Bolt-On -Or- Through-Neck?

[unclejane]

Here's the Fodera page:
Invalid Link Removed

To my ears most of the variation is coming from the player. If you listen to just one sound sample all the way through, you'll hear variation in attack and volume - that's the player. How your finger strikes a string will effect fullness and you can hear that as well. It's difficult if not impossible to remove that factor from the comparison of neck joints.

Well all the clips sound great to me, even though you can tell a very slight difference in the tones between the BO and the NT. And even that is subtle enough to possibly just be because of a placebo-like bias from knowing which is which when you play the clips.

In a blind test, it'd be a real task to tell these apart.

Otherwise, the different construction can introduce different acoustic properties which can affect the sound. But I bet you could even those out too by just doing the BO in such a way that it's acoustically the same as the NT.

That's all just a long way of saying it doesn't make any important difference in the tone and it just boils down to how you build the thing. In my view anyway.

I prefer NT for cosmetic reasons mostly. And most of the time NTs have the acoustic sound that I tend to like (dead dead dead), though I don't know if that's just incidental to the NT's I've owned and played.

LS

 

[tkozal]

A couple of issues back I think it was Bass Gear magazine did a comparison of a euro builder who built two basses exactly alike save the neck construction. They then do a battery of tests on each. The results were very interesting

 

[Baird6869]

Those clips are pretty cool and I have listened to them enough times to make my wife think I am mental.

I have owned almost exclusively BO basses over the years so going set neck or NT on a bass requires lots of consideration from me as NT and set neck are very expensive options (and possibly unnecessary).

I have to lock down the final specs of a custom 5 string bass in a few months and I have been flip flopping between BO, NT or set neck. I initially ordered set neck and I think that is how I will ultimately go. I like how it sounds more like a BO than a NT but with slightly muted highs. Also, the access to the upper frets is generally much better. Add an ebony board, I think it will be killer. There is a slim chance that I may go BO, but that would likely be a purely financial decision.

I personally can't justify another $1k or so for a NT over a set neck. If I HAD to have the NT tone that would be a different story. Also, another consideration is that a NT (and set neck in many cases) will have considerably higher resale on a boutique custom bass than a BO.

As far as maintenance, my custom bass comes with a 5 year warranty. I live in Canada and we have huge temperature and humidity changes each season.... if the neck is buggered up, it will be evident within the first 5 years for sure.

 

[BigJohnAZ]

Just throwing a question out there---to be really sure how a NT vs. BO neck sustains or sounds, instead of comparing a NT bass to a BO bass, which means two different fingerboards, bass bodies, nuts, bridges, etc, even if made by the same manufacturer, wouldn't you have to test a bass with a NT and then take that neck and make it a bolt on? This way you are comparing everything at the same other than how it is affixed?

 

[Baird6869]

Just throwing a question out there---to be really sure how a NT vs. BO neck sustains or sounds, instead of comparing a NT bass to a BO bass, which means two different fingerboards, bass bodies, nuts, bridges, etc, even if made by the same manufacturer, wouldn't you have to test a bass with a NT and then take that neck and make it a bolt on? This way you are comparing everything at the same other than how it is affixed?

The Fodera test is about as close as you are going to get. Same block of wood for necks, tops, bodies and fretboards and exact same specs.

I agree that no 2 PU or pieces of wood is the same theoretically though if we are nitpicking.

 

[Pilgrim]

Bolt-on or through the body neck, which do you prefer and why?

The answer is a firm yes. If it's a bass and plays well, I approve.

That is all you need to know.

 

[Nephilymbass]

After owning several of both I will stay away from neck through basses from now on. The problem is the truss rod does not extend all the way through the bass so eventually the neck will start to bow between the fingerboard and the neck pickup. This bowing actually cracked the top on my "hidden" neck through warwick thumb 5. This happens much faster in hot humid areas like i live in. The bonus of a bolt on is if something tragic happens you can replace a neck or a body. With a neck through you can have it repaired (sometimes) but I'd rather have new parts. The downside of bolt ons is when it comes to production basses they aren't always the same quality as the neck through versions. For example with warwick the ebony fingerboard and 3 band eq on my thumb 5 was light years better than the 2 band thumb bolt on I had before it.

As for sound and sustain. I really feel bridge design and string choice is way more important for sustain than construction type. Strings that have to much tension and bridges that cause strings to twist are big deals to me. The bridges on my warwicks and conklin are fantastic you can wind the string up on the tuner almost all the way untwist it and put it into place and tune up that little bit more. For tone...Pickups and pres are more of a big deal to me now than they use to be. I played bass for years using the electronics that came in the bass. These days I couldn't imagine getting a new bass and not replacing either the pickups or pre. For example my conklin groove tools gt7 has a aguilar pre in it and it sounds amazing for way way less than my warwicks with stock electronics.

 

[Ian_Flash]

Just throwing a question out there---to be really sure how a NT vs. BO neck sustains or sounds, instead of comparing a NT bass to a BO bass, which means two different fingerboards, bass bodies, nuts, bridges, etc, even if made by the same manufacturer, wouldn't you have to test a bass with a NT and then take that neck and make it a bolt on? This way you are comparing everything at the same other than how it is affixed?

Yessss!!!! Thank you. "All things being equal which they rarely are." You can find some CLOSE examples of this in a few production guitars i.e. Warwick Thumb B/O vs. N/T, a few Schecters share most of the characteristics between some B/O & N/T models, Ibanez and LTD on the lower end.

 

[InternetAlias]

If you're a perfectionist, NT will suit you. If you're into practical stuff, bolt on all the way! The neck is the most critical part of the bass, and as such, any damage to it can make the bass far less playable or unplayable. As someone said, you are way more likely to have to service a lower end instrument (whether BO or NT), but there are so many unexpected ways to damage a neck that NT just might not be option for some people considering safety. I know so many people who have had their basses rendered unplayable by neck damage, and even when they got them fixed it left a scar, where you can replace the whole neck if needed with a BO.

 

[MostlyBass]

This is interesting. I owned bolt ons my entire bass playing career (1990 - present) until now. I bought a neck through Carvin Icon last year. While I'm not sure of sonic differences, the Carvin has unreal sustain and upper fret access is amazing. I'm sold.

 

[InternetAlias]

^that is an undeniable adventage of NT design.
However, the first point: unreal sustain
Some BO designed basses have unreal sustain too, but possibly less of sustain than if they were constructed NT. However, do you really need the note to ring for a minute? However, the note will still have a lot more energy into its 'half life' if you have a well sustaining, resonant bass, so physics don't allow us to debate what has longer sustain (NT construction will have more sustain than BO of the same quality due to homogenous material) but we can debate whether or not you need that much sustain (just to realize some people do even if most don't, so this point gets moot too!)
The second point is upper fret access. If you're never playing in that range, this will mean zero to you, but this is the selling point for NTs for me. I don't utilize that position a lot, but I really loved how easy to play it is on NT basses (also had an ibanez-like guitar with NT design, it was killer). I guess the only reason I don't play in that position much is because I'm playing a BO bass that doesn't encourage that position

 

[MostlyBass]

I can't compare bolt on to neck through sustain. I do know that my neck through Carvin has more sustain than I need. BUT - I love it!!! Most likely it's a non issue for most players.

I consistently use the entire range of my bass so smooth feel and access are huge for me. FOR ME.

My last bass was an Ibanez SR505 and I can't remember having any complaints.

I feel it boils down to the right bass for the right player regardless (irregardless is not a word) of neck attachment method. When I was in the market for a new electric last year I looked at Carvin, Dingwall, and Skjold. The finalists were Dingwall and Carvin (i just couldn't bond with Skjold aesthetics. Carvin was where I could get the woods and frets I wanted. Neck through design was bonus.

 

[PauFerro]

Go with bolt-on -- cheaper, if the neck goes bad on it, you can replace it more easily, and I personally don't notice a difference between the neck-through and bolt on.

 

[georgestrings]

I don't really care. I like the heel on a neck through better, but I never really play that high up anyway.

If you like a thinner body, a neck through is the way to go, but all things being equal, all things are equal.

This - I own and like both, and never really notice any differences between them... I *used* to bring up the neck replacement hing, but ha since dropped it because it occurred to me that I've never had to replace a neck - on a quality instrument that isn't abused, it's just a non-issue, IMO...


- georgestrings

 

[maturanesa]

is really hard to find any fact that supports the idea of bolt-on being better than neck-through

 

[cfsporn]

Am I the only one who doesn't mind putting their thumb on the neck plate when playing in the higher register?

 

[InternetAlias]

^I do that too, but it really puts some strain on the left hand and it's weird since that part of the guitar is fatter than the rest of it, simply not as comfortable as a NT.

is really hard to find any fact that supports the idea of bolt-on being better than neck-through

Leo Fender went with that design because it was cheap and easy to manufacture, likewise, it is better only for some practical reasons plus it has a bit more snap to it (again, physics). I think people compare BO and NT in a completely wrong way, because it's obvious which design is better for what and they are both good. This subject has been beaten to death and all the conclusions are out there.

 

[PsychoG]

If the neck-through design has little or no impact on tone as many are suggesting, why do they command so much of a price premium? The few reasons I've heard in this thread might be worth a very small premium, but not such a large one as they currently command.

 

[grendle]

Just throwing a question out there---to be really sure how a NT vs. BO neck sustains or sounds, instead of comparing a NT bass to a BO bass, which means two different fingerboards, bass bodies, nuts, bridges, etc, even if made by the same manufacturer, wouldn't you have to test a bass with a NT and then take that neck and make it a bolt on? This way you are comparing everything at the same other than how it is affixed?

You can do that with a few different Spector models. The reboot or legend vs an ns2a , ns2000 , or euro. Same basses just bolt on vs nt.

 

[cfsporn]

You can do that with a few different Spector models. The reboot or legend vs an ns2a , ns2000 , or euro. Same basses just bolt on vs nt.

Wouldn't a Spector Reboot be a Smith or Fodera?

Sorry, couldn't resist.

The problem with that idea is that they are all sill wood instruments. The more I think about this, the more I think that the person who suggested that the only way to tell any differences is to have an all carbon fiber bass is correct.