docbass Posted February 4, 2007 Report Share Posted February 4, 2007 I have a nice bolt-on neck I'd like to use as a set-neck in a current project. Can I simply glue it into the neck pocket as is, or should I add any wood to the heel to change/strengthen the heel-to-pocket configuration? I'll be routing the neck pocket myself, so it will be tight with zero gaps. Just wondering. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Primal Posted February 4, 2007 Report Share Posted February 4, 2007 The general consensus in the past as been that if you are going to build a set-neck guitar, use a set neck and don't bother with a bolt-on. By the time you add enough wood to strengthen the joint, you've negated any cosmetic reason to have a set neck and you would have just been better off to bolt it on instead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickguard Posted February 4, 2007 Report Share Posted February 4, 2007 Keep in mind that the bolton's heel has probably already been sealed with finish, so I'm not so sure you can get a good glue joint anyway. There are alternatives for using a bolt on neck but giving it a set-neck look and feel --especially using inserts, instead of a neck plate, which will allow you to use shorter screws, eliminate the bulky heel and end up with something pretty sleek-looking without changing the neck at all. Although I used to think I preferred setnecks, I've now come around to recognizing the superior advantages of bolt-on necks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
custom22 Posted February 4, 2007 Report Share Posted February 4, 2007 Ive often wondered about this and had a discussion with somebody who had researched it, and he had done it on some of guitars. He would shave down the heel, and apparently that was not simply for better access. I dont remember the details about it. If you are doing a singlecut, I would say go for it. For a doublecut, you arent much better off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VesQ Posted February 4, 2007 Report Share Posted February 4, 2007 Ive heard that Ritchie Blackmore used to glue his strat necks. But maybe it´s just another one of those guitar related myths. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MiKro Posted February 5, 2007 Report Share Posted February 5, 2007 You might try looking at this, I made a set neck from a bolt on to use on this guitar. first build Hope this helps some. mk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biliousfrog Posted February 5, 2007 Report Share Posted February 5, 2007 that's a nice conversion Mikro but how high is the fingerboard off the body?...looks like about 3/4"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickguard Posted February 5, 2007 Report Share Posted February 5, 2007 that's a nice conversion Mikro but how high is the fingerboard off the body?...looks like about 3/4"? I'm pretty sure he put a cap on there Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biliousfrog Posted February 5, 2007 Report Share Posted February 5, 2007 that's a nice conversion Mikro but how high is the fingerboard off the body?...looks like about 3/4"? I'm pretty sure he put a cap on there ....hmm....I see that now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supernova9 Posted February 5, 2007 Report Share Posted February 5, 2007 Although I used to think I preferred setnecks, I've now come around to recognizing the superior advantages of bolt-on necks. And what exactly makes a bolt-neck superior to a set-neck? I'm wondering where Gibson got it wrong all these years... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westhemann Posted February 5, 2007 Report Share Posted February 5, 2007 superior is the wrong word. the advantages of bolt on are obvious...being able to easily take the neck off to work on it and being able to finish the pieces seperately are great advantages. but i hate bolt on guitars.i can't stand the heel...even an aanj sucks compared to a proper neck through or set neck(notice i said proper) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soapbarstrat Posted February 5, 2007 Report Share Posted February 5, 2007 No good reason to apply glue into the Fender style neck heel/neck pocket area. If you want maximum contact between those two, then threaded inserts with machine bolts will crank it plenty tight, and keep it tight. In other words a glue joint is more likely to fail than a joint held with a few bolts. I'll tell you what I did to my main strat. First I did the inserts, then I waxed the neck, bolted it in there tight, then packed any gaps around the neck sides with a sawdust/epoxy mixture (I had also made sure the neck was positioned correctly for string alignment of the E strings). The neck can still be taken out. I could then experiment with shims in the pocket (because I like the bridge saddles cranked way high). Some say you can increase the guitar's sustain by putting a metal shim in the pocket (causes string vibration to bounce back to the strings a little more, I guess.) Anyway, what I'm getting at, is that using bolts instead of glue leaves more options open, and adding glue is only going to *possibly* help "tonalwise" where it fills airspace. The main flat areas of the pocket and heel don't have airspace when held tight with screws, unless sloppy work, or lazy shim methods have been used (less than full-sized pocket shim). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supernova9 Posted February 5, 2007 Report Share Posted February 5, 2007 The real question for me is: Why not just bolt on this neck? A properly constructed bolt-on will have no detrimental effect at all when compared to a set-neck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
docbass Posted February 5, 2007 Author Report Share Posted February 5, 2007 You might try looking at this, I made a set neck from a bolt on to use on this guitar. first build Hope this helps some. mk Thanks MK, you did exactly what I was thinking. It makes a nice converstion IMHO. You did a nice job on it. I was even thinking going neck through would be a way to do it as well. I'm building a neck through nbass ow with a Carvin neck through neck, but they only come with rosewood boards and I'd like a maple or ebony set or neck through neck in the future, which I might have to craft myself. Thanks again, I'll be printing off your posting foreference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
docbass Posted February 5, 2007 Author Report Share Posted February 5, 2007 The real question for me is: Why not just bolt on this neck? A properly constructed bolt-on will have no detrimental effect at all when compared to a set-neck. I'm building a Les Paul bass project and I wanted a set neck look. More cosmetic than anything else. Besides, I'd been wondering about this idea for some time and was curious to see what folks would think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickguard Posted February 5, 2007 Report Share Posted February 5, 2007 I'm building a Les Paul bass project and I wanted a set neck look. More cosmetic than anything else. Well, that is indeed an excellent reason-- looks have a lot to do with it after all. And the heel on my buddy's LP is every bit as massive as the heel on my strat, minus the extra cutaway. And I have an setneck Epi Sorrento --that heel is even bigger than the LP. On the other hand, the heel on my Melody Maker is very slim, so there's variation there. I like the look of the thinner-heel-and-inserts construction --using shorter screws, you can eliminate much of the bulk. I'd be tempted to try the insert/machine bolt thing too, once I can convince myself that I can get everything lined up perfectly straight As for advantages...well, like I said, I've come around to this thinking. For one thing, I like it that the neck can be removed and replaced, if ever need be. And that it can be shimmed if necessary, if something shifts over time. Finishing a bolt on is easier too. And with inserts, you can get pretty fancy with the shape of heel (I hate to bring him up, but I really like the heels on some of the Zachary models). But I really think I like the brighter, tighter sound you get with a bolt on neck-- hard to compare though, since most setnecks are 24.75 scale and most bolt-ons are 25.5 scale. Although I recognize that some will prefer the mellower tone of a set neck. Took me a while to convince myself that this really isn't a tone voodoo issue--there really is a difference in tone to the construction, or at least an influence of the construction on tone. After that, it's a question of personal taste. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guitar2005 Posted February 5, 2007 Report Share Posted February 5, 2007 But I really think I like the brighter, tighter sound you get with a set neck-- hard to compare though, since most setnecks are 24.75 scale and most bolt-ons are 25.5 scale. Scale length makes a bigger difference in tone than bolt-on vs set neck in my opinion and experience... Has anyone here ever thought of gluing a bolt on neck that is tighly mated to the guitar body and then used some dowels in lieu of bolts to further secure the neck? I always felt that it would make for a nice design, expecially with square dowels in a contrasting wood. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickguard Posted February 5, 2007 Report Share Posted February 5, 2007 But I really think I like the brighter, tighter sound you get with a set neck-- oops, that was a typo...supposed to read that I like the sound of a bolt-on...(fixed in the original post)...you're probably right about the scale having more influence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westhemann Posted February 5, 2007 Report Share Posted February 5, 2007 ever see a bolt IN neck?i like it pretty well,though i have never tried it. basically the tenon extends under the neck pickup cavity,and the screws are set further towards the bridge...so the heel can be as nonexistant as a good neck thru,but you still have the ability to dissasemble Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fryovanni Posted February 5, 2007 Report Share Posted February 5, 2007 I personally see huge advantages in a bolt on in terms of construction, future repairs, finishing, and just general flexability. I don't know if I would trade those features off just to glue a neck in place. Advantage in how the guitar sounds???? That is going to be really debatable, and the slightest of differences at best(audable? maybe, but not likely). Now if you want to design a smoother heel transition. Eliminate a joint in the heel area(neck thru), and give yourself all the flexability you can in design. If you want some extra flexability use a deep tenion that allows for more shaping and still has good glueing surface. Many acoustic builders are really taken by the idea of bolt on designs for the flexability. Not only in repair, but some are coming up with systems that are adjustable on the fly (adjusting action, as acoustic bridges are not flexable like electrics). I have heard very few debates as to loss of "tone" or sustain, but plenty of raving about flexability. It is also allowing for reductions in heel size because you don't have to develop as much side grain to make for a good glue joint. A bolted design offers some real nifty advantages. Peace,Rich Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickguard Posted February 5, 2007 Report Share Posted February 5, 2007 ever see a bolt IN neck?i like it pretty well,though i have never tried it. basically the tenon extends under the neck pickup cavity,and the screws are set further towards the bridge...so the heel can be as nonexistant as a good neck thru,but you still have the ability to dissasemble That's pretty much what I'm planning to do with the next guitar. Maybe it won't work for every pickup type though, since you have to cut away some of the heel...although the guitar I'm building might end up having only one pickup, so that part won't be an issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fookgub Posted February 5, 2007 Report Share Posted February 5, 2007 ever see a bolt IN neck?i like it pretty well,though i have never tried it. Like this? I think that's a pretty good solution. It could probably be made to work with a two pickup guitar, but it would take some effort. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MiKro Posted February 5, 2007 Report Share Posted February 5, 2007 (edited) The fretboard is about the same as a strat. Picture is fuzzy but I think you can see it. As far as the heel I would remove more next time around. It Feels good but could be better. LOL:))) MK Edited February 5, 2007 by MiKro Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westhemann Posted February 5, 2007 Report Share Posted February 5, 2007 Advantage in how the guitar sounds???? well...neck thru and set neck generally offer greater sustain...but on a neck thru with a maple neck and mahogany bodu vs the same as a bolt on,the neck thru will have a greater ratio of maple.. it just gives you more neck wood...different tonal charachteristics because of it. if both body and neck wood match(as in all mahogany),the difference will not be much... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fryovanni Posted February 5, 2007 Report Share Posted February 5, 2007 Advantage in how the guitar sounds???? well...neck thru and set neck generally offer greater sustain...but on a neck thru with a maple neck and mahogany bodu vs the same as a bolt on,the neck thru will have a greater ratio of maple.. it just gives you more neck wood...different tonal charachteristics because of it. if both body and neck wood match(as in all mahogany),the difference will not be much... I agree 100% on how much of each wood is present, and how that should effect overall sound. The greater sustain on neck-thru, set, bolt,deep set. That is harder to say. You could debate that depending on construction of the various joints, and also the design of the heal and whether or not you could gain or lose based on mass and stiffness you derive(all design variables). Some take a firm stance that a glue joint dampens vibration significantly, some say a mechanical joint can not offer as tight a coupling. All in all I find a well made joint will not cut sustain enough to be mentionable. I think the percievable difference between neck thru and other designs relates more to the type and amount of wood that is used. The notion of a radical difference has sprung up more from marketing(IMO). Peace,Rich P.S. My method of choice is neck thru(FWIW). Mainly because that is the method I am most used to. 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.