Set neck/neck through construction

[honeyiscool]

So I've heard that bolt-on constructions have better sustain, stability, and transfer, not to mention being cheaper than set neck or neck-through. And I hear that in turn, set neck designs have better sustain, stability, and transfer than neck-through designs.

 

So tell me again, why are neck-throughs considered the most premium and desirable by many? It seems like all of its playability advantages can be realized with a set neck joint and it seems that it's very susceptible to season changes and things of that nature.

 

Not trolling, I just ordered a neck-through guitar (I've never played one before) and was just curious.

[Jerry_L]

Most premium because neck-through construction is significantly harder to mass-produce than bolt-on or set-in neck constructions.

 

Desirable because excellent stability and reaction to string tension and pressure make neck through guitars more sturdy.

 

Hard to imagine transfer is better on a set-neck or bolt-on vs. neck-through, and I don't know of any scientific objective analysis of this phenomena.

[Elias Graves]

Finding a piece of wood big enough for a body is hard enough. Compound that with finding one big enough for a whole guitar...

 

The only downside I've ever heard, and I have no idea how common it is, would be that neck through designs can warp due to the length of the wood. Perhaps that's why you see so many laminated ones?

 

I've only played a few but thought the lack of heel was pretty cool.

 

EG

[honeyiscool]

 

Hard to imagine transfer is better on a set-neck or bolt-on vs. neck-through, and I don't know of any scientific objective analysis of this phenomena.

 

 

http://liutaiomottola.com/myth/neckJointSustain.htm

[kayd_mon]

 

http://liutaiomottola.com/myth/neckJointSustain.htm

 

 

This article reflects what I've been told by a few people I know, actually. Me? I can't tell that much difference.

 

I remember back when I was a very young player, both me and a friend went out and got Epiphone Les Pauls. I got a Standard and he got a Studio (our individual choices were based on color options, primarily). Back then, the Studios had bolt-on necks. We both had the same amp, and we decided to test to see the if the comment by the salesman about sustain was true. We quickly found that our guitars sustained the same.

[Jerry_L]

 

http://liutaiomottola.com/myth/neckJointSustain.htm

 

 

Pity that link doesn't provide the detail of the actual study, but that is food for thought. Definitely tempers my neck-through GAS, which is a good thing.

 

Neck-thru's do feel a bit more sturdy, but that alone is not a compelling reason to use one.

 

The downside of a neck-through is that if the neck does warp, it's probably not worth repairing. I had a Carvin bass I got off E-bay that had that problem, which of course the seller did not disclose.

[honeyiscool]

I think the article, you can probably find it in a library if you needed to. It is cited.

[vcnyls]

Does any company make a guitar out of a single, solid piece of wood? I'm not talking neck-thru with wings but rather one full piece of wood made into a neck and body (I suppose with a fretboard added but you could even do it without adding a fretboard if you use the right wood for the body/neck and rear-route the neck for the truss rod). Just curious...

[Jerry_L]

I found this:

 

Abstract

 

An experiment was condicted to ascertain what effect the type of the neck joint of an electric guitar has on sustain. A test instrument was built using neck through construction. Audio recordings were made of this instrument using a uniform picking mechanism. The neck was sawed off and then attached with screws (bolt-on configuration) and audio recordings were again made in the same manner. The neck was then glued in place (set neck configuration) and allowed to dry, and audio recordings were again made. Spectrographic analysis was performed on these recordings and averaged sound clips were produced for listening evaluation. Sustain for each iteration of the instrument was measured. Listening evaluation did not indicate any difference in sustain among the three instrument iterations. Measured sustain values indicated that the bolt-on neck iteration produced the greatest sustain. Citation Mottola, R.M. "Sustain and Electric Guitar Neck Joint Type" American Lutherie #91 , 2007, p. 52. Reprints of this paper can be ordered from the Guild of American Luthiers .

 

 

It wouldn't have surprised me if the difference in sustain was insignificant. What is counter-intuitive is that he found it to be significantly reversed from the conventional assumptions.

[Steadfastly]

It's a question that we may never truly know the answer to. I wouldn't let it bother me one way or the other. However, if I really liked a guitar but wasn't too happy with the neck and it was a bolt on neck, I would still consider buying the guitar and putting a custom neck on it.

[Belva]

I think it'a all personal preference with advantages and disadvantages to each. I like bolts because it's much easier to deal with fret wear. Throw the neck away and get a new one.

I'm not buying any sustain arguments. I believe that was concocted by the Gibson people when Fender started selling great bolts for less money. They had to come up with some imaginary reason why a set neck is better. It's hard to prove or disprove, so the myth continues to this day.

[honeyiscool]

 

Does any company make a guitar out of a single, solid piece of wood? I'm not talking neck-thru with wings but rather one full piece of wood made into a neck and body (I suppose with a fretboard added but you could even do it without adding a fretboard if you use the right wood for the body/neck and rear-route the neck for the truss rod). Just curious...

 

 

Some high end builders do, but very expensive, of course.

 

I wonder what the best wood would be for a single wood guitar sans fingerboard. Maple would be ridiculously heavy.

[Radar-Love]

 

Does any company make a guitar out of a single, solid piece of wood? I'm not talking neck-thru with wings but rather one full piece of wood made into a neck and body (I suppose with a fretboard added but you could even do it without adding a fretboard if you use the right wood for the body/neck and rear-route the neck for the truss rod).

 

 

 

 

Switch Vibracell guitars are one piece -- but it's not wood, it's a patented artificial mahogany-like polyurethane resin substance called Vibracell that's moulded into a guitar.

[vcnyls]

 

Switch Vibracell guitars are one piece -- but it's not wood, it's a patented artificial mahogany-like polyurethane resin substance called Vibracell that's moulded into a guitar.

 

 

Yeah, I know there are companies that do that. Thanks though. I was thinking specifically full, 1 piece wood bodies, not polymers.

[Radar-Love]

So tell me again, why are neck-throughs considered the most premium and desirable by many? It seems like all of its playability advantages can be realized with a set neck joint and it seems that it's very susceptible to season changes and things of that nature.

 

 

 

Outside of sustain, guitars using these three major neck joint types have different sonic signatures.

 

A Rickenbacker 4001 bass has that signature bright-ish Ric tone largely due to the pickups sitting on top of the maple neck that's part of its maple neck-thru construction.

 

The three different neck joints also have a different feel where the body meets the neck. Bolt-on neck joints have evolved the most overtime. The original "clunky" Fender neck joint has been improved by many manufacturers (i.e. -- Ibanez). But, you'll find people who say the old-timey squared-up Fender neck joint still sounds the best (sustain, clarity).

 

To be quite honest, for one reason or another, I like all three types of neck joints.

 

Put on your flame suits. There are a lot of opinions out there.

 

 

 

 

[Steadfastly]

I think it'a all personal preference with advantages and disadvantages to each. I like bolts because it's much easier to deal with fret wear. Throw the neck away and get a new one. I'm not buying any sustain arguments. I believe that was concocted by the Gibson people when Fender started selling great bolts for less money. They had to come up with some imaginary reason why a set neck is better. It's hard to prove or disprove, so the myth continues to this day.

 

Aw, you're just too cynical. C'mon, the guitar manufacturers wouldn't lie to us so we would buy their guitars instead of the competition would they? Of course not. They just want us to have the best guitars, irregardless that they cost more or a lot more.

[Belva]

Aw, you're just too cynical. C'mon, the guitar manufacturers wouldn't lie to us so we would buy their guitars instead of the competition would they? Of course not. They just want us to have the best guitars, irregardless that they cost more or a lot more.

Maybe I should change my screen name to Stratocynic? I actually can't back my claim up. But it seems to many old timers, and yes there are some even older than me, that the set neck>sustain argument came out shortly after Leo set up his assembly line.

[Steadfastly]

 

Maybe I should change my screen name to Stratocynic? I actually can't back my claim up. But it seems to many old timers, and yes there are some even older than me, that the set neck>sustain argument came out shortly after Leo set up his assembly line.

 

 

Actually, that was pretty interesting as I hadn't heard of this before.

[Jerry_L]

 

Outside of sustain, guitars using these three major neck joint types have different sonic signatures.

 

 

Good points, Radar. I also have guitars with all three types and they all have their own charm.

 

However, this may explain why I'm drawn to mostly playing the Fender-style bolt-ons these days.

 

And as scientifically as Mottola's little study was executed, it would also be valuable to see measurements done comparing the most popular examples of each neck joint.

 

In his study, the longer neck joined to the body actually had a damping effect. Could this have been due to a characteristic of the wood or some other quirk of his construction?

[honeyiscool]

I don't think so. I think it might have to do with the fact that the bolt-on construction allows the neck to receive the vibration of the strings freely, without having to resonate the entire body along with it. Everything I hear about neck-through guitars seems to kind of confirm my hackish theory. Most agree that bolt-on has the brightest tone, and neck-throughs have a naturally mellow tone.

 

I think the perception of sustain has to do not only with how long a note is held, but the quality of that tone that is being held. Bolt-ons can sustain well but as it is a brighter sound, as it is sustained the highs will be lost more quickly, making us think that the bolt-on has inferior sustain when in fact, it's sustaining just fine.

 

Anyway, I also remember hearing that a body made of well matched pieces of wood generally resonates better than one made of one piece of wood.

[danswon]

 

So I've heard that bolt-on constructions have better sustain, stability, and transfer, not to mention being cheaper than set neck or neck-through. And I hear that in turn, set neck designs have better sustain, stability, and transfer than neck-through designs. So tell me again, why are neck-throughs considered the most premium and desirable by many? It seems like all of its playability advantages can be realized with a set neck joint and it seems that it's very susceptible to season changes and things of that nature. Not trolling, I just ordered a neck-through guitar (I've never played one before) and was just curious.

 

 

i've found exactly the opposite to be true

 

also it depends where on the neck you're playing. compare a bolt-on to a set/thru above the 12th fret and you'll see less sustain for sure. the difference seems less the closer you are playing to the nut

 

every guitar is different though - sometimes you just get lucky, sometimes a guitar is just dead (i have both bolt-on and set neck guitars in each category)

[honeyiscool]

Yeah but I'm just saying that you probably feel that way because a set-neck or neck-through guitar is mellow to begin with, giving the illusion of sustain, since sustained notes are somewhat deadened, so there's not as much of a difference between your initial attack and the sustain.

 

On a bolt on, it seems that you're not sustaining as much because the difference between your initial attack and the sustain is very different, but the notes can ring out longer.

[danswon]

 

Yeah but I'm just saying that you probably feel that way because a set-neck or neck-through guitar is mellow to begin with, giving the illusion of sustain, since sustained notes are somewhat deadened, so there's not as much of a difference between your initial attack and the sustain. On a bolt on, it seems that you're not sustaining as much because the difference between your initial attack and the sustain is very different, but the notes can ring out longer.

 

 

It's very possible that you're right. Unfortunately it's impossible for me to tell right now because all the guitars in my house are either les pauls/SGs or strats...they're so different in many other ways that it wouldn't be a fair test. i actually hope you're right as i'm starting to think bolt-ons with non-trem bridges are the way forward, for the sake of affordability and reliability

[honeyiscool]

Well I would love to read that article we were talking earlier about neck construction and sustain, but I'm sure it's about as controlled as it can get.

 

Basically, they built a neck through guitar, made some recordings, hacked off the neck, reattached it with bolts, made some recordings, then glued it on, made some recordings, and found that the bolt-on sustained the best.

 

It'd be interesting to do that with a few different guitars, though.

[Filter500]

Bolt ons have a snappier attack. I've found that less coupling between the body and neck will make for more snap and string definition. I read somewhere that Buzz Feiten believes it's good to decouple the body and neck to some extent to limit the interaction of resonances that don't work well together. Some people say the mahogany bodies don't work as well as alder when coupled with a maple neck due to the interaction of the resonances. I like the combo, but I can hear how this may be happening. I have a few neck thru guitars, and they are not as snappy. They have a deeper and rounder tone. The high fret access is more comfortable with the neck thru vs. the bolt on heel. As far as sustain is concerned, I think that depends more on the wood itself more than the contruction. If the wood that is attached to each end of the string is resonant and not dead, then it should be inclined to vibrate and feed that back to the string. It may not matter how well the two individual pieces (body and neck) are coupled.