Question about set neck and probably neck through guitars

[Ferdinandstrat]

I've noticed that neck pickups on a set neck guitars have a lot more "chewyness" than bolt on neck guitars, that chewyness is an important ingredient to my tone.

 

Why do set neck guitars have that certain tonal quality?

[soundcreation]

"chewyness"???

[-Assy-]

uh, what?

 

99% sure its not the neck joint causing your tone-change unless your bolt on neck is extremely loose fitting, and poorly made

[Kind of Blued]

I make up words to describe flavors and sounds pretty often, but I've found you really need to explain the reasoning...

[Ferdinandstrat]

I seriously dunno how to explain this, chewy is the only way I could describe this additional unique flavor...

[Elias Graves]

You know, I've been building stuff out of wood for a long time, including some pretty expensive pieces of furniture.

Honestly, if I showed up and tried to sell, say, a nice highboy that was bolted together with a steel plate and four wood screws, I'd be laughed out of the store.

There's just no way you can get as secure or accurate a joint using that method.

Set neck or neck through simply provides a more stable platform.

 

EG

[stormin1155]

Not sure what chewyness sounds like, but you win the prize for coining another vague tone description.

[dabbler]

There's just no way you can get as secure or accurate a joint using that method. Set neck or neck through simply provides a more stable platform. EG

 

This is a funny statement to make, as everything I have heard makes me say that Fender style guitars are less fragile than Gibson style (I've heard of far more headstock AND neck/body failures from the latter).

 

And in the final analysis it's not really an accuracy issue. The issue is does the joint transfer the string vibrations in a way that enhances, or at the very least does not degrade, the tone. If bolt-on necks are so inferior to set necks, why have the tele and strat styles been consistent sellers? :poke:

 

Music is art, of course then again there is some art to woodworking too, but one of the things I think Leo did VERY effectively was show that it's not necessary to use what are considered the best cabinetmaking/woodworking skills to make a good guitar.

 

If you prefer set necks over bolt-ons, that's fine, I use both and both are legitimate and useful. But I'm not going to say that one is universally better than the other. They are different, and have different tonal effects but, from a MUSIC-MAKING standpoint, one is not BETTER than the other.

[Longhair]

This is a funny statement to make, as everything I have heard makes me say that Fender style guitars are less fragile than Gibson style (I've heard of far more headstock AND neck/body failures from the latter). And in the final analysis it's not really an accuracy issue. The issue is does the joint transfer the string vibrations in a way that enhances, or at the very least does not degrade, the tone. If bolt-on necks are so inferior to set necks, why have the tele and strat styles been consistent sellers? :poke: Music is art, of course then again there is some art to woodworking too, but one of the things I think Leo did VERY effectively was show that it's not necessary to use what are considered the best cabinetmaking/woodworking skills to make a good guitar. If you prefer set necks over bolt-ons, that's fine, I use both and both are legitimate and useful. But I'm not going to say that one is universally better than the other. They are different, and have different tonal effects but, from a MUSIC-MAKING standpoint, one is not BETTER than the other.

 

Different neck & headstock angles are the reasons why one fails more than the other, not because of bolt-on vs. set- / neck-thru.

[Ferdinandstrat]

 

You know, I've been building stuff out of wood for a long time, including some pretty expensive pieces of furniture. Honestly, if I showed up and tried to sell, say, a nice highboy that was bolted together with a steel plate and four wood screws, I'd be laughed out of the store. There's just no way you can get as secure or accurate a joint using that method. Set neck or neck through simply provides a more stable platform. EG

 

 

Actually both of them seem to be pretty sturdy.

[soundcreation]

This is a funny statement to make, as everything I have heard makes me say that Fender style guitars are less fragile than Gibson style (I've heard of far more headstock AND neck/body failures from the latter). And in the final analysis it's not really an accuracy issue. The issue is does the joint transfer the string vibrations in a way that enhances, or at the very least does not degrade, the tone. If bolt-on necks are so inferior to set necks, why have the tele and strat styles been consistent sellers? :poke: Music is art, of course then again there is some art to woodworking too, but one of the things I think Leo did VERY effectively was show that it's not necessary to use what are considered the best cabinetmaking/woodworking skills to make a good guitar. If you prefer set necks over bolt-ons, that's fine, I use both and both are legitimate and useful. But I'm not going to say that one is universally better than the other. They are different, and have different tonal effects but, from a MUSIC-MAKING standpoint, one is not BETTER than the other.

 

Interesting you bring this up. I found this bit of information while looking at Blackmesa guitars. The guy who builds them wrote this:

 

As a custom guitar builder, I have built all three styles at one time or another and have come to prefer the bolt-on design. I feel that the neck-through structure, while eliminating the high-fret access problem, also eliminates the tonal influence of the body wood, which, since it is usually softer than the neck wood(s), helps enhance midrange frequencies. In a similar vein, the set-neck leaves a very thin layer of glue between the neck and the body, which can affect the wood's ability to resonate freely.

 

These opinions have recently been validated by painstaking research. There has been a long-standing assumption that a neck-through design provides superior sustain, with set-neck and bolt-on following behind in that order. But recent research by noted luthier R.M. Mottola, published in the Fall 2007 issue of American Lutherie, indicates that the reverse is actually true: the bolt-on design produces better sustain and better harmonics than either neck-through or set-neck designs. Mottola states, "Overall power around the fundamental (329.628hz) as well as second and third harmonics is highest and sustains longest for the averaged signal from the bolt-on neck configuration of the test instrument..." (2007, #91, p. 55). The test instrument used was a purpose-built, 2-string solid-body test bed, designed specifically to eliminate as many independent variables as possible.

 

http://www.blackmesaguitars.com/TorsionLogic%20long.html

 

As well you should see his method of bolt on. Quite unique and very interesting.

 

Personally my best sustaining guitars are set neck LP's but other factors could be contributing when I compare to my bolt on...so I would take the studies word for it over my personal experience as it is not controlled. My one neck through is supported by his view. It is my worst sustaining and resonating guitar. Still love it though.

[Elias Graves]

 

Actually both of them seem to be pretty sturdy.

 

 

They are. A set neck simply has the effect of turning the joint into, essentially, a single piece. A mechanical fastener will hold the joint just fine, however, there are still gaps. That has an impact.

For the record, I never said I hated bolt necks. I own one. I'm gassing for a nice tele right now too.

 

EG

[Ferdinandstrat]

 

They are. A set neck simply has the effect of turning the joint into, essentially, a single piece. A mechanical fastener will hold the joint just fine, however, there are still gaps. That has an impact. For the record, I never said I hated bolt necks. I own one. I'm gassing for a nice tele right now too. EG

 

 

Yes, but some say the glue acts as a filter.

[rusholmeruffian]

From 11 years of bass-playing experience, most of them on 5-string, I do know that the stiffness of the neck, the tightness of the neck joint, and the size of the neck-body contact area have a greater impact on the sustain of low-order harmonics--and thus whether an instrument has a compressed or "sharp" tone--than whether the joint is bolted or glued.

 

One of the best-sounding low B strings on the market belongs to the Music Man Stingray 5, which has a 34" scale (most 5-strings these days are 35") and a bolt-on neck made from a single piece of quartersawn maple. However, the Stingray 5 has a 6-bolt neck joint that occupies a 50% larger area than the traditional Fender joint; the neck pockets are cut and sanded to NASA-level precision; and the wood used for the neck is pretty much the best rock maple you're ever going to find, so it's stiffer than a lot of multilaminate necks (and even a few carbon fiber ones, in the case of Peavey's G-Bass series). The result is a low B that's absolutely thunderous.

[guitarcapo]

They sound like this character?

 

 

[Ferdinandstrat]

They sound like this character?

 

It's about {censored}ing time.

[guitarcapo]

 

It's about {censored}ing time.

 

 

My car broke down and I was a little late getting here. Blame it on the towing guy.

[soundcreation]

[YOUTUBE]TQIwEZlOzp4[/YOUTUBE]

 

enjoy!

[robertkoa]

The "furniture guy" is correct- the best furniture is always glued or screwed AND glued, or some type of fastener AND glue.

 

I'm not a repair tech- but I'm pretty sure that "neck shifting" is much more prevalent in Bolt Ons and there's all kinds of " alignment " and " shimming tricks guys have to do on Bolt Ons-I think that's what Mr. Graves was referring to as a " more stable platform".

 

Not to say your Bolt On guitar ( or mine ) can't be great tonally.

 

But-as the wood on a Bolt On ages and becomes more resonant, unfortunately the screws and wood around them move and grind the wood away, causing LESS resonance so for people who really care about that sort of thing ( like me ) a set neck guitar will most likely age better and have more resonance and sustain as it ages ( In my opinion - probably not worth debating), compared to an older Bolt On type.

 

There are VERY FEW Set Neck Stratocasters( from Fender) and we are just starting to see other companies make Set Neck 25.5" scale ' Superstrats" or Boutique Strats.

 

You could also imagine that a 20 year old Set Neck Strat would be more resonant than a 20 year old Bolt On that has shifted and has wood breaking down around the screws etc.( even microscopically) right?

 

I think we'll see( when more people play and review the new Set Neck Strats) that most of the tones we associate with Strats are NOT from the Bolt Neck joint , but from the scale length, and pickup type and placement.

 

I just hope they catch on ( like the new ones Suhr is making, for example), because again,just my opinion- I think we'll generally get more resonance and sustain and beef out of these compared to Bolt Ons or at least more "special ones" out of a batch of 100 compared to a batch of 100 Bolt Ons.

 

Also, I believe Chewbacca's Guitars are all "Plutonium Gravity Joint" type- which is basically a Set Neck.

[BG76]

The next guitar that I purchase is going to be bolt-in.

 

I played one of these and it was a great hybrid of set, bolt-on and neck through.

 

I don't want the model shown below, it's just a pic for reference.

 

[211dave112]

 

You know, I've been building stuff out of wood for a long time, including some pretty expensive pieces of furniture. Honestly, if I showed up and tried to sell, say, a nice highboy that was bolted together with a steel plate and four wood screws, I'd be laughed out of the store. There's just no way you can get as secure or accurate a joint using that method. Set neck or neck through simply provides a more stable platform. EG

 

 

thats bollocks.

 

a well made bolt on will be as sturdy, secure and efficient in transferring tone as a set neck.

 

the guitar-furniture analogy is {censored}.

[AlexMC]

 

Interesting you bring this up. I found this bit of information while looking at Blackmesa guitars. The guy who builds them wrote this: As a custom guitar builder, I have built all three styles at one time or another and have come to prefer the bolt-on design. I feel that the neck-through structure, while eliminating the high-fret access problem, also eliminates the tonal influence of the body wood, which, since it is usually softer than the neck wood(s), helps enhance midrange frequencies. In a similar vein, the set-neck leaves a very thin layer of glue between the neck and the body, which can affect the wood's ability to resonate freely. These opinions have recently been validated by painstaking research. There has been a long-standing assumption that a neck-through design provides superior sustain, with set-neck and bolt-on following behind in that order. But recent research by noted luthier R.M. Mottola, published in the Fall 2007 issue of American Lutherie, indicates that the reverse is actually true: the bolt-on design produces better sustain and better harmonics than either neck-through or set-neck designs. Mottola states, "Overall power around the fundamental (329.628hz) as well as second and third harmonics is highest and sustains longest for the averaged signal from the bolt-on neck configuration of the test instrument..." (2007, #91, p. 55). The test instrument used was a purpose-built, 2-string solid-body test bed, designed specifically to eliminate as many independent variables as possible. http://www.blackmesaguitars.com/TorsionLogic%20long.html As well you should see his method of bolt on. Quite unique and very interesting. Personally my best sustaining guitars are set neck LP's but other factors could be contributing when I compare to my bolt on...so I would take the studies word for it over my personal experience as it is not controlled. My one neck through is supported by his view. It is my worst sustaining and resonating guitar. Still love it though.

 

 

That is indeed an interesting bolt-on method. Elegant, too.

[deadllama]

You know, I've been building stuff out of wood for a long time, including some pretty expensive pieces of furniture. Honestly, if I showed up and tried to sell, say, a nice highboy that was bolted together with a steel plate and four wood screws, I'd be laughed out of the store. There's just no way you can get as secure or accurate a joint using that method. Set neck or neck through simply provides a more stable platform. EG

 

I've been waiting for years to use this:

 

Seriously, though, of all the guitars I've seen, the ones that have neck issues are set necks that need resets more often than they're bolt-ons with wobbly necks.

 

...except most of the three-bolt Fender necks I've seen, including my MIM 72 Thinline RI. Terrible neck joint design.

[-Assy-]

 

thats bollocks. a well made bolt on will be as sturdy, secure and efficient in transferring tone as a set neck. the guitar-furniture analogy is {censored}.

 

 

not really, lutherie = woodworking.

 

your argument is valid, but the only way youre getting a well-made bolt on neck is to buy maybe an anderson (which all have severe gaps on their little trapezoidal route), so i guess thats not relaly a well-made bolt on. Suhr probably has some well made neck joints when it comes to bolt ons. I make it so there are no gaps on the radiuses and you need a clamp just to get the neck all the way down i nthe pocket. i dont know of anyone else that does this.

[ashasha]

I love set neck guitars, but from some of the {censored} that I've seen posted on the internet over the years I really wonder just how tight some of those joints are prior to being glued up. As soon as you put a certain thickness of glue between the wood it loses the benefit of better transfer in my eyes.

 

Now atleast with a bolt on you can in theory smash the {censored} out of two pieces of wood together with nothing in between them. I mean someone may shim a neck, but you can always work the joint and remove that in most cases.

 

It's an interesting topic, but the question I have is how much does any of this really matter from one guitar to another guitar? I mean if it sounds good than it sounds good, if it sounds like {censored} than it sounds like {censored}; the neck joint construction isn't going to change my mind.