Members Cripes Posted January 13, 2008 Members Posted January 13, 2008 on a neck. I read moans and groans about bolt-on necks vs other methods and am trying to relate this to quality. I'm drawing a blank. While I am capable of seeing this as a personal preference - one method over the next - I'm trying to fathom why a person would rank it in with quality standards. I see a bolt on neck having an advantage over a "permanently" attached neck. I don't think the common sense of this design needs to be explained but I still can't group it under the heading of quality. What's your take on it?
Members Terry Allan Hall Posted January 13, 2008 Members Posted January 13, 2008 Taylor or Collins? You betcha! Fender, Aria or Epiphone? No-o-o-o-o-ope!
Members OldGuitarPlayer Posted January 13, 2008 Members Posted January 13, 2008 Well...the whole (Godin) La Patrie, Seagull, Norman, Simon & Patrick and Art & Lutherie line of guitars have bolt-on necks. Personally, I guess I'd have to say that for practical purposes it might be better in the long run to have a bolt on neck. I have owned both Art & Lutherie and Simon & Patricks and never noticed a problem with them. They always had perfect action and good intonation. Same with my current Taylor 114. We'll see how it is in 20 yrs. I also have a new Martin 000-15 so I will be able to compare them over time to see how they react.
Members riffmeister Posted January 13, 2008 Members Posted January 13, 2008 As TAH points out, it's all in the execution. .
Members Scodiddly Posted January 13, 2008 Members Posted January 13, 2008 Bolt-on necks are more associated with cheaper instruments. So therefore (in the mind of a stereotypical gear snob) anything with a bolt-on neck is cheap and will sound bad compared to a "real" instrument.
Members Cripes Posted January 13, 2008 Author Members Posted January 13, 2008 As TAH points out, it's all in the execution.. So, a couple 2 inch drywall screws driven by a Dewalt are out?
Members moctzal Posted January 13, 2008 Members Posted January 13, 2008 Well...the whole (Godin) La Patrie, Seagull, Norman, Simon & Patrick and Art & Lutherie line of guitars have bolt-on necks. Personally, I guess I'd have to say that for practical purposes it might be better in the long run to have a bolt on neck. I have owned both Art & Lutherie and Simon & Patricks and never noticed a problem with them. They always had perfect action and good intonation. Same with my current Taylor 114. We'll see how it is in 20 yrs. I also have a new Martin 000-15 so I will be able to compare them over time to see how they react. Actually, AFAIK, Godin's guitars are dovetails now...at least Art & Lutherie's website says so...
Members Cripes Posted January 13, 2008 Author Members Posted January 13, 2008 I dunno. I see glue, wood and joint (regardless of type) giving up the ghost well before any bolt ever will. I cringe a little when I read about folks who need neck resets. Seems the answer to that dilemma is obvious.
Members bjorn-fjord Posted January 13, 2008 Members Posted January 13, 2008 Count me as someone who prefers bolt-on necks. They just make so much sense. They're are easier to execute than dovetails, they are less prone to failure and they are much easier to take apart. Some people will try to tell you that a dovetail is superior because there is more wood/wood contact between the neck and the body but that simply is not true. I worked for *insert name of major manufacturer here* and I can attest that dovetail joints are cut a little loose and then firmed up and adjusted with tiny little wood wedges. The actual faces of the joint are not in seamless contact with each other. Many high-end builders have made the switch to a hardware-based neck/body joint and many more will do so in the future. We gave up friction pegs when a better alternative became available so why should we hold on to notions that the older method is the better method when it comes to neck attachment?
Members Cripes Posted January 13, 2008 Author Members Posted January 13, 2008 Bolt-on necks are more associated with cheaper instruments. So therefore (in the mind of a stereotypical gear snob) anything with a bolt-on neck is cheap and will sound bad compared to a "real" instrument. Let's see...McPherson, Breedlove Masterclass... I know what you are alluding too, though. The days of the old jack-plated Epiphone are gone now and I'm pretty sure those who cling to wood, glue and jammed shims will eventually make the switch. If you look at high-end instruments you'll be surprised. Though not considered high-end, the very good line of Waldens are bolted on. Various others are as well. My Breedlove in bolted but my Goodall is glue-jointed. Both these guys played on the same little league team. Obviously one was in the outfield while the other covered first base.
Members riffmeister Posted January 13, 2008 Members Posted January 13, 2008 We gave up friction pegs when a better alternative became available so why should we hold on to notions that the older method is the better method when it comes to neck attachment? +1 I will say, I am genreally more of a "traditional" kind of guy when it comes to guitars, but when something works well.......well........the results should speak for themselves. I just put new strings on my bolt-on Collings dread and OM the other day. And in my mind......well.......the results indeed do speak for themselves.
Members drnihili Posted January 14, 2008 Members Posted January 14, 2008 the very good line of Waldens are bolted on. Huh, I didn't know that. But looking inside, I can see the bolts. I must like bolt on necks.
Members Kap'n Posted January 14, 2008 Members Posted January 14, 2008 +1I will say, I am genreally more of a "traditional" kind of guy when it comes to guitars, but when something works well.......well........the results should speak for themselves. I just put new strings on my bolt-on Collings dread and OM the other day. And in my mind......well.......the results indeed do speak for themselves. Bourgeois is also a bolt-on. Dana's thought is that eventually all guitars will need a neck reset, and it's a lot easier and less invasive to do it with a bolt than a dovetail. However, I'd rather have a dovetail Larrivee or Martin than a bolt-on Taylor (in the same price range). It's about the guitar, not the method of neck attachment.
Members guitarist21 Posted January 14, 2008 Members Posted January 14, 2008 I think TAH is right on. Bob Taylor's neck joints are as stable as any other neck joint and have the wonderful consequence of being easy to work on post-build. However I don't really like Taylor's tone on the whole, and I've never really played any other higher-end instruments with bolt-ons. I wish I could somehow get my hands on two guitars which are identical but with one neck bolted and one neck traditional dove-tailed. Ellen
Members guitarcapo Posted January 14, 2008 Members Posted January 14, 2008 In the guitars I've personally built I could never hear a difference.I've also never noticed any long term structural difference. Given that I prefer bolt-on necks. Some people value the fact that they're more labor-intensive...but so it screwing somthing in by hand instead of using an electric screwdriver......doesn't necessarily make a better dresser
Members jwm1958m Posted January 14, 2008 Members Posted January 14, 2008 I don't think these days it makes any difference among the major players. Now back in the day I had an Epiphone acoustic that the neck was held on by four 3 to 4 inch long wood screws...that might be an issue of quality. It was the best guitar I had up to that time though. Was also the first guitar I installed a pickup in. Funny looking transducer that looked kind of like a rock that you epoxied under the bridge. Sounded pretty much like crap but wasn't much to choose from then.
Members min7b5 Posted January 14, 2008 Members Posted January 14, 2008 Bolt-on necks are more associated with cheaper instruments. So therefore (in the mind of a stereotypical gear snob) anything with a bolt-on neck is cheap and will sound bad compared to a "real" instrument. Well, my bolt-on Collings feels and sounds like a real instrument to me, and sure wasn
Members T.B. Posted January 14, 2008 Members Posted January 14, 2008 I mean really unless someone told me the neck was a bolt-on or a dove-tail, could I visually tell the difference? No. So, it really doesn't matter. However wouldn't it be environmentally/structurally practical, smart, and more economically viable to switch to a bolt-on neck? What if Harmony, Kay, Regal, Yamaha and other builders of moderately price guitars had the option of bolt-on necks in years past? Trina
Members drnihili Posted January 14, 2008 Members Posted January 14, 2008 Put the question this way perhaps. Imagine you're about to spend several thousand on a custom built git. The builder, offers both dovetail and bolt on options. Which do you choose? Or do you tell the luthier to just pick one? Personally, I think I might go for the bolt on just for ease of reset later on.
Members totamus Posted January 14, 2008 Members Posted January 14, 2008 Yep - all about the execution. Bolt ons have a bad rep only because crappy guitars tend to use them. So the bolt on has become guilty by association. personally I like the tradition of a set neck, but I have guitars with both.
Members garthman Posted January 14, 2008 Members Posted January 14, 2008 My old EKO Ranger VI guitar has a bolt on neck. It is as good now as it was when I bought it, so 10 out of 10 for "execution", I suppose. It is fixed exactly the same as an electric guitar bolt-on: four screws and a backing plate. The neck block on these guitars is a solid 4" cube of wood and the (long) screws go through it from below and into the neck. The guitar cost approx
Members Cripes Posted January 14, 2008 Author Members Posted January 14, 2008 Oops. I'm not trying to separate these from those based upon neck attacment methods. I'm just trying to lose the stereotyping of bolt-ons as a point against quality. Think current products. The past is what it is. There are many fine instruments available with (modern) bolt-on necks that should not be dismissed for that feature alone.
Members C70man Posted January 14, 2008 Members Posted January 14, 2008 Oops. I'm not trying to separate these from those based upon neck attacment methods. I'm just trying to lose the stereotyping of bolt-ons as a point against quality. Think current products. The past is what it is. There are many fine instruments available with (modern) bolt-on necks that should not be dismissed for that feature alone. Here's what Gibson has to say.... "Instead of a cheaper bolt-on neck, Gibson's dovetail joint technique creates a cohesive bond between the vibrating neck and body - almost as if the guitar were carved from a single piece of wood. This time-honored technique effectively transfers the strings' vibrations directly into the wood for superior tone and unsurpassed resonance" They even brag about a "double" dove tail joint(?) for superior sound. I have no idea that what they claim is true or not, just that I personally would have to agree that the J45 is a unique sounding guitar. If it had a bolt on neck, would it sound as good? Gibson probably isn't going to try it.
Members totamus Posted January 14, 2008 Members Posted January 14, 2008 Hype for a product has to be taken with a grain of salt. A bolt on neck is indeed cheaper. That is why crappy guitars generally have bolt on necks. But cheaper refers to cost and it doesnt mean that a bolt on is inferior, just less costly. Many advances are both cheaper and better (Transistors vs tubes, lcds vs cathode ray, gas vs coal, etc). I think any number of people would argue whether a bolt on transfer sound vibrations either better, or worse, than a set neck.
Members Terry Allan Hall Posted January 14, 2008 Members Posted January 14, 2008 Well, my bolt-on Collings feels and sounds like a real instrument to me, and sure wasn
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.