• 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.

physics behind bolt-on vs thru-neck

#81
Rob22315 said:
I'd have to disagree with you here and agree with grendel, this paper is more applicable to the matter at hand than any of the speculation in this thread so far. Here's a translator if that helps -

"artificial structural defects" - holes and joints

"reverberation time" - sustain

"studies of wood . . . show some frequency dependence already at a few Khz" - wood affect mids and highs

"sound source" - strings

"major resonant frequencies" - the opposite of this is dead spot

"impulse response" - an impulse essentially contains all frequencies so a hammer blow is a reasonable way to test the across-the-board frequency response of a bar

Figure 6 notes that the more mechanical defects in a wood bar, the MoE drops. I'd have to think a bit as to what this means for a guitar neck but figure 7 indicates only a modest impact on sustain.

The section in the middle of page 7 which talks about damping of waves in beams is particularly illuminating. "The most important form of damping . . . is material damping." and "energy can also dissipate at various boundaries of the beam" - boundaries here inclusive of neck/body joints and transtions between types of wood. This correlates with at one other statement in this thread (perhaps yours) that a change in wood type has an impact. Another - "radiative energy loss is . . . small compared to . . . bending mode excitation". I interpret this to say the overall structure of the neck (weight, thickness, length) have more to do with the response than the material or NT vs BO.

It helps to have an EE background where the mathematics of frequency response is drilled into the eager minds of the students.
Click to expand...
Actually, there are plenty of scientists on this board, many of whom have contributed more to the larger ongoing discussions here on this topic than this paper can contribute, however tangentially, but thanks for the smug self-righteousness anyway. From one scientist to another, might there be a bias in your "interpretation" perchance?
 
#82
Beej said:
Actually, there are plenty of scientists on this board, many of whom have contributed more to the larger ongoing discussions here on this topic than this paper can contribute, however tangentially, but thanks for the smug self-righteousness anyway. From one scientist to another, might there be a bias in your "interpretation" perchance?
Click to expand...

I'm sorry you interpret healthy debate as smug self-rightousness, there's a bit of pot/kettle in that. I've read lots of the dialog on TB although can't keep up with it all because of the volume but haven't seen anything more scientific or definitive from any of them. I like some of the stuff Dan Wilkerson's been doing but most of the lab-oriented folks have been quite critical about a lack of rigor in his tests. Tremendous entertainment value though.

With so many variables, I don't see a good way of truly proving anything. I get a sense here that the impact of the neck on tone is more in the hands of the luthier and what he chooses for a design than any particular subtlety of wood type. I'm also in the school that wood type matters little for tone in solid body basses.

FWIW, I'm the guy that gets called in when the 'experts' get it wrong so I rarely accept anything simply because an expert said it. More smugness I suppose given your sensitivities but healthy skepticism based on experience from where I sit. Make a compelling technical argument and I'm always willing to listen and have a healthy debate.
 
#86
No single bass player in history of music made their mark because of the nature of the neck joint on their instrument. Yet, when you hear Jaco, you know it's Jaco. When you hear Victor, you know it's Victor. When you hear Marcus, you know it's Marcus. Etc. At the end of the day, whatever is 'missing' frequency wise on the bass, is often fixed (or unfixed lol) with the EQ section on your amp. ;)

BTW, everyone knows the best sort of neck joint for metal is.... a "black" one. :D
 
#87
reverendrally said:
No single bass player in history of music made their mark because of the nature of the neck joint on their instrument. Yet, when you hear Jaco, you know it's Jaco. When you hear Victor, you know it's Victor. When you hear Marcus, you know it's Marcus. Etc. At the end of the day, whatever is 'missing' frequency wise on the bass, is often fixed (or unfixed lol) with the EQ section on your amp. ;)

BTW, everyone knows the best sort of neck joint for metal is.... a "black" one. :D
Click to expand...

Being the one NON scientist and NON luthier here, I think you summed it up perfectly.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back