| Author |
 Topic  |
|
StratoSphere
Double Platinum Member
Canada
2232 Posts |
 Posted - 02/08/2007 : 04:40:50
|
i read that the set neck VS bolt on sustain thing is a HUGE misconception. apparantly it doesnt make a lickin difference on sustain. the only way that a bolt on wont sustain as long is if it actually doesnt fit the guitar correctly, or if its crooked for some reason.
i think bolt on is just seen as worse since most cheaper priced guitars have them. i have 2 of each, and i dont find even the slightest difference. to be honest i actually prefer bolt ons for the simple fact that i can swap necks and it makes painting/repairing easier.
opinions? |
|
|
stratman
Silver Member
Australia
283 Posts |
Posted - 02/08/2007 : 05:27:46
|
Hmmm... another interesting question StratoSphere!
I reckon it might if the bolt-on neck wasn't an absolute perfect fit. Just seems to make sense in a physics/transfer-of-energy way.
Although, I've never compared so I'm certainly not an authority!!!
Going on further with that, a neck-through design would probably have even more sustain?
The same argument would apply to floating vs non-floating/blocked or hardtail bridges I guess as well.
I would have thought the argument for or against the neck providing more sustain would therefore also have to apply to the bridges. And I've never heard that the floating trems provide as much sustain as the stop-tail or string through design.
It's always (from my reading, that is!) claimed that the blocked trem in a Strat provides more sustain. So I can't see why it wouldn't for any other kind of method/design either.
Hmmmm... as far as the neck though, I reckon it would be so, so small. Hardly measurable even.
Hmmmm... no, on second thoughts, probably no different... I mean a neck that's bolted on so tightly would make just as much contact as a glued in neck that it would probably be the same.
Aaarrgghhh!!! I'm not even sure of my own opinion now... 
Better sum up. Nup! No difference for a decent fitting bolt-on neck. But, yes for trems/bridges etc.
And the wood of the guitar itself would probably have just as much an impact on sustain. And the saddles... |
 |
|
|
starr36
Platinum Member
Canada
1172 Posts |
Posted - 02/08/2007 : 06:04:41
|
the bolt on neck was devised strictly to reduce cost and effort to build a guitar. that's why Fender guitars are 50% cheaper than giv=bsons. Gibsons need a LOT of craftsmanship, but strats can all be cut by computer out of slabs of wood.
about sustain? who knows. |
|
|
|
DeFrag
Moderator
USA
3409 Posts |
Posted - 02/08/2007 : 06:26:06
|
Bolt-on = inexpensive, least sustain
Set-neck = better quality, sustain increases
Neck-through = neck goes almost to the heel or butt of the guitar making for the most solid integration of both pieces, especially when alternating glue-laminates are involved with the neck & body.
Think of it as one solid system from the nut to the bridge. My Schecter also enjoys strings through the body to further marry string resonances to the main bulk of wood comprising the guitar. |
|
|
|
stratman
Silver Member
Australia
283 Posts |
Posted - 02/08/2007 : 06:41:49
|
quote:
Originally posted by DeFrag
Bolt-on = inexpensive, least sustain
Set-neck = better quality, sustain increases
Neck-through = neck goes almost to the heel or butt of the guitar making for the most solid integration of both pieces, especially when alternating glue-laminates are involved with the neck & body.
Think of it as one solid system from the nut to the bridge. My Schecter also enjoys strings through the body to further marry string resonances to the main bulk of wood comprising the guitar.
I'm not so sure about the "better quality" - just different method of fixing neck to body. I've seen some pretty crap-quality set neck guitars. But that's not the point of this discussion...
And wouldn't one piece of solid wood for a neck provide more sustain than a glued laminate design? If this theory is actually true the one piece neck is the most solid integration of wood rather than glued. I could be wrong! But it just doesn't make sense to me.
I'm not so convinced myself that set/glued/through necks will actually provide better sustain.
Yep, I've always read and heard it said everywhere (who hasn't! - it's what the manufacturers always say) But I'd like to see scientific results. Or at least hear actual reasons why.
I'd agree that the bridge would make quite a different as if it floats then the bridge would definitely vibrate and therefore the strings would lose energy... But does a bolt-on neck joint really move? I just can't see how it would unless the bolts were loose.
Any further comments? Or reasons WHY it makes a difference? |
|
|
|
stratman
Silver Member
Australia
283 Posts |
Posted - 02/08/2007 : 06:46:06
|
... I think I'm really starting to question this theory now that I think about it - from a purely physics point.
I've always thought that the set/glued/through necks would but I just can't see why now?!?!?
And I wasn't having a go in my last post, DeFrag! On re-reading it it may have come across as a little strong. I'm just seriously questioning what I've always believed myself now, that's all.
Cheers!  |
|
|
|
Goran
Double Platinum Member
Sweden
2203 Posts |
Posted - 02/08/2007 : 07:31:38
|
There are a lot of things doing a guitar sustain more or less, one of the most important is how fresh the strings are�.
My opinion on glued/bolted is that the differences are small if they are done properly. Two identical bolted guitars have different sustain-time, compare two teles of the same model/year and you�ll see.
And remember, sustain is not the most important thing on a guitar, I have a Gretsch arch top (with glued neck) that have little sustain compared to any of my teles, but it sure sounds good anyway.
|
|
|
|
stratman
Silver Member
Australia
283 Posts |
Posted - 02/08/2007 : 13:53:20
|
I'd have to agree about the strings too! Seems to make the biggest difference - and to the tone.
Hey Goran! 666 posts! Ooooh, how evil   |
|
|
|
Goran
Double Platinum Member
Sweden
2203 Posts |
Posted - 02/08/2007 : 14:26:29
|
You�re right Stratman, I correct it now, I will not be associated with heavy metal in any way� |
|
|
|
stratman
Silver Member
Australia
283 Posts |
Posted - 02/08/2007 : 14:28:50
|
That is very funny! Especially the way you corrected it by responding to my post!!!
I'm still chuckling away... |
|
|
|
Goran
Double Platinum Member
Sweden
2203 Posts |
Posted - 02/08/2007 : 14:35:27
|
| Well it�s not going to happen to me one more time on this forum, puuuuuuuuh�. |
|
|
|
Dr. Bob
Moderator
Australia
6593 Posts |
Posted - 02/08/2007 : 15:08:31
|
quote:
Originally posted by Goran
Well it�s not going to happen to me one more time on this forum, puuuuuuuuh�.
Hi Goran, Stratman & Guys
What about 6666 posts...
Regards Dr Bob |
|
|
|
DeFrag
Moderator
USA
3409 Posts |
Posted - 02/08/2007 : 16:08:38
|
Set neck guitars to me usually seem to be of better quality than bolt-ons. There are of course exceptions but generally I find the construction techniques required with a set-neck forces the manufacturer to be a little more accurate such as in the routing & mating of the materials. Overall, the entire guitar exudes a certain level of attention to detail as the fit & finish quality tends to increase in relation to the time the builder spends.
I see now that my statement of laminates was misleading & I didn't intend for the implication. I have little experience testing the tonality deltas with the construction techniques in question. But hell, I can bolt a neck on. Even if I spend an inordinate amount of time getting angles right, shaving perfectly matched surfaces, etc., from a physical standpoint alone consider the energy in the neck portion of the guitar. It must travel through metal bolts & no matter how many or how tight, imperfections in the interface between the neck & body is basically a lack of density & there will be frequency loss, a loss of tone if you will.
So, it stands to reason the best construction technique to propagate efficient tonal resonance throughout the entire guitar which will inevitably be carried through the pickups must be a one-piece guitar (material type notwithstanding. A neck-through design obviously mates more neck material to the main body of the guitar, thus more energy is transmitted.
I would most rather have a solidly built guitar with great tone made with love, care, & attention to detail. Since tone is so important, think of C.F. Martin's reputation. Sure there are comparable instruments out there but nothing is a Martin, which is why their held to be the pinnacle of standard. |
|
|
|
jack
Platinum Member
USA
1418 Posts |
Posted - 02/08/2007 : 22:50:34
|
Set-necks and Neck-Thru's are more expensive due to the manufacturing, and personally, I think for electric guitars it doesn't make much difference as sustain for electrics is subject to many variables such as wood, pickups, strings, amps, and other things. I also feel that something bolted on is stronger than something glued on. Neck-thru's might be different, but I cannot compare. The physics...I don't know...science and music don't mix well at times, but I have never been able to hear a noticeable difference anyways. I'm sure there are differences if you hooked up all sorts of diagnostic stuff, but if it sounds good who cares...
To add more confusion, I heard that fatter headstocks, like on vintage Fenders, do not add to sustain as many think... |
|
|
|
stratman
Silver Member
Australia
283 Posts |
Posted - 02/08/2007 : 23:49:38
|
quote:
Originally posted by DeFrag
Set neck guitars to me usually seem to be of better quality than bolt-ons. There are of course exceptions but generally I find the construction techniques required with a set-neck forces the manufacturer to be a little more accurate such as in the routing & mating of the materials. Overall, the entire guitar exudes a certain level of attention to detail as the fit & finish quality tends to increase in relation to the time the builder spends.
I see now that my statement of laminates was misleading & I didn't intend for the implication. I have little experience testing the tonality deltas with the construction techniques in question. But hell, I can bolt a neck on. Even if I spend an inordinate amount of time getting angles right, shaving perfectly matched surfaces, etc., from a physical standpoint alone consider the energy in the neck portion of the guitar. It must travel through metal bolts & no matter how many or how tight, imperfections in the interface between the neck & body is basically a lack of density & there will be frequency loss, a loss of tone if you will.
So, it stands to reason the best construction technique to propagate efficient tonal resonance throughout the entire guitar which will inevitably be carried through the pickups must be a one-piece guitar (material type notwithstanding. A neck-through design obviously mates more neck material to the main body of the guitar, thus more energy is transmitted.
I would most rather have a solidly built guitar with great tone made with love, care, & attention to detail. Since tone is so important, think of C.F. Martin's reputation. Sure there are comparable instruments out there but nothing is a Martin, which is why their held to be the pinnacle of standard.
Aw! Come one now DeFrag! Too many fancy words! I can't argue when you use words like that.
Seriously though, I think you raised some excellent points. And, after re-thinking, I tend to agree with them too. I still don't think you can outrightly say that a set/glued neck guitar is of "better quality" (made with more care etc) than a bolt on. Sorry, I re-read and see that you didn't. Yeah, I've had a Les Paul Standard before and compared to my Strat, the build quality of the Strat is better - on this occasion. Sometimes one would be better - just depends on the guitar, how it was actually made etc, IMHO. Usually though the set necks are better, I agree. And I think you could say this too as probably most of the bolt-on necks are made by the cheaper guitar manufacturers - as you've said it is cheaper to make them this way. However, I'd say the build quality of a set-neck PRS compared to a bolt-on neck PRS would be the same - assuming they're from the same production line etc i.e. a Custom 22 that's available in both versions. It would only be that the neck joint is different. Everything else (in theory) should be the same.
My Strat is a very fine example - I have yet to find one single flaw - in any area of the guitar. But I've seen a lot of crappy ones too.
Ok, enough of my Fender-defending...
And again, I have to agree with your comments about the Martin guitars. I'd say the neck construction technique in acoustics would play a much more significant role in the sustain and tone. And it's hard to argue about the build quality of a Martin!
Do you make the odd guitar yourself? It sounds like you have a Martin or two! Lucky bugger. 
quote:
but if it sounds good who cares...
- good point jack!
|
|
|
|
StratoSphere
Double Platinum Member
Canada
2232 Posts |
Posted - 02/09/2007 : 00:06:52
|
i think Defrag has a good point with the love and time that goes in to a set neck. but i dont necessarily think that this gives it better sustain. i think that expensive guitars and quality just share common ground. i also agree that set necks are more likely to be found on higher end guitars, which is where i think this whole better sustain arguement ever started. higher quality guitars generally have better sustain and are also generally set necks. see my point?
Defrag, about your comment on bolt ons and loss of tone/sustain.. i can see where you're coming from with the vibrations passing through the bolts and space inperfections. maybe this is what people are talking about when they compare the two. but does set neck really have a tighter hold than bolt on? just thinking about bolt on VS set neck you would actually think that four wood screws would have a tighter fit than glue, thus holding the woods tighter and filling in any gaps in the wood. keep in mind that these gaps would be micro in size.
something else that came to my mind. does sustain really matter? why is better sustain necessarily a good thing? in all my years of playing i dont think i ever sat there and strummed a chord and timed how long the notes rang saying "now THAT is good sustain!"
it could definately go both ways. i think we need a chart or a graph and tests with beakers full of colorful bubbling liquids.
|
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Set neck VS bolt on
