1. Please take 30 seconds to register your free account to remove most ads, post topics, make friends, earn reward points at our store, and more!  
    TalkBass.com has been uniting the low end since 1998.  Join us! :)

Bridge-thru, body-thru, neck-thru & bolt-on...

Discussion in 'Basses [BG]' started by KYJazzy, Dec 5, 2004.

  1. KYJazzy


    Nov 10, 2004
    Lexington, KY
    All chased pac-man around when they were youngins...

    I'm familiar with neck-thru and bolt-on neck construction, but can anyone tell me the tonal/quality difference between these two?

    But I've never heard of bridge-thru and body-thru string setup until rummaging through a lakland catalog. Can anyone tell me the difference between these, and the advantages/disadvantages of each? Tones? Possibilities? Qualities?

  2. Dbassmon


    Oct 2, 2004
    Rutherford, NJ
    The difference is this: Neck-thru construction will give you more sustain and a bit clearer fundamental. Also, this method is more expensive to produce therefore, these basses are more expensive to buy.

    Bolt-ons will give more attack great for slapping. You can read some more about this on Sadowsky's site. He addresses this question on his FAQ section. (seventh question down)http://www.sadowsky.com/pages/framesets/fs_faq.html

    Answer is that it's a matter of preference. Plenty of great sounding basses constructed both ways.
  3. KYJazzy


    Nov 10, 2004
    Lexington, KY
    cool, thanks.

    through-body and through-bridge? anyone..? :rolleyes:
  4. Ian Perge

    Ian Perge Supporting Member

    May 11, 2001
    Evansville, Indiana
    This is much more subjective than body construction, but some people say that stringing through the body makes for "better" tone and better "feel" ("perceived" tension) due to increased body coupling and a tighter break angle over the witness point at the bridge. Others don't. Luckily, this is something you can test yourself as a bass that you can string through the body will most likely also have bridge-through as well.

    One thing is objective and scientifically proven: stringing through-body will not increase string tension. Just to nip that in the bud. :smug:

    One method of construction I always thought interesting was the "half-through" Ibanez Affirma (they've reused the body style for the Ergodyne EDA's) that Rolf Spuller designed in the early '90's. (Imagine a neck-through ending halfway to the bridge). It was his theory that the body wood should produce the principle sound of an instrument, and thus the bridge should be anchored to that as opposed to the neck wood on a neck-through. I suppose it could also be called a "very, very deep set-neck", as it's glued it. ;) You can see the design and where the neck ends in this photo:

  5. KYJazzy


    Nov 10, 2004
    Lexington, KY
    All right, makes sense. I didn't know how subtle the differences were. Thanks a bunch.
  6. Ozzyman


    Jul 21, 2004
    Well, string-thru is kinda like having an angled headstock. It secures the string in the saddle more tightly because the tension is pulling downwards instead of backwards. Same thing with an angled headstock pulling a string into the nut. I don't know if that makes a longer sustain or not, but I know that I want all my basses to have string-thru.