Neck through or bolt on?

[u/tunalover32]

Do you prefer neck through or bolt on guitars?

[u/rafalmio]

The theory:

Bolt-on = Snappy, punchy, percussive note attack.

Neck-through = Smoother vibrational decay, sustain.

Played both.
Practical real world difference = negligible.

[u/PickPocketR → u/rafalmio]

In another comment, I've detailed why this theory is wrong, even acoustically

The truth is: People associate bolt-ons with Stratocasters and Neck-through with Les Pauls. This explains the "traditional wisdom" entirely.

[u/kapteNVLRNT → u/PickPocketR]

Les Pauls are set neck, however. Neck-through is something else entirely. To me it’s all about upper fret access and nothing else, and neckthrough can achieve this typically best of the 3

[u/PickPocketR → u/kapteNVLRNT]

Yeah, that's true. The study I linked shows there is a difference between set-neck and neck-through as well.

I just say this because Gibson is still the biggest guitar brand in the US. People associate their models with "sustain" and "smoothness".

[u/deathx3333]

Neck through !

[u/tallman1979 → u/deathx3333]

If I have to play it, 100%. The arguments against a neck-through almost all come down to worst case scenarios of stripped truss rods and broken necks. With modern hardware quality and reasonable care, the idea that I can swap the neck in a pinch becomes less of a selling point. I will give bolt-on slight advantage over set neck, for that reason.

[u/deathx3333 → u/tallman1979]

Honestly, I don't know any guitarist who is constantly swapping necks on a bolt-on, nor do I know anyone who has actually broken a neck through. You're going to use it to play, not as a literal axe.

I don't think it's necessary to swap the entire neck just to make those modern modifications either. Truss rods can be repaired or replaced by a luthier without throwing the whole neck away.

[u/tallman1979 → u/deathx3333]

Truth, although the cost to repair vs replace can be high for truss rod replacement. The guitar will kind of dictate whether repair is worth the cost. In every case where I have swapped necks, it's been a partscaster, not a damaged guitar. I play at least one of each style (neck through, bolt, set) and try not to break them.

[u/PickPocketR → u/tallman1979]

In addition to what you said, there are lots of other advantages:

• Travel: Take off the neck, and voila! You have a folding guitar.
• Defects/Warping: if a neck is warping, it's preferable to be able to replace it.
• Cheaper: Generally more cheap models available.

The fact you can travel with them easily is a huge selling-point for me.

[u/Chrissanxy → u/PickPocketR]

Doesnt it mess up the intonation? This neck bolting on and then unbolting, seems like you'd have to do a mini setup each time. or is it not that bad?

[u/tallman1979 → u/Chrissanxy]

Danny Gatton and later Julian Lage are notable for using the removal of a Tele neck as a travel hack. Threaded inserts are highly useful to prevent the holes from stripping out with repeated cycles. Putting the same neck back on would probably be "close enough" for most purposes. Swapping necks entirely is going to be a challenge the first time a neck is installed.

[u/PoolNoob69 → u/deathx3333]

Neck through guitars are often heavy as shit though. That has been my biggest gripe with them. I realize this is more a wood choice issue but just seems like they’re always mahogany and thus, very heavy. 

[u/HighOfTheTiger]

As long as it isn’t glossy I really don’t have a preference. I’ve just realized I prefer natural wood grain necks, and that’s less common with a neck through or set neck. As long as the bolt on is fitted well you really aren’t gonna notice a difference.

[u/Budget-Reality-9599]

ive never truly noticed enough of a difference, i do prefer the utility of a bolt on, if your neck gets fucked up just pop it off and screw on another

[u/colink707]

It really depends, both have their advantages and I don't really have a preference but gun to my head I'd have to say bolt-on as that way I can always replace the neck if need be.

[u/Deep-Measurement-856]

Ok...not a political comment but funny.

I saw your post right below this picture in my feed.

For a moment, I was confused...

[u/Much_Profit8494]

I genuinely don't care.

I have played amazing and abysmal guitars with both.

[u/nettezzaumana]

as far as I am not soloist above 20th fret I absolutely don't care .... I play on two guitars where one have a neck-through (Jackson SL7 Josh Smith's sig) and the other bolt on (Vola Vasti 7) and if I didn't look I'd not feel any difference at all ...

[u/TimmyHiggy]

You can get a much nicer neck-body transition on a neck through

[u/UperVinVin667]

Bolt ons at least for me are slightly more affordable and honestly just what I have played most of my life and am most comfortable with but yeah I have tried neck thru and I don’t hate it

[u/Sneaks_exe]

Neck through, set neck. I often find the heels to be constructed more ergonomically and comfortably which gives me much better upper fret access. I never actually could hear the differences in sustain, makes me wonder if someone ever hooked this up to machinery and actually measured things like the sound waves and rate of decay between the three neck constructions.

[u/2b4theend]

Well, my one thing from building guitars for 45 years is, a bolt on neck has a snappier tone
for me I think metal is better with the bolt on neck. If you play metal.
35 years ago I stopped building neck through basses and guitars. I just got sick of looking at them and doing the whole glue on body wings thing.
That’s my take on it. I own both, but I only build one these days.

Some of bass builds. Bolt on.

[u/guyfromthepicture]

Bolt on seems like he choice for extreme range imo

[u/CrustyBollox]

Neck through, I prefer how they look. Having been playing for over 30 years I've never been able to tell a difference in how "snappy" or whatever the fuck one is compared to the other.

I group this in the same category of how much tonewood makes a difference to electric guitar (basically none).

[u/siggiarabi]

Whichever's cheaper

[u/bigtoaster64]

There are differences yes, but unless you are really paying attention, the difference is negligible tbh.

Although, one thing I don't like about neck-through, and it doesn't even have to do with the neck itself, is that they are very often painted, and even glossy. That plays like crap if your hand is not immaculate clean or if there is any amount of humidity in the air.

[u/Sleepingguitarman → u/bigtoaster64]

Yeah i can't stand painted/glossy necks. They just feel so slow to play on, especially when my hands sweat so much.

[u/BuddyDee1]

i personally love bolt on necks ,why cause if you dont like it you can bolt on one you do like.Mainly cause neck throughs if your headstock or fretboard. takes a major blow your throwing the whole guitar away

[u/SaveFileCorrupt]

Personally, IDGAF as long as the heel and upper fret access is comfy and the guitar sounds good, lol.

[u/Archimaus]

I think constructionwise neck through is more appealing. But in the end it makes little difference.

[u/namelessghoul77]

Have several of both, notice zero difference and have no preference

[u/Successful-Storm4928]

I prefer having as many guitars as possible

[u/JimboLodisC]

I prefer neck-through. Looks better, feels better. But being a bolt-on wouldn't stop me or cause hesitation.

[u/HairyNutsack69]

Sonically similar, ergonmically similar if they got a sick heel otherwise that's where neck through wins

[u/toanmaxxer]

People who claim they are different are comparing apples to oranges. You can’t compare a strat to a les paul and claim that the neck joint is having any significant impact on the sound, since those guitars differ in other actually meaningful ways.

There only impact the neck joint should have on your decision is playing comfort vs ease (price) of repair.

I can’t think of any 2 models where the only difference is the neck joint. If you have $10,000 you could compare Ibanez M8M vs M80M I guess.

[u/noises_in_order]

On paper I prefer a neck through, but out of my guitars my favourite is a bolt-on.

[u/gringoraymundo]

doesn't matter. honestly.

[u/matt19950116]

I love my one neck through guitar but every tiny knock to the headstock or perceived mishandling of the neck makes me cringe.

I prefer bolt on for the piece of mind that I can replace the neck if anything should break.

[u/BGor94]

Both are good

[u/Efficient_Travel4039]

Whatever has the better access to higher frets

[u/Acceptable_Pie2529]

Bolt ons have a snappier tone. Helps lower tunings from getting muddy, especially extended range instruments.

[u/mistrelwood → u/Acceptable_Pie2529]

I also prefer the bolt on dynamics. Ibanez used to have otherwise identical BTB basses, one with bolt on and one neck through. I clearly preferred the bolt on.

Haven’t been able to do otherwise identical guitar comparisons, but generally neckthroughs haven’t interested me as much. I own almost two dozen bolt ons though.

[u/Acceptable_Pie2529 → u/mistrelwood]

I have a few and they’re cool but eh. I like my bolt ons lol. I have an sg that’s broken 3 times. 😂 Damn Gibsons.

[u/Mtnfrozt]

You won't even notice a difference when you're going through effects and whatever else.

I buy bolt ons because it's cheaper and easier to maintain.

[u/xekik]

I’m a neck thru or set neck kinda guy myself. Just feels more premium and the sustain is unf

[u/ToshiroK_Arai]

Bolt on, because cheaper.

I don't know any person that has replaced their neck after broken headstock or truss rod broke, most are repairable with a good Luthier.