• 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 freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Bound necks-yay or nay?

Do you like bound necks?

  • Yay

    Votes: 276 74.6%
  • Nay

    Votes: 94 25.4%

  • Total voters
    370
Picked up a new Fender Deluxe PJ with a bound neck and love it. Never played a bass with a bound neck and never knew what I was missing. Neck feels slightly more rounded on the edges, which I love, (hate sharp flat edges) and makes a thinner Jazz neck, I’ve never cared for, feel a bit more substantial. Seems like only the 70s styled Fender necks are bound? Any reason for this?

I am totally 100% ambivalent....I think...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sixgunn
My ancient and venerable '73 J has a bound neck, or whats left of it after 35 years of playing it. the binding is age yellowed and is good on the top. the bottom of the neck is about worn down up to about the 8th fret. But that's ok too. after all those years of Rotosound R66 strings gnawing away at it, the frets are about gone as well. It's still my favorite 4
 
IMG_20180818_130535935_LL.jpg
 
Are the dimensions of the edge of the necks/FBs exactly the same between the two? I’m betting not.

If the binding changes the geometry of the aforementioned spec(s), of course it could be more comfortable. But if the dimensions are exactly the same (which seems to be what you’re suggesting- but I could be misinterpreting), then binding isn’t going to make it more comfortable.

Also, is it really a surprise that a $2k guitar is more comfy to play than one that’s a quarter of the price?

Price doesn’t matter really. It even makes a difference within the same make. An SG or LP with binding is considerably more comfortable to play than one without. Play some side by side and tell me which is more comfortable.
 
My Squier VM Jazz has bound & blocked neck, of course, with a generous coat of poly over it. It is a gloriously smooth and buttery neck for sure and I love playing it.
But for my next build, I won’t be doing a binding, only block inlays (white pearl on roasted maple). A binding is an expensive aesthetic option that I can live without. It makes fretwork more expensive, too. At Warmoth, Stainless frets are approximately $15 more than nickel frets without binding, but $65 more with binding.
 
It is definitely going to make a refret more time consuming, finicky, and therefore more expensive. I don’t know if modern materials have helped the situation or not, but I’ve seen many vintage instruments where the binding has either shrunk, distorted in some way or discoloured.

Hot/cold through the seasons or even the same day/night and outdoor gigs in windy drizzle filed air make for binding to be another thing that can go wrong on a heavily gigged bass.

It looks nice when its tasteful.

I like the feel of the frets when Im not playing a fretless, which is what I do now. It's a benefit of frets. I can feel where I am when singing and looking ahead.

I think they bound and pearloid blocked them to make the bass look more 'deluxe' but later quit to be more cost effective. What gets me is how fender has (more or less) stuck with that bent piece of tin bridge all these years. I guess that if it works, it works.
Whatever...

Most people cant tell the difference between a bent bridge and a baddass. Same with body wood and many other thongs, but that is another topic...
 
Last edited:
I don't prefer binding, but I like it on the instruments I have that have it - Ric 4001, Ric 4003, Gibson Les Paul Triumph. It doesn't show up in the pictures I have though, need to take some more pics at an angle! Gotta post at least one though - '76 Autumnglo 4001

27746111218_efa319e65c.jpg


I especially like this one because usually Rics with black trim also have black binding but as far as I know these came like this. The binding on the body doesn't bother me either because I wear it kind of low.