NT vs Bolt on

[Tommy Sparks]

I have both and it doesn't really matter to me. NT is definitely cool looking from the back.
I have NT, set and bolt on skinny string guitars and again no difference to me.

 

[Arthur U. Poon]

I really have no preference. For the past few years, I've been gigging with my NT Spectors and I've always favored their ergonomics, but I also own some really nice BOs that sound incredible.

 

[Dirtnap]

I prefer NT. Bolt-on just seems like something of a cost-cutting measure. Likewise for pickguards. However, my current number one (mexican fender P-bass) has both, and I don't let it bother me. I do appreciate the modularity of the bolt-on design.

Edit to add: I also don't like the thick neck joint and the extra metal plate and bolts. I'm no engineer, but it seems like it would weigh more.

 

[themickster]

In tests comparing bolt-on necks, set necks , and through neck construction, it was shown there were no intrinsic advantages to choosing one method of attachment over the other in terms of tone, sustain, or stability. The conclusion was that the performance of a properly constructed neck was not dependent on the way it was attached to the body.

The biggest single disadvantage of neck thru construction is that the instrument is effectively unrepairable if the neck ever breaks. Set necks are difficult to but still possible replace. And bolt on necks are extremely easy to swap out.

I own basses with all three types of neck. And based on my own experiences I can't say any one type is better in terms of sound or balance than the other. It's been argued (and I used to believe) that there's an audible difference in the tone you get from a thru neck bass. But there have been several blind tests conducted that clearly demonstrated general listeners and musicians couldn't reliably distinguish the difference between a neck thru and bolt on instrument.

Bottom line: it doesn't matter how you attach the neck - provided you do it properly.

Luthiers can repair Les Paul headstocks without having to take off the neck. A broken NT shouldn't be hard for them.

 

[themickster]

I don't know if I'm talking squit, but do NTs need a longer bit of fault-free wood? Speed of building might come into it. A neck can be on one machine and the body on another at the same time. Only wondering, as a layman.

 

[Steve Fox]

I chose bolt on because all my basses are bolt on. It wasn't by design. Just kinda happened that way. Lol.

Same. I've had neck through's, set necks, bolts. Almost 30ish years playing and honestly it has never been that much of a factor to me.

Except set necks, too much heel for my liking.

 

[Jefenator]

A lawyer once advised me: "The devil is in the details."
IME nuances in the material & construction trump the overall design type.
NT does make me a bit anxious, being all-in on a neck that might warp. (Which I have seen happen.) But I do have a couple NTs that sing very sweetly. (And it's not like you're any less screwed when a rare & valuable bolt-on neck gets compromised.)
Shopping on a budget, I would generally prefer to put my dollars toward a higher caliber bolt-on than splurge on the thru-neck & skimp on woods & electronics.

 

[brianrost]

I've never had the chance to compare NT vs. BO with what otherwise would be the same bass, like Warwick Thumbs.

For NT I've owned a B.C. Rich, two Pedullas, and two Steinbergers. Every other bass I've owned was BO. Never owned a set neck bass (Gibson and Guild come to mind), only a guitar.

Both are fine with me and add set necks to the list as well. Some of the claims about NT having more fundamental and better sustain may be true, but the main difference for me is that neck through usually gives much better access to the highest frets.

 

[Pings Bass]

Whatever floats your boat. Neck-through was seen as more premium in my younger years, and there's a certain tactile and visual beauty to it. I finally got one in my dotage, and it's sleek and lovely.

As for tone, much like wood species, it matters very little (if at all). Nobody in an audience at a show would perceive a difference, but if you think you can hear it, play the kind you like

 

[semiprohooker]

I don't know about that, ESP LTD and epiphone make plenty of cheap neck throughs, and MTD, Dingwall, Wal make plenty of very pricy bolt-on basses.
I don't buy that generalization.

Just because something is expensive, doesn't mean it was expensive to make. It means people are willing to pay expensive prices for them.

Now if something is cheap, on the other hand, it had to be cheap to make.

I know of several sub $200 bolt ons, I don't know of any sub $200 neck through (they might exist though).

 

[Mike Sorr]

I like Fender style bolt-ons because you can always find a replacement.

 

[Williethump]

Which is better, cumin or paprika?

Seriously, this is a worn-out generalization that ignores all of the complexities of instrument design and manufacture. Every instrument is the sum total of all of its elements. The only reliable differentiator is the ease of neck removal and replacement.

I eat a lot of cumin but I put paprika on almost everything.
I've dismantled lots of basses and every single one used wood screws to hold neck to body. Did or does any bass ever use bolts? Or is that just a traditional use of the word as jargon, like on a boat calling a rope a 'line'?

 

[B-Mac]

I went back 10 pages on the forum and couldn't find a NT vs bolt-on thread. Nor is there one in the sticky section. I didn't really find anything with the search here either. What do you think?
Advantages or disadvantages. Personal preference. Favorite?

68 Bolt-On
13 Neck-thru
46 Set

It's been my observation that NT's or at least my NT's don't have any dead spots or somewhat dead spots. YMMV

 

[Williethump]

Aside from being able to swap necks easily you can also shim them to get some extra adjustment. VERY helpful especially when dealing with old cheap basses and warping necks or bridges that just cant go low enough. If you build a neck through then that neck had better be solid as a rock with graphite or carbon fiber because if it warps or twists you're literally screwed unless you pull away the body wings and get another neck and center of body piece. Yes sustain from a set neck through body is pretty cool but thats probably the only pro. Everything else is a con. Also keep in mind they have to build neck through a bit thicker than bolt on because they know that neck has to be extra stable or its going to be real trouble later on.

You mean figuratively screwed. If cheap NT necks got you 'literally screwed' I'd be spending all my money at pawn shops and flea markets on warped basses.

 

[FRoss6788]

68 Bolt-On
13 Neck-thru
46 Set

It's been my observation that NT's or at least my NT's don't have any dead spots or somewhat dead spots. YMMV[/QUOTE

I've had around 50 basses in the past, not all at once, and the worst ever with regards to dead spots was a 2012 Rick 4003. Horrible.

The bass with none that I could find, b-o Thumb. Too bad the ergos are horrible.

 

[wysiwyg248]

As I said, I like them both, but if I had to PICK ONE, I prefer NT and 24 frets.

Amen to your comment.

 

[Auspuff]

I went back 10 pages on the forum and couldn't find a NT vs bolt-on thread. Nor is there one in the sticky section. I didn't really find anything with the search here either. What do you think?
Advantages or disadvantages. Personal preference. Favorite?

I have four B-O's, three Fenders, one Rick, and two N-T, both 1980's vintage, Carvins.

While the sustain on the B-O's is present, and fades rather quickly, the sustain on the N-T's lasts until next week. There is no comparison. Plus, my N-T's DO NOT have any dead-spots.

Additionally, fears of un-repairability of a N-T are pure nonsense. A properly built specimen (with high quality wood) is built like a tank, so the fear of neck issues is negligible, at best. Example, I have a 1981 Carvin LB50, and it has never needed a truss rod adjustment, and the Ebony fretboard is still perfect. Yes, it depends who builds it.

And, yes, Upright will always be the foundation of all that is, Bass. Amen.

 

[B-Mac]

It's been my observation that NT's or at least my NT's don't have any dead spots or somewhat dead spots. YMMV

I've had around 50 basses in the past, not all at once, and the worst ever with regards to dead spots was a 2012 Rick 4003. Horrible.

The bass with none that I could find, b-o Thumb. Too bad the ergos are horrible.

Interesting.
Not a Dead Spot on my 2009

 

[FRoss6788]

Interesting.
Not a Dead Spot on my 2009
View attachment 5155402

That could be my Ric's twin.

Ya, I was very bummed, The D string was unusable from the 6th to 11th fret. Really wanted to love that bass...

 

[Muttleybass]

I always find that each individual bass has it's own unique personality. I've had neck throughs ('74 Ric 4003, Steinberger XL-2) that I've loved, and many bolt ons (MM Sterling, my current Sandberg) that are amazing.

To me, and individual bass must be judged on it's own merits. Bolt on vs Neck Thru is not a deciding factor for me.