• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Are bolt-ons punchier and snappier than thru or set necks?

#21
Thanks for those links!

They were informative from an engineering perspective (not that I have any engineering knowledge to begin with!)

Personally, I think that the difference is more feel than sound. The amount of space between the body and strings will be different (typically greater) on the bolt on because of the added length the heel contributes. This means that one's left arm will be slightly more extended when playing a bolt-on vs neck through (again, typically, not always). For some, this is more comfortable and for others, not so much.

I'd like to believe in the punchy vs fundamental difference, but I think that any sonic contrast between the two is a mentally contrived one rather than sensorially perceived one.
 
#22
KJung said:
No. IMO, a classic case of mis-attributing cause and effect from the most obvious differences between/among instruments.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty much with this.

Misattribution of cause & effect is the mother's milk of gear forums and bubba science generally.

I know that a lot of "experts" insist that the premise is true, but they offer no plausible explanation of why it would be true.

I do know that the fit of a neck to the face of the pocket does affect the sound and can easily demonstrate and explain why, but that's a different question.
 
#23
NecroticImbecil said:
This.

Although I must add red cars are fastest. Everybody knows this.
Click to expand...

^^^ this

And the engine belongs in the back, just as gawd and Ferry intended.

I had these three basses in the house at the same time. One is bolt on, the other two dovetail. Pups are identical. Preamps are essentially the same. There was no significant "punch" advantage to the bolt on. Nor any significant sustain advantage to the dovetail. If the builder picks the right wood and executes, you'll get punch and sustain. If they don't, then you won't. The neck joint design isn't going to save or screw the instrument.

yys-about3.jpg
yyd1.jpg
mon21.jpg
 
#26
A very common misconception and even a, sometimes false, selling point that's attributed to the manufacture of the instrument. The only fact about this is, I've played BO's that are smoother sounding than NT. I've played NT's that fit the bill for sounding smoother, it goes both ways. It really depends on about a million factors that we can't yet completely quantify. Of course the different necks allow the string vibrations to be carried throughout the bass in different manors, but in the end it's relative to the bass wood, how it was made, etc.

If you are trying to buy a new bass blindly, I'd never recommend that, always play it first because those stereotypes could be false for that bass and then you'd have a bass that defies the myth about how the basses are supposed to sound based on neck construction.

Best regards,

Brooks
 
#27
JimiLL said:
I can tell a difference.

This is regarding IDENTICAL designs. Comparing a fender to a Tobias or anything else is completely fruitless
Click to expand...

If you are pointing this at me, reread my last two sentences, where I said - "I can't prove any direct relation with construction and tone based upon my instruments, because there are waaaay too many other variables making them apples and oranges from each other. But, I will say my StingRay is the punchiest, snappiest bass I own".

It's not "fruitless" at all. I mentioned both apples and oranges.
 
#28
It depends on how the bass is constructed and of what. There are a number of construction details to be considered. Ultimately it comes down to what you prefer. Coming from the Fender camp, I'm down with bolt-ons.
 
#30
The old argument was that bolt-ons facilitated more odd order harmonics, which contributes to a more liveley, punchy tone, whereas neck thrus were more about the even order harmonics...smooth even tone, long sustain with natural compression.

I dunno...:confused:
 
#31
I have a MIK Squier Jazz with GOBS of sustain. (bolt-on)

Have an old '67 Gibson EB-2 (neck thru) that thumps and punches when coaxed. No sustain at all. Even with the mute disengaged.

While the general consensus may be true concerning tone characteristics of bolt-on vs NT, there are certainly many exceptions. imo.
 
#32
This is just my opinion and experience based on scientific speculation and physics:

Yes, bolt-ons are punchier and more lively IMO!! :)

Why?

I believe there are two reasons:

1) The neck-body joint wood compression that a bolt-on has IMO creates a "density node" that translates vibrations between the neck and body differently, and perhaps the vibrations even "reflect" back and forth between the neck and body differently, whereas on a set neck or neck-thru, not-so-much. This bolt-on density node IMO enhances essentially two vibrating fields (neck and body separated by a bolt-on density node) that somehow reflect and play with the vibrations.

2) RIGHT HAND TECHNIQUE (!!): specifically, an aggressive fingerstyle where the strings are plucked to their maximum yet controlled. If your right hand is less aggressive and light, you will not tell a difference between bolt-on vs set neck. Your right hand has to initiate a powerful enough wave to traverse the dense bolt-on joint to be reflected back to the body.

PEACE
 
#33
Yes there is a little bitn more snap and a little bit more midrange punch with well made bolt on compared to neck thru. Neck thru will give better sustain then mediocre qaulity bolt on. Comapered to very well done bolt on sustain is practically the same. However neck thru may have more treble conten due to the extra maple now running thru the body. Ive noted a small increase in fullness to sound for the low end for set neck design. However you lose the bit of midrange bump that bolt ons have.

Ive routinely added a layer of wood glue to bolt on basses and guitars in the neck pocket of msot of the bolt ons Ive owned. This has allways added a little more low end and tiny bit longer note fade out sustain. But you lose just a little bit of midrange bump. If sound fullness and max sustain is your thing, then this small tweak to the sound may be for you to.

So far only one two maker have come up with a design that addresses these issues. And retains the little bit of snap and midrange extra bolt ons have with the added sustain and fullness of neck thru. These being Brubaker, and a series of invisibolt neck guitars from BC Rich. I own the BC Rich warlock version. Unfortunately BC Rich never made a bass version.

Of current production basses, brubaker would be the only one I know of using this extreme in body neck extension. Whats it do for your sound? Ive owned warlocks with exact same woods and electronics. The IT neck joint makes it the most aggressive sounding warlock Ive owned with also just a little more articulation in low bass. Sustain equals the best neck thru versions Ive owned. And the warlock retains that little bit of midrange bump and snap of bolt on.

The sound diff between very well made bolt on, set neck, and neck thru along with the extended in body neck. Are small, yet significant to me.
 
#35
"The old argument was that bolt-ons facilitated more odd order harmonics, which contributes to a more liveley, punchy tone, whereas neck thrus were more about the even order harmonics...smooth even tone, long sustain with natural compression"

If this was true, all of us who play electric guitar thru overdrive or distortion would have noticed this. Due to the diff sound result when using OD/Dist units that used odd or even harmonics. It be the same result as say putting a odd order OD after an Even order one, sound suck. I can kinda understand why bassists who seldom use OD/distortion might fall for this claim, but its false. There is no affect on how bolt on versus neck thru affects the tone of overdrive and distortion effect pedals. There is a small eq tweak to bolt on versus neck thru. But no change to harmonic content odd or even harmonics wise in actuality.
 
#36
NoFretsNoWorry said:
This is just my opinion and experience based on scientific speculation and physics:

Yes, bolt-ons are punchier and more lively IMO!! :)

Why?

I believe there are two reasons:

1) The neck-body joint wood compression that a bolt-on has IMO creates a "density node" that translates vibrations between the neck and body differently, and perhaps the vibrations even "reflect" back and forth between the neck and body differently, whereas on a set neck or neck-thru, not-so-much. This bolt-on density node IMO enhances essentially two vibrating fields (neck and body separated by a bolt-on density node) that somehow reflect and play with the vibrations.

2) RIGHT HAND TECHNIQUE (!!): specifically, an aggressive fingerstyle where the strings are plucked to their maximum yet controlled. If your right hand is less aggressive and light, you will not tell a difference between bolt-on vs set neck. Your right hand has to initiate a powerful enough wave to traverse the dense bolt-on joint to be reflected back to the body.

PEACE
Click to expand...

These are good points. And please, just because some of you can't (or dont care to look for) hear a difference doesnt mean someone else cant.
 
#38
NoFretsNoWorry said:
This is just my opinion and experience based on scientific speculation and physics:

Yes, bolt-ons are punchier and more lively IMO!! :)

Why?

I believe there are two reasons:

1) The neck-body joint wood compression that a bolt-on has IMO creates a "density node" that translates vibrations between the neck and body differently, and perhaps the vibrations even "reflect" back and forth between the neck and body differently, whereas on a set neck or neck-thru, not-so-much. This bolt-on density node IMO enhances essentially two vibrating fields (neck and body separated by a bolt-on density node) that somehow reflect and play with the vibrations.

2) RIGHT HAND TECHNIQUE (!!): specifically, an aggressive fingerstyle where the strings are plucked to their maximum yet controlled. If your right hand is less aggressive and light, you will not tell a difference between bolt-on vs set neck. Your right hand has to initiate a powerful enough wave to traverse the dense bolt-on joint to be reflected back to the body.

PEACE
Click to expand...

"Scientific speculation" is another phrase for "in theory".

Put up sound clips of two equal basses with the only difference being the design of how the neck is attached. You will hear no difference.


It's one of those things where if people say it enough, people start to believe it merely because it's been said enough.
 
#39
JimiLL said:
These are good points. And please, just because some of you can't (or dont care to look for) hear a difference doesnt mean someone else cant.
Click to expand...

If I have to look for it, then that proves the point they are making. One shouldn't have to look for it. It should be readily apparent. Once you start "looking for it", you start placing values on things that either don't exist or already existed but suddenly have been attributed value.
 
#40
JimiLL said:
These are good points. And please, just because some of you can't (or dont care to look for) hear a difference doesnt mean someone else cant.
Click to expand...

I hear differences with different woods on similar (or otherwise identical basses). Neck joint? I could not hear anything that I could attribute to the joint. I would however defer to builders who make both as they have more than my anecdotal experience.

Just because someone *thinks* they hear a difference doesn't means there actually is one :)
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back