Bolt-On -Or- Through-Neck?

[Phalex]

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.

It's easier and cheaper to manufacture a separate body and a separate neck that bolt together. Kind of Henry Ford's assembly line principle for mass production.

Taking a neck and building a body onto it is more labor intensive, and if you screw something up, you don't just grab a new neck or body off of the parts rack.

 

[InternetAlias]

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.

Time = money It simply takes more time and more expensive techniques to mass produce, that's a no brainier. That being said, I am sure many companies boost the price 'just because' as well, because 'neck through' looks flashy.

EDIT: Beat me to it

 

[grendle]

Lol. Gotta love auto correct !

 

[Solarmist]

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

I really don't care one way or the other, but all mine happen to be BO.
My much bigger concerns are aestetics, neck profile, PU's/electronics, body size & weight, and QC.

 

[Davo-London]

Folks

You've all missed one point; neck bending.

If you play open string harmonics and you move the bass back and forth away and to your body you get a wonderful vibrato on a BO.

This doesn't work on a NT. I'm very cautious bending the neck on my NT, but with a BO it's fine.

That's the only difference I've experienced except looks - NT look gorgeous!

This would never be a factor to me when buying a bass.

Davo

 

[InternetAlias]

^nobody used that point because it isn't too much of a smart move, no matter how cool it can be at times.

 

[jeff7bass]

Bass Gear magazine had some of the world's best bass builders discuss bolt-on vs neck-thru as well as string-thru-body vs string-thru-bridge and brass-aliminium-steel bridges and their effect on sound. I suggest contacting Tom Bowlus and buying the magazine. I subscribed and bought all of the back issues and I'm very happy I did.

 

[MostlyBass]

It's free online. It was an interesting read.

 

[PsychoG]

Time = money It simply takes more time and more expensive techniques to mass produce, that's a no brainier. That being said, I am sure many companies boost the price 'just because' as well, because 'neck through' looks flashy.

EDIT: Beat me to it

That's from the manufacturing perspective. But builders aren't building things and pricing them higher than the market will support. Therefore the question is why are buyers willing to pay that much of a premium.

 

[maturanesa]

Time = money It simply takes more time and more expensive techniques to mass produce, that's a no brainier. That being said, I am sure many companies boost the price 'just because' as well, because 'neck through' looks flashy.

EDIT: Beat me to it

Neck pocket/joint in a bolt-on has to be tight for a better vibration transfer (Lesson 1 in any instrument building class). Now, take a look at the neck joint of a neck through bass and tell which is better..

 

[Ian_Flash]

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

Sorry, couldn't resist.

I have ABSOLUTELY no idea what you mean by that!

 

[Ian_Flash]

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.

Theoretically you are correct. Remove all VARIABLES except for the neck joint. Unless someone is going to pay me a TON of money to do that, I'd rather be out GIGGING!

 

[Ian_Flash]

Neck pocket/joint in a bolt-on has to be tight for a better vibration transfer (Lesson 1 in any instrument building class). Now, take a look at the neck joint of a neck through bass and tell which is better..

Very good point. Now... what about the variable that the N/T is usually a single laminated billet of wood transferring the vibration, and the B/O is often transmitting vibration through two DIFFERENT woods which may enhance or degrade said vibration? And what about the propagation of Odd-Order vs. Even-Order Harmonic content?

 

[voigtstr]

I've getting an Epiphone thunderbird Classic IV pro - through neck, 7 ply, I'm hoping for good sustain and good tone...

 

[InternetAlias]

The only way that a bolt on neck will transfer vibrations better is if you hit some weird resonances and get two different parts and types of wood to produce louder output and more sustain... which is unlikely to work for all notes, it could work for a note or two, in which case you have a serious problem. For purposes of output and sustain, NT is unmatched due to simple physics. Set in neck is losing some sustain and loudness (as well as getting damped) by the glue, so NT still wins there. But if the real debate is 'how much is there a perceivable difference and what do we really need' then I'd say all three types of neck-body relationships are perfectly fine. It's also important to mention that technically, set in and bolt on necks produce more attack. There's no more attack per se, it's just that there's more damping which makes the attack less prone to getting lost in transfer while the body of the note gets lost a bit. To picture this, you have to realize that the whole neck is vibrating. The more it vibrates the more matter around it it will move along with it, and so it will affect the body more. As it starts vibrating less, it is less likely to affect the body a lot because of the distance between neck and body (what we see as two objects touching one another could be microns away, which is huge for this application). But still, some people simply don't like the way NT design damps (or that is, doesn't) the note. Really trained ears like BO system more because it damps notes more and in a way produces more attack. Another thing people forget is that if you have neck through design guitar has to sound different because it has more of the neck wood in the total amount of wood on guitar, and it's in the most critical place, meaning that the difference you're hearing is more so the fact that there's more neck wood (maple, bubinga, mahoganny, etc) than what's used for the body (or in this case, the wings). Obviously an alder bass with a bolt on neck will sound drastically different to a neck through bass with a maple/mahoganny laminated neck with alder wings. This is one of reasons why it's impossible to a/b this correctly.

TL;DR:
Going down to micron levels, neck will always be farther from the body on BO and set neck basses, meaning the smaller the amplitude of the vibration is, the less will transfer, which means that NT basses have the best way of getting loudness, sustain and even dynamics. But still, that might not be what you're after, some people have even put foam under strings to dampen them... So if you have really good ears to tell, you might not like NT system because it doesn't dampen string vibrations enough.

 

[cfsporn]

The only way that a bolt on neck will transfer vibrations better is if you hit some weird resonances and get two different parts and types of wood to produce louder output and more sustain... which is unlikely to work for all notes, it could work for a note or two, in which case you have a serious problem. For purposes of output and sustain, NT is unmatched due to simple physics. Set in neck is losing some sustain and loudness (as well as getting damped) by the glue, so NT still wins there. But if the real debate is 'how much is there a perceivable difference and what do we really need' then I'd say all three types of neck-body relationships are perfectly fine. It's also important to mention that technically, set in and bolt on necks produce more attack. There's no more attack per se, it's just that there's more damping which makes the attack less prone to getting lost in transfer while the body of the note gets lost a bit. To picture this, you have to realize that the whole neck is vibrating. The more it vibrates the more matter around it it will move along with it, and so it will affect the body more. As it starts vibrating less, it is less likely to affect the body a lot because of the distance between neck and body (what we see as two objects touching one another could be microns away, which is huge for this application). But still, some people simply don't like the way NT design damps (or that is, doesn't) the note. Really trained ears like BO system more because it damps notes more and in a way produces more attack. Another thing people forget is that if you have neck through design guitar has to sound different because it has more of the neck wood in the total amount of wood on guitar, and it's in the most critical place, meaning that the difference you're hearing is more so the fact that there's more neck wood (maple, bubinga, mahoganny, etc) than what's used for the body (or in this case, the wings). Obviously an alder bass with a bolt on neck will sound drastically different to a neck through bass with a maple/mahoganny laminated neck with alder wings. This is one of reasons why it's impossible to a/b this correctly.

TL;DR:
Going down to micron levels, neck will always be farther from the body on BO and set neck basses, meaning the smaller the amplitude of the vibration is, the less will transfer, which means that NT basses have the best way of getting loudness, sustain and even dynamics. But still, that might not be what you're after, some people have even put foam under strings to dampen them... So if you have really good ears to tell, you might not like NT system because it doesn't dampen string vibrations enough.

I think the sound qualities of a bolt on bass can also be attributed to the fact that vibration travels from the neck to the body by means of metal bolts. Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't sound travel faster in metal?

 

[InternetAlias]

Bolts help tighten the neck into place, thus they also help dampen the vibrations on their way, thus reducing some amplitude. Do realize that the more parts you have on your way, the more dampening occurs and the more signal you lose. Laminated necks are designed with this in mind. Try playing a bass where vibrations transfer only through bolts. What you'll hear is a very thin sound. Bolts certainly do help get a bit of high end (high mids mostly) into the sound... Don't forget resonant frequencies of materials and specifically of the part. Steel has a much higher resonant frequency than, say, mahogany and a bolt is tiny, so it has a higher resonant frequency. You need a really good wood-to-wood connection to actually transfer lower frequencies properly, bolts simply aren't cutting it. Some people don't even like maple guitars because they don't have enough low end for them.

For one to truly understand how neck/body connections work one has to first understand what makes one material transfer some frequencies better than others, which is what I think isn't very well understood in guitar/bass player world (though majority of luthiers obviously know this!). And as I've said many times, people have different tastes and expect different sounds out of the guitar and some things can be way harder to design and make and could yield a tiny bit of PERCEIVABLE improvement... That's how the bolt on necks have held up to this day, basses produced that way are cheaper to build and buy and the sustain/volume differences are not big enough to warrant the BO market breaks, not to mention most of our brains are wired to hear classic tones as good since we are so used to them, which means bolt on and set neck will be widely accepted as more desirable sounding and finally, there are some desirable aspects of bolt on/set neck design, as I've said, the damping that occurs at vibration transfer could be desirable...

 

[Ian_Flash]

Bolts help tighten the neck into place, thus they also help dampen the vibrations on their way, thus reducing some amplitude. Do realize that the more parts you have on your way, the more dampening occurs and the more signal you lose. Laminated necks are designed with this in mind. Try playing a bass where vibrations transfer only through bolts. What you'll hear is a very thin sound. Bolts certainly do help get a bit of high end (high mids mostly) into the sound... Don't forget resonant frequencies of materials and specifically of the part. Steel has a much higher resonant frequency than, say, mahogany and a bolt is tiny, so it has a higher resonant frequency. You need a really good wood-to-wood connection to actually transfer lower frequencies properly, bolts simply aren't cutting it. Some people don't even like maple guitars because they don't have enough low end for them.

For one to truly understand how neck/body connections work one has to first understand what makes one material transfer some frequencies better than others, which is what I think isn't very well understood in guitar/bass player world (though majority of luthiers obviously know this!). And as I've said many times, people have different tastes and expect different sounds out of the guitar and some things can be way harder to design and make and could yield a tiny bit of PERCEIVABLE improvement... That's how the bolt on necks have held up to this day, basses produced that way are cheaper to build and buy and the sustain/volume differences are not big enough to warrant the BO market breaks, not to mention most of our brains are wired to hear classic tones as good since we are so used to them, which means bolt on and set neck will be widely accepted as more desirable sounding and finally, there are some desirable aspects of bolt on/set neck design, as I've said, the damping that occurs at vibration transfer could be desirable...

Exactly true! Couple that with the fact that virtually no two pieces of wood are exactly alike, it's very difficult to predict, specifically, how an instrument will sound until it's built. At that point it's up to the things that a builder CAN control such as Bridges, P/U's and EQ, Strings etc. Sound does travel at different rates through different materials. That's why when a Whale farts, you don't smell it for at least an hour!

 

[grendle]

Very good point. Now... what about the variable that the N/T is usually a single laminated billet of wood transferring the vibration, and the B/O is often transmitting vibration through two DIFFERENT woods which may enhance or degrade said vibration? And what about the propagation of Odd-Order vs. Even-Order Harmonic content?

Which is exactly why their different

 

[grendle]

Exactly true! Couple that with the fact that virtually no two pieces of wood are exactly alike, it's very difficult to predict, specifically, how an instrument will sound until it's built. At that point it's up to the things that a builder CAN control such as Bridges, P/U's and EQ, Strings etc. Sound does travel at different rates through different materials. That's why when a Whale farts, you don't smell it for at least an hour!

We find this true in the Spector community. Same woods , pups, pre, and hardware, yet there are a few that just have the magic. Most are close. But there's a few that just sing and growl differently from the rest. We even hear the difference between the thin matte finish on the forte line and the hard gloss poly on the std basses. Thankfully Stuart does too. Always about the tone above all else with him, amen. Oddly enough I believe he likes the sound of walnut over the maple the ns basses are usually made of. The us bolt ons also get mahogany bodies for the same reasons. It's all good stuff though.