Bolt-on vs. Set/Neck Through

[jack butler]

This isn't about what's better, but what's percieved to be better. I've only owned set neck or neck through guitars for last 15 years. I've always viewed bolt-on guitars as inferior. My opinion wasn't based on anything, other than to me it seemed easier to bolt a neck on guitar than build a set/neck through. So I thought i was basically a cheaper/faster way of building guitars. What always struck me as odd was why so many custom builders would build high dollar bolt-ons. Now after having experiencing some neck problems with a neck through guitar, I've ordered a Suhr Modern to see what a high end bolt-on is all about. It's a custom order so it has the options I want(Ed Yoon has been unbelievably accommodating), but it's a bolt-on so I'm apprehensive about it. I got a Brian Moore C90 about 2 months ago, but it's 22 frets and has a fairly big neck joint. The C90 is ok, but I'm really hoping the Suhr neck joint is less obtrusive(I never played one). I'm hoping the Suhr will completly chage my mind about bolt-ons, we'll see. Anyone else have this type of experience?

 

[thiswaythatway]

Set/neck Through. I won't bother to argue how or why, but MOST of the best guitars i have ever heard were set or neck through.

But, i think the wood types and pickups make more of a difference.

 

[headlessdeadguy]

I have owned all three and I prefer set necks and bolt ons over a neck through. They seem to sound better to me. The neck throughs that I have played,do play really friggin sweet though.

 

[Random Hero]

Never had a problem with either the set necks or the bolt-ons I've owned. Never owned a neck-thru but I have played a couple. But yeah, I'm with Danyeo, wood type and pickups are a bigger difference maker IMO.

 

[mrp5150]

I prefer bolt on guitars. I like actually feeling the wood on the neck, not glossy paint. I like set neck guitars, but I'm not a fan of neck through. 99% of the time the neck wood is maple, so 1/3 of the body has to be maple, which I don't like. I don't play a lot on the higher frets either, so amazing upper fret access doesn't matter to me.

 

[Mudder]

It depends on what school of thought you come from. Set neck/through neck if you're looking for max sustain and a more accessible neck pocket. Bolt on if you're interested in spanky tones and ease of repair/replacement.

Personally I've owned way more bolt ons, but currently my number 1 is a set neck. Incidentally, the quickest necks I've played were bolt on, the best pocket was a neck through Carvin.

 

[Random Hero]

I prefer bolt on guitars. I like actually feeling the wood on the neck, not glossy paint. I like set neck guitars, but I'm not a fan of neck through. 99% of the time the neck wood is maple, so 1/3 of the body has to be maple, which I don't like. I don't play a lot on the higher frets either, so amazing upper fret access doesn't matter to me.

Yeah, I much, much prefer unfinished necks to thick glossy finishes.

 

[jack butler]

Sustain of the bolt on I have is fine, the neck pocket kinda sucks but it's only 22 frets so it maybe beter on 24 frets. Repair/replacement has become an issue for me now. The Suhr has a lifetime warranty on the neck, which is one of the reasons I went with them. I think if I never had a problem with neck through I would have never considered a bolt on. But since I've had problems with neck throughs and Ebony fret boards I'm second guessing both.

It depends on what school of thought you come from. Set neck/through neck if you're looking for max sustain and a more accessible neck pocket. Bolt on if you're interested in spanky tones and ease of repair/replacement.

Personally I've owned way more bolt ons, but currently my number 1 is a set neck. Incidentally, the quickest necks I've played were bolt on, the best pocket was a neck through Carvin.

 

[Digital Jams]

About upper fret access, it is not how the neck is mated to the body but the body itself. I have a Hamer Diablo that I can get up to spead on up to the 24th fret but have issues with a normal strat/charvel body. IT has nothing to do with the body, at least with strats. The Diable does have a sculped heel though and the old RG series had the angled heel.


Bolt on has more snap than neck through and more hair with hot pups while the neck through is smoother.

Set neck IMO has to be a long tenon to transfer maximum energy throughout the body. There is no extra time in today's cnc world to create a setneck joint, gibson makes 100,000s of them a year so the bolt being cheap is not accurate. Look at lots of Fenders and how loose the pocket is, a proper pocket is one reason to pay extra for a well crafted guitar.

Suhrs today are prced pretty good when compared to the big makers anyways, esp the pro series.

 

[Hard&Heavy]

Well put...

About upper fret access, it is not how the neck is mated to the body but the body itself. I have a Hamer Diablo that I can get up to spead on up to the 24th fret but have issues with a normal strat/charvel body. IT has nothing to do with the body, at least with strats. The Diable does have a sculped heel though and the old RG series had the angled heel.


Bolt on has more snap than neck through and more hair with hot pups while the neck through is smoother.

Set neck IMO has to be a long tenon to transfer maximum energy throughout the body. There is no extra time in today's cnc world to create a setneck joint, gibson makes 100,000s of them a year so the bolt being cheap is not accurate. Look at lots of Fenders and how loose the pocket is, a proper pocket is one reason to pay extra for a well crafted guitar.

Suhrs today are prced pretty good when compared to the big makers anyways, esp the pro series.

 

[nbarts]

My neck through esp has a definite very different tone compared to anything else I've played. Before it I couldn't get along with anything other than LPs, but this thing has its own character & plays like no other guitar. I don't have anything against bolt-on necks, but I've never played a guitar with one that would impress me tonally.