Brad Heller Posted September 15, 2006 Report Share Posted September 15, 2006 So, I'm planning out my first build...!!! I'm wondering if I should go with bolt on or set neck. I'm planning on buying a neck as I havn't done any real wood work in a few years and I don't want to screw that part up. I'm really leaning towards set, however it seems bolt ons are easier to come by... Any suggestions? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desopolis Posted September 15, 2006 Report Share Posted September 15, 2006 my first neck will be a bolt on.. I hear alot of tone issues between the wood/glue thing.. plus if I jack it up I can just undo it. personaly, as far as woodworking goes, I see it to be easyer with a bolt on.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al heeley Posted September 15, 2006 Report Share Posted September 15, 2006 ^agree, and much easier to adjust to get a good action. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supernova9 Posted September 15, 2006 Report Share Posted September 15, 2006 my first neck will be a bolt on.. I hear alot of tone issues between the wood/glue thing.. Yes, because Les Pauls sound worse than Strats or Teles. That is a ridiculous statement, and something you should not be telling a new poster. Go away, build two identical guitars in all respects apart from neck joint, and then tell us if you can tell a difference, or if one sounds noticeably different tonewise or sustain wise from the other. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marksound Posted September 15, 2006 Report Share Posted September 15, 2006 my first neck will be a bolt on.. I hear alot of tone issues between the wood/glue thing.. I love irony. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Digideus Posted September 15, 2006 Report Share Posted September 15, 2006 I agree with Mr Heeley. For simplicity, do the bolt on and when youre happy with your knowledge of necks, neck tilt, scales etc.. then tackle a set neck or a neck thru. you *COULD* just jump in a do a neck thru, but unless youre confident, making a mistake could turn it into expensive scrap. Not that youre never going to make mistakes.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desopolis Posted September 15, 2006 Report Share Posted September 15, 2006 my first neck will be a bolt on.. I hear alot of tone issues between the wood/glue thing.. Yes, because Les Pauls sound worse than Strats or Teles. That is a ridiculous statement, and something you should not be telling a new poster. Go away, build two identical guitars in all respects apart from neck joint, and then tell us if you can tell a difference, or if one sounds noticeably different tonewise or sustain wise from the other. no need to get testy After sitting in the search for a while I was mistaken, BUT it doesnt overshadow the fact that allthough your correct, there is/was still information out there that glue effects the the sound. I never said it was fact, I said I hear. And its true. there are at least 10 threads on the issue from the threads I found, it seams only if you use to much glue and the pocket is made poorly. Second, if somthing happens its much more dificult to remove and repair. argument there? Digideus, they are talking about a glue in vs a bolt in neck, not a through neck.. witch I would'nt atempt as my first build.. wood is expensive enough eek.. and lastly, I have a $300 squire strat, I have no Idea what the body is made of, maple/rosewood neck a pretty damn good finish and Ive spent some time on it. ALL new electronics, SD hotrails, duckbuckers, and a vintage single coil. New tuners, and I use DR strings. PERSONALY, myself and my friends agree that it sound better then my friends LP custom AND a buddies through neck. its all relitive to whos listening. the sustain is longer and I didnt even have to crank it to 11. lighten up! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deadmike Posted September 15, 2006 Report Share Posted September 15, 2006 necks dont last forever, a bolt is easy replaced or repaired off the guitar. personally i just think neck throughs are an auwful lot more hassel, but i admit the sandwhich guitars that show the differences in wood from headstock to bottom look great. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supernova9 Posted September 15, 2006 Report Share Posted September 15, 2006 my first neck will be a bolt on.. I hear alot of tone issues between the wood/glue thing.. Yes, because Les Pauls sound worse than Strats or Teles. That is a ridiculous statement, and something you should not be telling a new poster. Go away, build two identical guitars in all respects apart from neck joint, and then tell us if you can tell a difference, or if one sounds noticeably different tonewise or sustain wise from the other. no need to get testy After sitting in the search for a while I was mistaken, BUT it doesnt overshadow the fact that allthough your correct, there is/was still information out there that glue effects the the sound. I never said it was fact, I said I hear. And its true. there are at least 10 threads on the issue from the threads I found, it seams only if you use to much glue and the pocket is made poorly. Second, if somthing happens its much more dificult to remove and repair. argument there? Digideus, they are talking about a glue in vs a bolt in neck, not a through neck.. witch I would'nt atempt as my first build.. wood is expensive enough eek.. and lastly, I have a $300 squire strat, I have no Idea what the body is made of, maple/rosewood neck a pretty damn good finish and Ive spent some time on it. ALL new electronics, SD hotrails, duckbuckers, and a vintage single coil. New tuners, and I use DR strings. PERSONALY, myself and my friends agree that it sound better then my friends LP custom AND a buddies through neck. its all relitive to whos listening. the sustain is longer and I didnt even have to crank it to 11. lighten up! I'm not getting testy, that clarification you've given there is great. But these are new builders we're talking about here, coming to the board, I just don't want to proliferate the ridiculous notions that appear round here all too often that there are so many absolutes in guitar making. Can you see from your post how people would take that to be the point you were putting across? I'm tired of the "tone voodoo" that often gets thrown around - there was a thread on here a while back where people were actually doing experiments to test various theories on guitars - that I like, random statements (and I'm not targetting you here, there are thousands of examples on this board alone) such as "nitro has better tone than poly" are just ludicrous and annoying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desopolis Posted September 15, 2006 Report Share Posted September 15, 2006 I agree.. im still a newb.. DOH! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
low end fuzz Posted September 15, 2006 Report Share Posted September 15, 2006 if you think your good enough to make a set neck (ie, snug fit, no gaps, perfect on the first shot) id suggest doing that , but instead of gluing it, screw in 4 shallow screws; then you have the benifit of fixing any errors, a set neck snug, and the security of screws without forcefully pulling your neck back into your pocket, which allows for a more un compressed sound; Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supernova9 Posted September 15, 2006 Report Share Posted September 15, 2006 (edited) then you have the benifit of fixing any errors, a set neck snug, and the security of screws without forcefully pulling your neck back into your pocket, which allows for a more un compressed sound; Again, what?? Ok, in more detail, surely a 'compressed' sound, is one that has more even volume, even out attacks and decay to produce a more stable sound. How on earth is that produced by the presence or absence of screws, or by doing both a bolt and set neck design? Edited September 15, 2006 by Supernova9 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travismoore Posted September 15, 2006 Report Share Posted September 15, 2006 (edited) I know i am only new but i think a benifit of the set neck over the bolt-on is the rounding you can do so it less in your was on upper frets Edited September 15, 2006 by travismoore Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prostheta Posted September 15, 2006 Report Share Posted September 15, 2006 I prefer set necks as opposed to thru's or bolt-ons. There are always arguments either side of my fence, so get off my lawn and stop peering through next door's bushes. Bugger off! Anyway. I've heard a lot of people say that bolt-ons can be more difficult to make then sets or thrus, but again - everyone will have different mileage. I'll sure make my own opinion up for people to disagree on when I do the bolt-on Tele, set neck and a thru bass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattia Posted September 16, 2006 Report Share Posted September 16, 2006 I'm a set neck guy m'self, from an aesthetic, comfort, sound POV, although I do like some bolt-on neck instruments, and I do build them. As for 'glue affects tone', well, maybe. But only if you're gluing things wrong. Seriously, it's a complete and utter non-issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaycee Posted September 16, 2006 Report Share Posted September 16, 2006 (edited) Hi Brad and welcome to the forum. Firstly forget about which sounds better set necks or bolt on's. Thats not the issue. In my opinion I have been working with wood for many years the more cuts you have to do the harder it is. A bolt on neck is the easier of the two. Edited September 16, 2006 by jaycee Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nitefly SA Posted September 16, 2006 Report Share Posted September 16, 2006 Done correctly, a bolt on has just as much sustain, tone, other key voodoo words as a set neck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prostheta Posted September 16, 2006 Report Share Posted September 16, 2006 Oh no!! You reopened the can of worms again Nitefly... I'm not going to dwell either side of the fence (or sit on it) for this age old argument, so I'll kick the fence over and say that you're all wrong, deluded and spending too much time talking about them rather than playing or making them. If you like having a plate on the back of the heel, cool. If you like sculpted heels, cool. If you like the look of laminates going through the entire neck and body, cool cool. Kick off yer yackin' shoes, put yer boots on go make some metal!! I just realised that my RBX-775 bass is a bolt-on, but it minces hell out of most "other neck build" basses!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
custom22 Posted September 16, 2006 Report Share Posted September 16, 2006 if you think your good enough to make a set neck (ie, snug fit, no gaps, perfect on the first shot) id suggest doing that , but instead of gluing it, screw in 4 shallow screws; then you have the benifit of fixing any errors, a set neck snug, and the security of screws without forcefully pulling your neck back into your pocket, which allows for a more un compressed sound; For this to be effective there needs to be absolutely zero space between, that could normally be "slopped" with glue. You will find that bolt on necks are, in fact, easier to come by. I prefer set necks because of the access, and it has been my experience that they have less and more uniform decay. My theory is that a guitar must be solid all the way through, but thats another dicsussion... You may want to try a neck through, as they can be easier than a bolt on. Check out carvin for neckthru types. Good luck with your project! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.