Guitars: neck-thru vs bolt on?

[MarcusGHedwig]

Not too keen on neck-thrus tonally - mahogany set-neck in mahogany body for chunky rhythms, maple neck bolted on to alder for shred!

 

[vaiman]

i don't care much about neck-through vs bolt-on, but I find it kind of funny that there is so much talk about sustain, when the current trend in riffing is making the notes have the duration o a few miliseconds

LOL. I couldn't have put it better.
Some people are talking like they are banging out Gary Moore solos, but they play "da da de dum dum djent djent wurrrp"

 

[LeSedna]

I would love to hear two almost exactly identical guitars, one being neck through, the other one being bolt on. Because even the size weight and shape would affect the sound.

 

[Matt-Steele]

I am selling a neck-thru ESP guitar at the moment. I thought I would try it out as well as giving EMGs a shot. Needless to say, it doesn't stack up against my bolt-on guitars with passive Dimarzio's. Not even close.

 

[Ermz]

As others have said, with a neck-through the neck wood comprises most of the tone. Maple neck-through might as well be a maple bodied guitar. That means a mid-bright sound with potentially annoying mids and upper mids. It has a focused driving sound, not a heavy chugalug sound. The rigidity of a plank of wood causes a much snappier, less blooming, less "sag" like dynamic. Think of a vehicle with low mass, it is nimble and agile but doesn't carry much momentum. For soloing it may help; but for rhythms I'd opt for a high end bolt-on or set-neck to allow the warmer body tone-wood to come through more.

I'm not entirely sure whether I agree with this. If it were the case, my BTB705DX wouldn't be so abysmally bad when compared to a similarly built Spector, with the chief difference being alder wings in place of ash, and a paint/gloss finish in place of stain. The 705DX sounds like its tone is massively impacted by the ash wings - I would know if the maple neck-thru shone through, because I would hate it a lot less.

There is all this conflicting information around, and my personal experiences just don't seem consistent with anything I read. It makes the whole process so difficult.

 

[Ermz]

Pretty I've been corrected MANY times before that the SLS is actually a MAHOGANY neck not maple!

Ahh, I forget, thanks for the correction.

Though I must say, that's even more disappointing. The 'awesome' tracking guitar I talk about is virtually all mahogany: http://ibanez.wikia.com/wiki/SZ320MH . It's also less than a quarter of the price of the neck-thru in question... just absolutely baffling. I don't understand what could be happening to create such a substantial difference in tone.

 

[StefTD]

I actually own that guitar (just with another finish) and it's pretty great, no clue why because it was pretty cheap
and nothing special, but it just kills almost every guitar I owned...

 

[Ermz]

^ Awesome, isn't it? Just love how a budget guitar will come along once every era and nail all the right criteria almost out of sheer chance.

If you know of any for sale, please let me know.

 

[Gnash]

only on cheap guitars...I bet you wouldn't say that after you played my custom shop ESP MII....best guitar ever....and it's bolt on

Yeah, my bolt-on ESP KH-2 has an alder body; it has a very punchy, "in your face" tone for leads. I can't wait to get my neck-thru M-II though. Damn lefty.

 

[gabriel g.]

^ Awesome, isn't it? Just love how a budget guitar will come along once every era and nail all the right criteria almost out of sheer chance.

If you know of any for sale, please let me know.

Have this one but with another finish and an 85 and a mtm2 with an 81 both awsome budget instruments!!!

But I will bet my ass on, my custom shop (which will be finished in around one week) will blow them both

 

[Shinozoku]

I'll compare my experience with 3 guitars through the same amp:

Gibson early 2000's LP DC. Mahogany body, maple cap, mahogany set neck, rosewood board, Gibson 498T bridge pickup. It was huge, meaty, powerful, and very smooth.
Dean Mach V: Same specs as the gibby but different shape and no maple cap. Bridge pickup was a BKP Nailbomb. Very similar tone to the LP, but less sludgy. Much tighter and more focused.
Edwards E-AL128: 3pc Maple thru-body neck, ebony board, alder wings, Duncan JB pickup. I was surprised at how much more OOMPH and punchc this guitar had. I expected it to be brighter, but it is merely clearer, tighter, and has a LOT more power behind the palm mutes.

My observation showed that the thru-body neck imparted a more up-front bottom end, a tighter overall sound, and clearer tone.
Can't say about bolt-on.

 

[AdamWathan]

My bolt-ons have ALWAYS sounded better than the neck through guitars I've owned. Clearer and sharper. I had a neck through Jackson Rhoads from the early 90s that sounded like absolute shit. My SLSMGs sounded pretty good but still not as good as my Dinkys, and my Carvin neck through didn't sound all that great either. I don't see why I would ever buy a neck through guitar in the future.

 

[JeffTD]

You know how I feel about this one - all else held equal, neck-thru = tubby, rounded low midrange and slow, stunted response to playing. Bolt-on = very snappy, 'immediate' feeling, and clear. Set-neck is a nice middle ground, but avoids the tubbiness and keeps a lot of the response.

 

[Robert W]

There is all this conflicting information around, and my personal experiences just don't seem consistent with anything I read. It makes the whole process so difficult.

Personal experience trumps on-line advice any day. But from my personal experience, I find bolt-on necks sound better for rhythm work, but neck-thru off better access to the higher frets.

As it sounds as though the guitar you'll be ordering will be used more for rhythm work, I would think a bolt-on would make more sense.

 

[Fifth_Horseman]

I agree with the "bolt-on = more snappy, better for rhythm" folks.
And now I just realized, that indeed I have never tracked rhythms on any records (albums or demos) I played on with a neck-thru. It has been either Jackson Dinkys (of which the COW DK6 was my fav - all-mahogany bolt-on, ebony fretboard with a Duncan Distortion) or my old early 90's Jackson Soloist Archtop Pro. That one has a mahogany body with maple cap and maple set-neck, 24,75" scale, ebony fretboard and Duncan Distortion in the bridge.
I've wanted to retire that one for years because the neck was quite a bitch during the last album recording (had to be re-setup several times), but all the guitars I've bought since then for that purpose have been neck-thrus and none of them can achieve the same response as the Soloist. For my derp.

I have tracked many a lead with neck-thrus, though.

BTW, my most aggressive, pick-attack-snap-yo-nose-off guitar is a Jackson KVX10 King V. Alder body, maple bolt-on, Duncan Distortion bridge PU. It lacks the bottom end for recording, but it's my most inspiring guitar for writing riffs. It even still sounds snappy with year-old strings.

So, yeah, for rhythm I definitely suggest going for bolt-on construction, at least if set-neck is not an option.

 

[Keregioz]

I'm sure that I'm not as experienced as many of the people who posted in this thread but I do own both a set-neck and a neck through guitar and also a bolt on (although it's a cheapo ibanez), and in my opinion the differences are highly overrated. Good constraction, good quality wood and good pick ups are far more important. There's no chance a neck-through won't be a good rhythm guitar (like many people imply) if it's a quality instrument, and vice versa.

 

[oroinvictus]

I'm sure that I'm not as experienced as many of the people who posted in this thread but I do own both a set-neck and a neck through guitar and also a bolt on (although it's a cheapo ibanez), and in my opinion the differences are highly overrated. Good constraction, good quality wood and good pick ups are far more important. There's no chance a neck-through won't be a good rhythm guitar (like many people imply) if it's a quality instrument, and vice versa.

+1

 

[FrancescoFiligoi]

One thing about "why does it sound so bad" guitars: I often find it's just the electronics and components like pots, caps, even the jack output. Of course it has to have good and solid sounding pickups, and in the end the woods will imprint their character to it.

That being said, I own and have owned a fair amount of high end guitars and definitely agree on bolt-on being snappier and more responsive for tight riffing. Don't underestimate frets and fretboard, which I think have a MASSIVE importance.
Maple or ebony fb (preferrably ebony) would be my suggestion for your purpose, maple being awesome for leads but ebony retains a certain "authority" and awesome fundamental.
Stainless steel frets add some very musical highs and contribute to the string attack imho.

In the end, I'd recommend a oiled finish mahogany body (no finish = better resonance), bolt-on hard rock three piece maple neck (no figured maple, it's more subjective to weather change, and multiple-piece necks are WAY more stable), ebony fretboard, stainless steel frets. Preferrably just switch and volume, no tone knob as it's "something in between the circuit", like a pedal. Everything else to taste

 

[Ermz]

How does a '3-piece neck' differ from a standard? The Ibanez I dig has a 3-piece mahogany neck, but I'm not sure what the 3 pieces actually are.

Agreed on the oiled/stained finishes. I won't be marring the tone of my guitars with paint in the future (bass guitars are a different story, though).

 

[Melb_shredder]

How does a '3-piece neck' differ from a standard? The Ibanez I dig has a 3-piece mahogany neck, but I'm not sure what the 3 pieces actually are.

Agreed on the oiled/stained finishes. I won't be marring the tone of my guitars with paint in the future (bass guitars are a different story, though).

3 piece necks are made that way for neck stability. The center piece runs the opposite way to the grain of the outer 2 pieces. That way causing much more stability as the opposing grains will mean much less chance of warping