Is it true that... (neck question)

[MisterMagician]

That a bolt-on neck Bass provides a much more "snappy" or "punchy" tone than a set-neck or neck-through Bass?

I have been recently looking at neck-through Spector and Warwick Basses to get a good mix-raping tone, but would a bolt-on Bass provide to my needs better?

 

[PICK]

It can be true. But that would be a fairly generalised statement.

 

[Arpeggiator]

basses such as spectors and warwicks have a really cutting tone anyhow, Neck thru's sustain better i feel.

 

[MisterMagician]

basses such as spectors and warwicks have a really cutting tone anyhow, Neck thru's sustain better i feel.

How much more significant is the sustain?

 

[lomo]

If both basses are well-built, the differences in sustain and "punch" will be minimal at best. Close your eyes and I wager they disappear completely. Just my .02

 

[MisterMagician]

If both basses are well-built, the differences in sustain and "punch" will be minimal at best. Close your eyes and I wager they disappear completely. Just my .02

That could be the case.

The bolt-on versions of both Basses cost significantly less, plus they have unfinished/satin maple necks. Both of those reasons seem pretty attractive to me.

 

[humpy thumb]

Bolt ons typicallt have a slightly stronger mid range.
The majority of Warwick necks are either ovangkol or wenge,with maple being standard on a few models.

 

[PSPookie]

If both basses are well-built, the differences in sustain and "punch" will be minimal at best. Close your eyes and I wager they disappear completely. Just my .02

This

 

[MisterMagician]

Bolt ons typicallt have a slightly stronger mid range.
The majority of Warwick necks are either ovangkol or wenge,with maple being standard on a few models.

Well, I do like mids.

The Streamer $$'s I am looking at have maple necks.

 

[Zooberwerx]

Neck-thru vs. set-neck vs. bolt-on? Doesn't even make my list of criteria when buying a new instrument. Too many other elements have a more profound collective effect on the overall character of a given bass.

Riis

 

[David Jayne]

I'd have to agree with those who say it basically doesn't matter, given all the other variables.
Having said that, I've owned three neck-throughs and didn't like two of them. Then the third, which I do like. You never know.
I owned a set-neck and loved it.
My friend has two neck-throughs, one of which I like a lot, and one not so much.
I now have several bolt-ons and love them all.

 

[ezstep]

All things being equal, that would be true.

However, if you look at 15 Fender Jazz basses, all MIA, no two are alike. When you mix and match brands, you will NEVER find two alike...meaning all things are NOT equal.

Just play dozens, find one you like, and only then look at the headstock and the neck.

 

[PICK]

Agreed. There are far too many variables in basses. No two pieces of wood will sound exactly the same. Find a bass you like the sound of and buy it.

 

[MisterMagician]

When you mix and match brands, you will NEVER find two alike...meaning all things are NOT equal.

But I am talking about not only bolt-on Basses that belong to the same brand as their neck-through counterparts, they are in the same production line as well.

 

[PSPookie]

But I am talking about not only bolt-on Basses that belong to the same brand as their neck-through counterparts, they are in the same production line as well.

And you're still likely to see more variation caused by the differences in the individual pieces of wood than by the differences in neck construction.

 

[KJung]

And you're still likely to see more variation caused by the differences in the individual pieces of wood than by the differences in neck construction.

+1

 

[MisterMagician]

Just FYI...

I am asking this question, because the benefits of a bolt-on (less costly bass as well as an unfinished neck) are intriguing me.


I am just wondering if there would be any general tonal difference between the bolt-on and the neck-through that would deter me from going that route instead. Nothing life-changing.



I don't even know why I bothered asking it, seeing as how most of you appear to be agitated by my question.

 

[ubado]

IMO/IME ... I do believe it to be true, however there are so many other variables that come into play. 2-1, being able to tell the difference, with just your ears, will be difficult to narrow it down to just that. Add to that, the fact/idea, that even two basses made by the same company, with the same woods, etc., won't sound exactly the same.

Not to get all Billy Nye the Science Guy ... to answer the question; one must look at how the two types of basses are constructed.

... A Neck-through bass is basically one long neck, with the body comprised of "wings" added on. The vibrations that travel between the fretted string, and the Bridge; there is no dampened/deadening point on a Neck-through bass. Thus, giving the bass more sustain.

... A Bolt-on is comprised to two elements; the neck and the body. The vibrations that travel between the neck and the bridge, are dampened/deadened at the neck joint. Eventhough the neck is "bolted" onto the body, there are gaps between the neck and the body ... which dampens/deadens the vibrations ... giving the bass less sustain. The two elements, the neck and the body, both vibrate together, but a bit more seperate than that of a "neck-through" which also contributes to a "punchier" tone.

(Flame On )

With that said ... I must say, I prefer Bolt-on. For the most part, I do find them to have a bit less sustain (however I've owned some Bunker/PBC basses that have sustain for days! but they're engineered to be that way). Bolt-on's do seem to be a bit "punchier" with a bit more mid range. Also if something happens to the neck, depending on the bass, it'll be much easier to replace, and possibly a bit cheaper than a repair, if it can be repaired.

 

[Philbiker]

All things being equal, that would be true.

However, if you look at 15 Fender Jazz basses, all MIA, no two are alike. When you mix and match brands, you will NEVER find two alike...meaning all things are NOT equal.

Just play dozens, find one you like, and only then look at the headstock and the neck.

+100. I've read report that, all things being equal, the bolt-on design creates a more defined "snap" at the beginning of the waveform than neck-through/set neck exactly because of the construction; and conversely that set neck/neck-thru has a longer sustaining waveform.

I've also read people swear that this subtle difference noticibly carries through on their tone, particularly in a full band situation.

However, in practical reality it's quite possible that there are so many other variables that the difference may not really matter. I personally prefer bolt-on basses for the ability to fine-tune neck angle in set-up; but that wouldn't stop me from buying a neck-thru/set neck design that I fell in love with. I've never played a bass that I complained didn't have enough sustain, regardless of construction. I don't sit and hold a note for that long, ever.

 

[humpy thumb]

Well, I do like mids.

The Streamer $$'s I am looking at have maple necks.

The Streamer $$ is an excellent bass.The pickups & eq make for a pretty versatile instrument & the Streamer body is one of the comfiest around.It's also lighter than alot of other Warwick models.
Good luck with it mate.