Bolt on Or Neck thru?

[cjbhunter]

bolt on or neck thru? which do you prefer?

 

[derrick007]

I've got one of each, and the set neck plays better, but I wouldnt credit that compleatly to the set neck. I don't know that i would prefer either more or less, they both have disadvantages, but I guess i would lean more toward the set neck.

 

[doctorjazz]

I like anything as long as the neck heel doesn't get in my way. I have a neck-through bass and a bolt-on with a nice smoothly carved heel, and I like both of those basses' neck joints equally. Big blocky heels are a no-no, though.

I suppose bolt-ons offer the advantage of not having to replace the entire bass if something goes tragically wrong with the neck. Neck-through basses are pretty much guaranteed to have a good comfy heel, and I think they look cool if you leave the neck showing, i.e. uncovered by the top. There are supposedly tonal advantages to neck-through basses also, but to be honest I haven't noticed anything.

 

[KJung]

Find the bass you like. Neck construction methods have a very, very, very, very small impact on tone given the million other things that interact to make a given bass sound the way it does.

 

[cjbhunter]

thanks for the input so far, iv been looking into a new bass ibanez Sr 750 or a Schecter Stiletto Studio-5. the ibanez is a bolt on and the schecter is a set neck.

 

[Saxomafone]

I like 4 string bolt ons. More punch and attack for me.

5 strings I want neck through. B strings seem to be less floppy. I have only tried 1 bolt on 5 that I felt like the b string was good and not merely ok. It was a Sadowsky, so that means $$$$!

 

[coreyfyfe]

All my basses are bolt-ons, but that was never a factor in the decision it just happened. I buy what feels good to play and don't worry so much about construction.

 

[cjbhunter]

well on reason i made this topic was to see which you fellow bassist's liked to play and second i heard from some people that set necks could have problems and you'd have to replace the whole bass, is that true?

 

[emblymouse]

I agree, this should be way down the list.

I know the advantages in theory, but I must say historically the best sustaining and harmonically 'live' basses I've owned have had bolt on necks. It's so magically random.

 

[amimbari]

REMEMBER GUYS:

a set neck is a bolt on neck without the screws that was glued in place, a neck-thru is a full center wood section+ neck with glued on body sides around it --2 different animals, KJUNG is right, a lot more go into tone than a neck attachment configuration.

 

[Jazz Ad]

I prefer neckthru because it makes more sense to me and looks more beautiful.
It's a thin reason but since I'm the one paying for them...

 

[derrick007]

I like 4 string bolt ons. More punch and attack for me.

I would agree with that just off of my two electric basses. My bolt on epiphone is way punchier than the neck through hamer. this is probably just the pickups, or the fact that i play with my thumb on the bridge pickup, which is way further down on my epiphone, but still.

 

[ClassicJazz]

I've had both.....I prefer the sound of a bolt-on.

I liked my neck-thru basses, very nice and easy to play heel and looks good to. But my bolt-on basses do a certain punch I like. They say you get more sustain on the neck-thru......but I can't remember the last time I was sittin there holding a note for six measures! So that is not a issue to me.

 

[Phalex]

I like the smooth heel on a neck through, but I hear no difference between the 2.

 

[mark beem]

bolt on or neck thru? which do you prefer?

I prefer bolt on necks..

 

[hyoshim]

REMEMBER GUYS:

a set neck is a bolt on neck without the screws that was glued in place, a neck-thru is a full center wood section+ neck with glued on body sides around it --2 different animals, KJUNG is right, a lot more go into tone than a neck attachment configuration.

 

[rodneyat]

A lot of people are commenting on the attack and punch of bolt-ons vs neck through. Something to consider when looking at that...Generally (I said, generally, not all) bolt-ons tend to be maple or ash is being used more these days. And then having ash, alder or even maple bodies. Neck throughs tend to also be maple but you also see a lot of other woods used either by themselves on in conjunction with the maple. Mahogany, walnut, paduk, bubinga, wenge etc. Those woods then have a different tonal characteristic than maple. I have owned bolt-on necks made of mahogany that sounded more like what most people would expect a neck through to sound...Why? Because the wood combinations of the entire bass where more in line with what is generally used for neck throughs. As a number have already said, it is more about the woods than how the neck is attached to the body. I own all 3 (bolt-on, set-neck and neck through) They all have their own personality and it has little to do with the neck attachment.

 

[Fretlessboy]

Bolt on all the way...they are punchier

 

[Muddslide]

I'm a devoted bolt-on fan. The sound/sustain differences are, in my experience, neglligible.

Plus, if something goes awry with a bolt-on, you can get a replacement cheaper and easier than having a reset.

I once had a '76 Gibson SG. A drunken friend of mine tripped over it and snapped the neck right off at around the 15th fret. At the time it would have been about the same to just replace the entire instrument as opposed to fixing the neck, and IF I had gotten it fixed, it never would have felt as solid to me.

 

[cjbhunter]

is there really a big problem with set necks or neck thru's like weather changes and warping? thats the real reason why im made this thread.