Why set-in neck solid body basses aren't popular?

[ggunn]

I agree it's not too clearly worded in English, but I think this is what Jens means:

The energy of the plucked string sets the system in motion. The two resonant domains to consider are the neck and the body. By having them mechanically separated with bolts, rather than being more or less contiguous, less string energy is absorbed into the neck/body complex, so more goes into the pickup(s), which only sense string vibration. Result: a more articulate and immediate representation of what you as the plucker put in.

It still sounds like pseudoscience to me.

 

[elros]

My Benavente bass is set-neck and it is very popular with me.

 

[Lobster11]

Count me among those who are still mystified about why bolt-ons generally have more "punch" than neck-throughs. Something that occurs to me is that my only neck-through bass, a Carvin, produces much less sound unamplified than, say, my Fender P. Maybe it's different strings, or something about Carvin's woods, or who knows what else, but it leads me to ask: Is this difference in unamplified sound generally true of neck-throughs vs. bolt-ons? If so, it might be relevant to answering the question about amplified "punch," no?