Discussion in 'Basses [BG]' started by BASSnSAX, Jul 26, 2001.

  1. Neck-thru

    8 vote(s)
  2. Bolt-on

    34 vote(s)
  1. Could anybody fill me in on the pros and cons of neck-thru and bolt-on necs? I know there's a difference and I think I heard it somewhere but I don't remember. Thanx
  2. Christopher


    Apr 28, 2000
    New York, NY
    Tonally, bolt-ons tend to emphasize harmonics over fundamental frequencies, which leads many players to characterize them as "punchier" than neck throughs. From personal experience, I think that's right; they punch up the higher frequencies and generate a more ringing tone. Most of the bolt-ons I've tried beat neck throughs for slap tone.

    Conversely, neck throughs emphasize the fundamental over the harmonics. The fact that there is no neck joint also helps stabilize the neck and improve low B response. To me, neck throughs generate a more organic or "acoustic" tone than bolt-ons; I think they're well-suited for fretless basses.

    Re expense: bolt-ons reduce manufacturing costs for mass production; boutique luthiers probably don't save much by using them.
  3. JMX

    JMX Vorsprung durch Technik

    Sep 4, 2000
    Cologne, Germany
    There's also a third method: set-neck construction, where the neck is not bolted but glued to the body (Gibson Les Paul, Le Fay Pangton). The resulting sound is (probably) somwhere in between bolt-on and neck-thru.
  4. Aaron


    Jun 2, 2001
    Bellingham, WA
    you can also replace the neck with a bolt on.
  5. barroso


    Aug 16, 2000
    i agree with you guys. and the neck thru has more sustain. i love them both.