Ramious” Ward oops I mean RG and S Series oops
The screw on neck was promoted to it's current state by Leo Fender, for the express purpose of cost efficiency in production. YES, it is a less than ideal way to build a guitar.... BUT, if done right (tight fit into pocket, it delivers sustain and resonance equal to a glued in neck. I personally find an advantage to gluing my bolt on necks to the body, in addition to the screws.
Hey man good info if you turn the music down a little when you record a video ?
Love that guitar nice wood and lovely neck, I would like it glued in just as it is with fake old fashioned square head nails where the screws would go.
I like neck through because there is no hot spots when i hold it down there. There no square BS or metal plate. It feels nicer that's about it. I see 1000+ guitars that are set, bolt and neck thru. So its your preference.
Bolt ons sounds a bit more 'spanky' then set necks from what I've heard. I do believe that set necks are better if your playing a lot of leads since you can easily make it a really deep joint.
No I'm just talking about strat shape, I've played both bolt-on an set necks on a 25.5 inch scale and there is a massive sound difference.
+ildur That would be the only way you could know for sure. There are never two guitars that are exactly the same. Its impossible. Ive built 3 of the same guitar with exactly the same specs and they all sounded different from each other. The only difference was the body wood itself. You cant have the exact same piece of wood it 3 different guitars. I highly doubt there would be a difference either.
From a player's standpoint, the neck-thru has more lead-playing comfort down towards the body, because the transition is smooth, rounded, and easy on the palm. This pertains to the Jacksons I've been playing. Neck-thru was more superior, as a player.
Set neck better? Not true. Carefully routed neck joints demonstrate a quality build. Generally speaking a very well craft bolt neck is much stronger than a set neck. I have a Warmoth Gecko 5 string bass that has a spectacular neck joint. Easily as tight as you demonstrate. Both of my Music Man Silhouettes have extremely tight neck joints. As for sustain my Silhouette are hard tails and sustain for days. I play the Alder body Silo acoustically every day for several hours (total time). It sits on a stand next to my chair so I can pick it up and play whenever the spirit moves me. I used to think set neck guitars were higher quality until I bought 2 Rosewood Taylors. A drednaught and a cut away jumbo. Both are spectacular guitars even though I sold both to friends. When it comes to solid body electric guitars my choice is bolt neck and particularly a Music Man Silhouette. My 20th Anniversary model blows away any Les Paul ever built. I went through a bunch of guitars over the years Fenders, Gibsons, Guilds, Gretch, etc. My favorite among those guitars is my ash body Guild S-300. I bought it in 1979 and still own it. Nice axe with a set neck. I don't gig with it but do play it once in a while. Nothing compares to my Silhouettes though. Oh yeah I have a Washburn semihollow arch top with a set neck. Still my Silhouette is my choice for any and all electric guitar playing. Acoustically I use an Emerald Carbon.
On a proper fitting joint there should be no major difference soundwise between a bolt on and a set neck. The slight differencies also not meaning better or worse. The general perceived difference is just due different construction of the joint and scale length, and the wood combination.
A bolt on neck sits tight on the bottom and back of the pocket, while the glued neck has strong connection all around in the pocket. The glued tang is often longer, so more neck sticks in the body.
The kind of more “loose” connection on a bolt on allows a bit more “movement” on the sides of the pocket, thus a slightly airy and jangly tone. The rigid glued neck would sound tighter with faster attack response.
On the other hand the screws compress the wood fibres with some force of arround of 100-120kg making that area stiffer and thus restraining a tiny bit the transfer of vibration….
But the metal baseplate and the screws add more weight near the center of the bow-like construction. Olimpic archers tinker with weight on their bow in that area to control vibration…
Metal also transfers very good high frequencies (hold your ear on various places on the body while strumming, you'll notice the piercing brightness on the plate).
So, I think the weight and the vibrational properties of the neckplate make the biggest difference, less this (supposedly well done) two types of connection between neck and body. Neck thru is a different topic. On neck thru the bridge sits on the same wood of the neck…
A good test would be first with the neck only screwed, then the same neck glued in, and finally the glued neck with added baseplate and screws.
Whay would you say it's the easiest nack joint to fabricate??
Depends on what type of joint your doing. My bolt on and glue in joints are the same. For me neither is harder.
@@benfordguitars gotcha thanks!!
I don't really care which one is better, I want to know if you should stay away from set necks in cheaper guitars. I found a Jackson with a set neck for 600 bucks and I'm worried that if their is a bad neck angle you won't be able to fix, like you can with a bolt on with a shim.
There is no way to make a broad sweeping statement that all cheaper set neck guitars are bad. Same with any guitar really, bolt on or otherwise. Ive seen $2500 Gibson LPs with gaps in the neck pocket. Others have been flawless. Every guitar deserves a inspection. They need to be judged individually, not as a whole.
If the action is where YOU like it, and there is adjustment left in the truss rod, bridge and bridge saddles, then you have nothing to worry about. Out of all the 1000's of guitars ive worked on over the past 20 years, I dont recall ever seeing more than a handful set neck guitars that had a major neck angle issue.
If there is something about that guitar that sends up red flags, other than a issue you may or may not have to worry about in the future, then walk away.
Good luck!
STEVE
+benfordguitars thank you so much! I am much more confident about buying the guitar I have picked out. I will have it looked at by the shop I go to to set my guitars up. Thank you so much
Great idea to have someone you trust look at it. Thanks for checking out the videos
I prefer bolt on. just something about a nice bolt on
@benfordguitafsv ...Thanku for that! That Really helped me!../ Tremendously!! I'm shopping around for a new guitar which the shop Says they have to order it in.. Meanwhile the guys been naming off guitar suggestions for me buy ,instead of the one I've ordered and raving on about the neck... As though the one I've ordered isn't as good because of the neck... Now I know what he's talking about he can go jump... Quite frankly as long as it sounds good (whatever your taste is) is what matters , not the bloody way its put together ... It'd b like buying a car wanting another one that staples the material to the roof rather than glue or something.. What difference does it make to the function of it .
What would happen if you took your guitar in the video and just glued it in, instead of bolting it on, even though the neck joint has been routed to be a bolt on.
It would be fine. My bolt on and glue in neck joints are exactly the same.
I find bolt on's better for rhythm playing. They sound cleaner. I like set and neck-through for that thick with more mid tone sound. Typical Slash and Gary More. Very full and creamy with more sustain. For clean Rhythm definitely bolt on.
Those qualities are due to much more than just the neck joint.
Kings X!
Question -- multi piece bodies vs one piece bodies...Not talking about tops or veneers -- just talking about the actual body of the guitar itself being split in multiple pieces...What are the pros and cons of doing this? I'm thinking that the pro is you can combine multiple pieces of wood rather than have to look for a structurally sound single piece of wood that is the size of the entire body, right? So in the end this is probably more cost effective...?
+surgeyX Using multiple pieces of wood can create a striking look. Say you had a 5 piece neck through neck. Then you had body wings with a matching top and back and contrasting center core. The color and grain opportunities are endless. As far as being for cost effective, thats the question. Yes its definitely harder to get nicer quality one piece bodies. You'll pay a bit more for them. The amount of money you would save going multi piece will be minimal. If you factor in the time it will take to mill all that wood, then glue it up your loosing money in labor hours. So I never approach it from a cost saving perspective. Its always from a design perspective and the cost is the cost.
+benfordguitars
Interesting...Thanks for the reply. I never noticed my Ibanez Prestige RG was a multi-piece body..I always assumed it was one piece, but I was looking at it in the light the other day and I could see the separation ever so slightly when looking at the glare. It's really hard to notice though, since it has an opaque finish. It seems that after googling this, many of the guitars from the big builders that I always thought were one piece...aren't, most of the time anyway.
Multi-piece bodies are definitely a cost cutting measure. These should painted over with opaque paint to hide the mismatched pieces...but some companies don't care and clear coat some of them. I received a "natural" Fender mex strat for xmas one year and it had 4 pieces of wood that were all a different shade of brown...it was hideous. Sold it and bought a USA opaque strat and, in the right light, I could tell it was also a 4 piece body. There was so much glue and paint on both guitars, they both sounded dull unplugged, but sounded fine plugged in.
To be honest, I don't really care too much about looks. And, it's actually pretty interesting when it comes to glue -- because the bonds created by glue are actually stronger than the natural wood itself...I recall there are a few builders who purposely cut their necks vertically, and glue them together, to make them stronger. As far as sound goes though...That is the question. I doubt there is any one size fits all answer though, there's just so many variables. I wish someone would do an academic quality thesis paper on what makes an electric guitar "tone wood" and scientifically study what modifications produce X sounds, etc.
I don't care if mine is a multi-piece body (although, anything over 4 pieces is questionable), but I do care about looks. If wood has knots in it or the pieces look mismatched, just paint it...it's that simple.
Only time a neck need to be strong enough to warrant lamination is when the headstock is extremely tilted (Gibson LP, etc). Having multiple pieces on a fender style neck/headstock is overkill...unless you just want it to look cool.
im building a tele guitar.. just finished staining it..on my neck its a bolt on neck maple..i like the color of the back an fret board .. head stock ill need to shape an stain... can I use tung oil ? or use gun stock oil? thanks for video
+thomas pinkerton I use Tru-oil on the back of my necks. I also use it on my bodies if im doing a satin finish. If you use a dye or stain I would seal it first with a couple coats of shellac. I like to really rub in my finishes and if I have a stain or dye the Tru-oil tends to pull it back out of the wood. Sealing it first helps lock it in.
+benfordguitars thanks for replying..im doing this build in a wheel chair.. used oil stain on the body.im going to use a satin finish...looks I have to go find tru oil. thanks again..
+thomas pinkerton Tru-oil is a finish that was made for gun stocks. Its available at sporting goods places like Bass Pro or Cabeleas. A lot of time they are 3oz bottle within a little finishing kit. Ive never bought tthat kit however. I normally buy a 8oz bottle as a I use al ot of it. It can also be found at wood working stores like Woodcraft and Rockler although they are fairly expensive there. You can find it on Ebay for around $12 shipped for a 8oz bottle. Rocker and Woodcraft are typically $16 a bottle. Occasionally Walmart has it as well. Good luck!
STEVE