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

I'm Afraid of Set Necks

#101
FingerDub said:
As far as I understand them, set necks are a dovetail joint attaching the body and neck together along with some sort of adhesive. I have read that this is supposedly just as strong as a bolt on but I'm not so sure. Even with glue I feel like the wood could move or bend or compress even just a little bit and compromise the joint. I'm definitely more comfortable with bolt on at this point.

I guess I'm asking for my mind to be set at ease. There is a bass I really think I want except for its set neck.
Click to expand...
I don't know about anybody else but I think we should cut to the chase…what bass is under consideration?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Korladis
#103
Ahh, thought so.
Funny thing is, I went to the store thinking they had a Thundergun and this one, which has a bolt-on neck, 6 bolts (screws).
They didn't, but I still would've gone with the Thundergun.
I wouldn't mind owning a 20th Anniversary Mercalli, though, that's for sure.

(By the way, the set neck didn't really figure into my choice, but the Blackwood Tek fretboard did.)
149t40i.png
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Korladis, Craig4003 and FingerDub
#104
I haven’t read through the whole thread; no doubt others have made these points.

1. Nobody ever claimed bolt-ones were stronger or sonically better. The only claim is that they’re easier and cheaper to make and repair.

2. I’ve built both set-necks and bolt-ons. They both feel equally sturdy.

3. PLENTY of gluing surface for a Gibson-style joint. You should not fear a weakness there.

4. To me, bolt-ons get the nod because they’re infinitely easier to tweak.
 
#105
FingerDub said:
As far as I understand them, set necks are a dovetail joint attaching the body and neck together along with some sort of adhesive. I have read that this is supposedly just as strong as a bolt on but I'm not so sure. Even with glue I feel like the wood could move or bend or compress even just a little bit and compromise the joint. I'm definitely more comfortable with bolt on at this point.

I guess I'm asking for my mind to be set at ease. There is a bass I really think I want except for its set neck.
Click to expand...

There's only one thing I am scared of...

upload_2018-6-18_20-16-37.jpeg


;)

Good Luck!
 
#108
armyadarkness said:
Yes. This is an important "note".

Most bolt ons are just screwed in, which is a much lousier way to secure a neck than glue... now if they really were bolted, that would be very strong. To add insult to injury... After losing a strap button in 1992, I got into the silly habit of removing the strap button screws of all new guitars, and then reinstalling them with crazy glue on the threads.

As the years went on and I started installing strap locks, machine heads, bridges, pups, and different PG's on ALL of my new basses, I began using the crazy glue technique on all of the screws. Guess what I found?

Better than 35% of the screws on all of my USA Fenders and G&Ls were stripped from the factory. So, my trick works very well, but the glue is better than the screw...

I too have always been scared of set necks and I try to avoid them, but I'm also smart enough to know that I'm basing it on foolish OCD nonsense. If Slash, ACE, and Angus are using them, then I suspect you can too.
Click to expand...
"The glue is better than the screw".

That seems to capture the point right there!

My 1968 Hofner seems fine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HaphAsSard and armyadarkness
#109
What about the type of bass or guitar where the neck IS the instrument with wings added to the sides to make the body?
You can't get more 'set' than that.
Glued over screws any day for pure rigidity.
Bolt-on if you have worries about having to replace the neck down the road.
 
#113
I have an Alembic with a set neck, but I"m not a fan on solid body instruments. The reason is that a set neck combines the worst of all worlds. A bolt-on tends to be sort of large and lumpy up near the high frets. but has the advantage that you can replace a bad neck, you can put in shims to adjust setup if a neck slightly warps, and in general deal with neck problems if they crop up. A neck through is usually smooth and slim at the high frets and being one piece of wood is strong and stable if the wood is. But a neck through leaves little easy options if your piece of wood goes bad. The Set neck sits sort of half-way in between the two. It's more lumpy than a neck-through, but less so than bolt-on. It's much more difficult to repair/replace the neck but not impossible. So it kind of sits between the two options. Personally I think I'd prefer to just choose either bolt-on or neck through and live with them rather than trying to compromise with set-neck.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: GIBrat51 and FingerDub
#115
bassbenj said:
I have an Alembic with a set neck, but I"m not a fan on solid body instruments. The reason is that a set neck combines the worst of all worlds. A bolt-on tends to be sort of large and lumpy up near the high frets. but has the advantage that you can replace a bad neck, you can put in shims to adjust setup if a neck slightly warps, and in general deal with neck problems if they crop up. A neck through is usually smooth and slim at the high frets and being one piece of wood is strong and stable if the wood is. But a neck through leaves little easy options if your piece of wood goes bad. The Set neck sits sort of half-way in between the two. It's more lumpy than a neck-through, but less so than bolt-on. It's much more difficult to repair/replace the neck but not impossible. So it kind of sits between the two options. Personally I think I'd prefer to just choose either bolt-on or neck through and live with them rather than trying to compromise with set-neck.
Click to expand...

As I so often do, I think it just depends. Here's my neck-through, which insets into the one piece body and does not show through the top at all:

CMB_back.jpg


And my set neck bass, which has maybe my favorite ergonomics of any bass I've yet played:

MarcoBass_SCProto_Back.jpg


My bolt-on EUB is made so you're pretty much in thumb position by the time your hand would otherwise encounter the "bump", so the neck attachment method is more or less moot IME and IMO.
Yel_wink.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: kesslari and bassbenj
#118
Passinwind said:
As I so often do, I think it just depends. Here's my neck-through, which insets into the one piece body and does not show through the top at all:

And my set neck bass, which has maybe my favorite ergonomics of any bass I've yet played:

My bolt-on EUB is made so you're pretty much in thumb position by the time your hand would otherwise encounter the "bump", so the neck attachment method is more or less moot IME and IMO. View attachment 3054822
Click to expand...

The Neck-though is clearly a nice smooth transition which is what I'm talking about.
On the other hand, seems to me you are right on the "just depends" thing because a single cut clearly is yet another type of animal altogether.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Passinwind
#120
jeff62 said:
If thousands and thousands of mass produced instruments produced by builders the world over isn’t enough proof for you what could we possibly say to change your mind? :roflmao:
Click to expand...
I have set neck 5 string, my first one and it’s terrible after the 13th fret my B string sounds like a rubber band strung on a tuna can. I’ll never buy another ever again. It’s a beautiful Bass but it sounds terrible.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back