# I Think I Hate Neck Thru Guitars



## Rawkmann (Nov 7, 2015)

Been playing guitar for about 20 years now, and went through the neck thru or nothing phase, but after probably owning 40 or so guitars through the years it seems like I only ever have fond memories of my bolt-ons. Every time I play a neck thru it always feels like something is missing from the sound and the guitar overall just doesn't feel right. A few months ago I got the urge to give neck thru another try so I ordered a custom Carvin DC600. Nope. Just didn't do anything for me. I don't want to start a whole neck thru vs. bolt on type thing because we all know the pros/cons and many of my favorite players use neck thru guitars exclusively, but I wanted to hear from people who maybe came to a similar conclusion either way.


----------



## possumkiller (Nov 7, 2015)

I've been playing 18 years and I always hated the cheapo bolt on, basswood, maple, rosewood, passive equipped guitars I started out with. I thought a guitar was .... if it wasn't neck through, alder/mahogany, ebony with 24 frets original Floyd and EMGs. I've went through almost 60 guitars costing from 175$ to $4400. I always thought my ....ty tone was from .... equipment. What I've learned is that a good set up can make almost any guitar play badass. Also for a better tone you don't have to spend 300$ on a set of pickups. I got the best tight metal tone I've ever played with a stock RG1527 through a Line 6 Spider IV combo. Just back off the gain. Just because it goes to 10 doesn't mean it sounds the best maxed out. The more you back off the gain the more tight and less muddy it gets. You just have to practice more because you can't hide mistakes behind a wall of super saturated gain anymore.


----------



## Rawkmann (Nov 7, 2015)

possumkiller said:


> I've been playing 18 years and I always hated the cheapo bolt on, basswood, maple, rosewood, passive equipped guitars I started out with. I thought a guitar was .... if it wasn't neck through, alder/mahogany, ebony with 24 frets original Floyd and EMGs. I've went through almost 60 guitars costing from 175$ to $4400. I always thought my ....ty tone was from .... equipment. What I've learned is that a good set up can make almost any guitar play badass. Also for a better tone you don't have to spend 300$ on a set of pickups. I got the best tight metal tone I've ever played with a stock RG1527 through a Line 6 Spider IV combo. Just back off the gain. Just because it goes to 10 doesn't mean it sounds the best maxed out. The more you back off the gain the more tight and less muddy it gets. You just have to practice more because you can't hide mistakes behind a wall of super saturated gain anymore.



I agree with a lot of what You say for sure. I guess for me its not that I think a neck thru guitar isn't good or won't get the job done, its just a personal bias on my part that I've cultivated over the years. A POS guitar is a POS regardless of how it was made.


----------



## Metal Mortician (Nov 7, 2015)

There are > $4k guitars out there that are nothing more than polished turds. The old saying of "tone is in the hands" is quite true. We just need to find some things that fit us and be happy with what we have. Some of the best players I know have had the same gear for almost two decades but they still practice, record, and look for inspiration in other places than Guitar Center. 

To match OPs point, my favorite guitar is an RG 565 that I got at a pawn shop for $150 and I wasn't even looking for a guitar that day. It was beat to hell and needed a lot of elbow grease to get back into playing shape but that experience made me bond with that guitar more than. Looking through online ads for new stuff.


----------



## Hollowway (Nov 7, 2015)

For me the issue isn't whether the guitar is bolt on, set, or neck thru. It's how big the heel is. I hate bulky heels wherever they turn up.


----------



## Chokey Chicken (Nov 7, 2015)

I have no preference so long is it plays well. No tonal difference to my ears. That said, I've played dozens of each neck type that felt aweful and I didn't jive with. I've also played dozens that are the opposite.

My three absolute favorite guitars to play right now are an Ibanez MTM20 (bolt on), Gibson explorer (set), and a Kiesel Vader (through.) They all feel, sound, and look great. I'd never be able to swear by one neck type since that excludes lots of great axes.


----------



## pastanator (Nov 7, 2015)

I've never been particularly biased against any neck construction, but I will say neck through is a preference. Bolt on's just always seemed like the cheap thing to do. I understand that's not necessarily the case but like idk I'm not gonna go out and spend a ton of money on a bolt on guitar. Nothing tonal about it really, just in my head neck through is best.


----------



## bzhan1 (Nov 7, 2015)

The thing with neck thrus is you can't adjust string height without messing up the action. You can shim bolt on's and get the perfect action and string height. Also any neck/fret problems on a neck thru the whole guitar is done. No benefit of a neck thru compared to a low heel bolt on.


----------



## larry (Nov 7, 2015)

Hollowway said:


> For me the issue isn't whether the guitar is bolt on, set, or neck thru. It's how big the heel is. I hate bulky heels wherever they turn up.



^ such a deal breaker-for me. otherwise I'd have a boden 8.

I definitely prefer neck-through guitars, specifically with non-existent heels like jacksons, ESPs, Ibanez prestige RGTs and LACS. 

the m8m 'ramp' is a bit annoying. the guitar checks off every box in my case and i routinely play the crap out of it. but for some reason, the heel contour starts from the 15th fret and inclines to body thickness. which i know is completely unnecessary, as I've seen/played several other guitars & basses with very sculpted heels. 

I've come to a sort of ultimatum as well. similar to the OP's situation, i am finding that i don't care about wood beyond aesthetic choice and relish 100% composite construction. i am very keen on the idea of a guitar that is impervious to climate and moisture, very light, will hold a setup indefinitely, and not crack if dropped from a typical height. of course I'm referring to carbon fiber . 

i prioritize how comfortable i am when playing, while tone is a close second.


----------



## Mordacain (Nov 7, 2015)

I'm a bolt-on fan. I'm also a bit of an old fogey and like being able to customize my ...., add a shim if needed.

Doing fret work is much easier on a bolt-on, as I can just detach the neck and spend a lot of time with the frets while watching TV. It sounds strange, but being able to maneuver the neck easily into different positions makes getting just the right angle on the frets with a file MUCH easier.


----------



## Shask (Nov 7, 2015)

I have always preferred bolt-ons. They just feel and sound right to me. I have went through cycles, but most of my current guitars are bolt on.

That being said, it is hard for me to say I hate neckthrough or set neck. I have always liked neckthrough in the past. I think the finished neck is what bothered me about them. I am thinking about a DC600, and a Tung Oil neck is definitely mandatory if I do. I dont know if they have the same quick snap as bolt-ons, but that is hard to generalize. I generally dont prefer set neck, but I think it is because of the type of guitars they are attached to. Normally Gibson style, short scale, etc.... Same issue with finished neck.

I think I have finally come to terms that my favorite guitars were always bolt-on, floyd, superstrats, so I think I am going to stick with that in the future. I may try a DC600, but the rest of the specs will match....


----------



## vick1000 (Nov 7, 2015)

A good guitar is a good guitar, no matter how it's made. And there are bad ones of every sort from every manufacturer. I prefer neck through or set neck for reasons of fret access and in some cases, more attack from the brighter woods. But I love my cheap ass RG8, and I am rollinglots of hi-mid range and mid range guitars right now, trying to find one better. Sadly, there is not much out there to compete with it. It's just got a great neck and great action. And since I upgraded pick ups, tuners, and saddles, it has the features of those higher end models, but costs less, and plays better.

I am hoping the cheapo used Agile Intrepid ($299) I have coming can compete, it's neckthrough.


----------



## wakjob (Nov 8, 2015)

Same here... no personal preference as long as it's good, its good.

But I can say that where I live in central NY, neck-thru's can be a nightmare with our season changes. 
Super dry cold winters to hot humid summers with all points in between reek havoc on them requiring constant adjustments.

Bolt-ons remain much more stable here.


----------



## Cybin (Nov 8, 2015)

Bolt on have a more percussive sound which makes it sound a little more aggressive. Neck thru has more sustain and sound smoother. Either one is fine for metal as you can pretty much just dial in your tone with the eq on your amp. I don't play much clean tone so I can't say how construction affect clean tone.


----------



## Rawkmann (Nov 8, 2015)

Just thinking back, no neck thru has ever just blown me away. The best guitars I've ever owned or played were a Tom Anderson, my Vigier Excalibur, and a few Ibanez Prestiges over the years. Although I DO want to get a hold of a Mayones Regius before I completely write off Neck Thrus


----------



## Edika (Nov 8, 2015)

I had the misconception of bolt-on equals cheap and neckthrough equals expensive/good. It was one of the main factors keeping me away from Ibanez guitars as I would see prestige basswood, bolt-on, rosewood fretboard guitars costing over a grand. I went through a few neckthrough guitars and I too wasn't feeling it. Then I got my Ibanez and was blown away. Then had the oportunity to play my first guitar, a MIJ Squier bolt on, and was again blown away by the playability. Then I played mostly the bolt ons, got rid almost all of the neckthroughs aside from one that I loved. Then I got a few more bolt ons. Then I played my neckthrough and thought "crap this plays awesome" and bought a couple of more neckthroughs and a set neck and got rid of a few of tge bolt ons.

Personal conclusion, some guitars play great and sound great regardless of construction. If you're fortunate enough to be able to go through a few of them until you find the ones that suit you then great. If you've found them already and settled down on your preferences, even better as you want have to go spending a ton of money to identify what it is you like about them.


----------



## Hollowway (Nov 8, 2015)

bzhan1 said:


> The thing with neck thrus is you can't adjust string height without messing up the action. You can shim bolt on's and get the perfect action and string height. Also any neck/fret problems on a neck thru the whole guitar is done. No benefit of a neck thru compared to a low heel bolt on.



Wait, what? You mean intonation? Or are you considering action as something other than string height?


----------



## ThePIGI King (Nov 8, 2015)

Cybin said:


> Bolt on have a more percussive sound which makes it sound a little more aggressive. Neck thru has more sustain and sound smoother. Either one is fine for metal as you can pretty much just dial in your tone with the eq on your amp. I don't play much clean tone so I can't say how construction affect clean tone.



Gonna disagree on the sustain thing. I've read studies saying that bolt-on's actually have the best sustain if made properly, then comes the Neck-Thru in second, and set-neck in third. Maybe I've read studies that are outdated or incorrect, but this is what I've read.

But to contribute to the thread: Yes, I too prefer bolt-on's. They feel more "right" to me. And I've never had a problem reaching the 24th on a bolt on with a huge blocky joint either. I wish Schecter had more bolt on models in the upper range...


----------



## Unleash The Fury (Nov 8, 2015)

I think bridges play a huge part in sustain. my Gibson LP with a tuneomatic and stopbar tailpiece sustains for days. (set neck). compared to my agile Septor with a hipshot style bridge. (neck through). also my prs se guitars with a set neck sustains really well too. I didn't have many bolt on neck guitars, but I had a fender american start that was meh


----------



## bzhan1 (Nov 8, 2015)

Hollowway said:


> Wait, what? You mean intonation? Or are you considering action as something other than string height?



String height = distance from body, action = distance from frets...


----------



## Nlelith (Nov 8, 2015)

I don't have experience with lots of guitars, but so far it's bolt-on > neck-through.


----------



## TRENCHLORD (Nov 8, 2015)

As long as there isn't a clunky squared-off heel I'm fine with any type.
Getting an ideal setup should be just as easy on either type, as long as there isn't a major defect of some sort.


----------



## Force (Nov 9, 2015)

This



bzhan1 said:


> The thing with neck thrus is you can't adjust string height without messing up the action. You can shim bolt on's and get the perfect action and string height. Also any neck/fret problems on a neck thru the whole guitar is done. No benefit of a neck thru compared to a low heel bolt on.



I have 2 neck-thru, 19 bolt-on, guess what I like the most? 

In general, I just prefer the look & feel of bolt on more with a comfort of knowing neck replacement keeps my axe alive should it come to that unfortunate circumstance.

My 2 neck thrus are great, nothing about the construction bothers me. It does make them seem a little higher endish because of it but most of us know that means sod all, bolt ons are just another construction method, it all depends on the guitar.

No one is wrong, make your choice & be happy.


----------



## Great Satan (Nov 9, 2015)

My two current guitars in most use right now are the cheapest i've ever owned,
(One a sub $200 7-string jackson, the other a 2nd hand strat i got for $40)
After i upgraded the pups, they are my current favs.

I don't really care about the specifics of a guitar, bolt on, neck thru, string number etc. so long as its playable and stays in tune/intonates properly, then i can work with it (if i have some half decent pickups lying around to put in them).

Maybe i just accept the drawbacks more readily on an old cheap beater of a guitar rather than a +$1000 guitar, but i'm happy 

Also, in regards to clunky heels, i thought i'd be more bothered with my strat's block heel than i am, but i never really notice it (i guess i just don't play right up tjere that much). The nature of the heel on my jackson however, as its slightly flattened, means i never really even touch it.


----------



## Chokey Chicken (Nov 9, 2015)

ThePIGI King said:


> Gonna disagree on the sustain thing. I've read studies saying that bolt-on's actually have the best sustain if made properly, then comes the Neck-Thru in second, and set-neck in third. Maybe I've read studies that are outdated or incorrect, but this is what I've read.
> 
> But to contribute to the thread: Yes, I too prefer bolt-on's. They feel more "right" to me. And I've never had a problem reaching the 24th on a bolt on with a huge blocky joint either. I wish Schecter had more bolt on models in the upper range...



I've read the same thing, though I don't buy it, given my personal experience tells me there's a negligible difference if any. The only guitar I've played that had sustain issues was a bolt on with uneven frets, and it wasn't the neck joint's fault.


----------



## Given To Fly (Nov 9, 2015)

Guitar construction determines the attack/sustain characteristics. Solid body guitars have the longest sustain but the weakest attack, arch top hollow body guitars have the strongest attack but quickest decay time. (That is just a general rule and there are always exceptions.)


----------



## SqWark (Nov 9, 2015)

I've always preferred an unpainted neck which counts out most thru necks.


----------



## VBCheeseGrater (Nov 9, 2015)

For me it's always been a case of wanting the same style as the original model it's based on...so i don't want a bolt on les paul or a set neck strat (although that could be cool). I think more so, i don't mind the bolt-ons at all, unless it's a case where the original model is a set neck or neck through. I had a bolt on mockingbird that bothered me for that reason - nothing about the way it played or sounded.


----------



## vilk (Nov 9, 2015)

I like'em both 

And I mostly play a setneck!


----------



## 1-0-0-1-0-0-1 (Nov 10, 2015)

It's funny you mention hating neck thru instruments. Although I prefer the snappiness of a bolt on, for me it comes down to the heel comfort and how it sounds acoustically. My 1996 RX20 I got at a pawn shop for $40 as a little project has one of the BEST feeling necks and since it's a bolt on, I can shave it down to preference. That's not something I can typically do on neck thrus!


----------



## Tuned (Nov 10, 2015)

so we're ultimately down to:

- sustain,
- clarity,
- playability,
- upper fret access.

For a long while I was led by the idea that neck-throughs were superior. Personally, I had a luthier-built 24 fret neck-thru and a 24 fret bolt-on pair where the latter sucked and first was a great instrument. I owned some bolt-ons that I always felt were lacking something. I also had a neck-thru 24 fret Ibanez SoundGear (from the first year they stopped bass production in Japan) that I wanted so bad and liked it too.

Then by chance I came across high-end instruments, namely LAKLAND basses, that are bolt-on and only have 22 frets. They kill in every way, and all this detail about the number of frets was to conclude this: a well-designed bolt-on provides better access and far better playability on the 22th fret than a neck-thru, even if with 2 more frets!... and then in come the neck-thru 24 fret Spector NS/Warwick Streamer twins that have upper frets playability that was designed to be scorned.

LAKLANDs have a sustain that actually rings full-tone between the songs if you want to. So if you like to attract attention of the audience and to be hated by the fellow groupmates, a good bolt-on does both. They're just well-engineered and well-built.

On another note, I owned a top-of-the-line MIJ ' '84 Soloist' Fernandes from the late eighties, its MIJ cheaper bolt-on version ('Dinky' Fernandes) from the same era, and still own contemporary bolt-ons: a MIA EBMM JP7 and a MIJ ESP Edwards E-CY-115d (like the ESP KH-2 but with H/S/H Seymour Duncans). 
Now, the sound of the neck-thru was "fuller", "larger" than that of the Edwards, but this can be because of the neck profile: the Edwards' neck is even thinner and flatter than that of a thin-necked Ibanez. The sound of the EbMM, however, is "larger" than the neck-thru's (and it has a larger neck too). 
Both bolt-ons have way better clarity and ring.
The bolt-on Fernandes was a so-so guitar from quite another league, nothing to mention really (and it may have been a Frankenstrat too).

From the viewpoint of heel and fret access, the old Fernandes twins were the poorest, the EBMM and ESP have better heels and access as well.

As for the set-necks, I occasionally use a ESP Original Eclipse II and a LTD 400 Series Eclipse. The ESP asks to be beat up like a bitch and then she gives it all. The guitar pwns heavy greasy chording but lacks easiness, sensitiveness and clarity of the bolt-ons. The LTD sounds like a lesser version of the ESP, not so rich and full; that said, it has cheaper pickups and (IIRC) has a thinner body.
The neck joint of the both sucks compared to the bolt-ons. All said.


Kinda.


----------



## Hollowway (Nov 11, 2015)

bzhan1 said:


> String height = distance from body, action = distance from frets...



Ah, gotcha. I don't really have any opinion on string height, then, since I don't own any guitars that I don't like the string height on.

But I will say that if a neck thru is made crappy, there's not much you can do in terms of reducing the action to a reasonable amount, because neck shimming is out of the question. I have an Agile bolt on with a Kahler and I had to shim the neck to get the action low enough without taking all of the pressure off of the string rollers on the bridge. Had it been a neck thru I would have been hosed, because the bridge really should have been sunk. And I have a Strictly 7 with a Kahler, and Jim actually did sink the bridge for that very reason.


----------



## Thanatopsis (Nov 17, 2015)

I only owned bolt on or set necks until a couple years ago when I got my SLSMG. Only thing I like better about my bolt ons is that I much prefer an unfinished neck. Granted I know neck thrus exist with unfinished necks, but mine is painted. I've entertained the idea of sanding it down but don't want to kill the resale value in case I decide to part with it some day and also don't want to risk somehow screwing it up.


----------



## Guamskyy (Nov 18, 2015)

Growing up looking at guitars I dreamed of, I was a big Jackson soloist fan, so I've been a neck-through guy. To date though, out of the many guitars I have owned, I have only owned 2 neck-through guitars: an agile intrepid 8 and my Kiesel Vader 7. With these two guitars, I loved how seamless the transition from neck to body was, and fret access was superb. Not to take away from a good bolt-on guitar, I've owned many bolt-ons from Ernie Balls, OAF, MIM Tele, Import Parker, Jackson, Schecter, and many others I cannot remember at the moment. Have I noticed a different in tone? Sure, but they were different guitars. I believe it wouldn't be fair to compare two different guitars of different construction. A well set-up neck through can be better than a stock bolt-on, and vice versa.

TL; DR I like both, I've had a bias to neck throughs, but one or the other isn't going to be a deal breaker for me.


----------



## NuBz (Nov 19, 2015)

Who are you trying to convince?
Us or yourself?


----------



## noUser01 (Nov 19, 2015)

Oddly enough, I've always felt that neck-thru guitars made it feel like the neck and body were two separate pieces. It didn't feel like one cohesive unit, and it feels unbalanced to me. Very backwards, I know, but I just never got on with them, save for a few Ibanez ones I've played.


----------



## TankJon666 (Nov 19, 2015)

I was always die hard bolt-on only then one day I realised all but one of my guitars had a set-neck.


----------



## vilk (Nov 20, 2015)

Then weren't you actually not die hard bolt-on only?


----------



## TankJon666 (Nov 20, 2015)

vilk said:


> Then weren't you actually not die hard bolt-on only?



Until I got my SG all I had was bolt-on Jacksons and Charvels for about 6-7 years. Now the only bolt on I have is my Jazz Bass.


----------



## azyat (Nov 30, 2015)

Among my five 7string axes I can't stop admiring neck-thru Mayo Regius and Jackson Broderick while it always feels like something is missing in the others. Is this love?


----------



## noise in my mind (Dec 8, 2015)

I like 'em all! I'm a whore!


----------



## Andromalia (Dec 8, 2015)

I'm utterly unable to assess if this or that guitar quality is due to this or that.
I can say which guitar I like more when comparing two guitars, but that's it. I never tried to say "it's because it's a neck through" because I actually don't care. I have pretty much everything but a Kahler guitar in my current collection (neck throughs, Set necks, floyds, TOMs, hisphots, vintage trems, etc etc etc )and there is no single reason that would make a single style of guitar better than the others. My best sustainging guitar is a neck trough, but the second one is a bolt one before all other NTs.


----------



## moroza (Dec 8, 2015)

Holding the variables of overall quality, body shape, and neck dimensions constant, I've found that bolt-ons flex more (usually) and are slightly harder to reach the very upper frets (almost always). However, they invariably sound brighter, and I have not noticed a correlation with sustain at all. If you like brightness, you're going to disprefer the sound of neck-thrus, simple as that.

I think an understated reason many (myself included) prefer neck-thrus are for the feeling of the instrument as a nice piece of wood in your hands; they're smoother. Until you're wheedling on the 24th, the effect of this is purely psychological and usually unconscious, but it's there.


----------



## Jujex (Dec 10, 2015)

azyat said:


> Among my five 7string axes I can't stop admiring neck-thru Mayo Regius and Jackson Broderick while it always feels like something is missing in the others. Is this love?



This dude knows what he is talking about, just look at his profile pic.


----------



## Jujex (Dec 10, 2015)

moroza said:


> Holding the variables of overall quality, body shape, and neck dimensions constant, I've found that bolt-ons flex more (usually) and are slightly harder to reach the very upper frets (almost always). However, they invariably sound brighter, and I have not noticed a correlation with sustain at all. If you like brightness, you're going to disprefer the sound of neck-thrus, simple as that.
> 
> I think an understated reason many (myself included) prefer neck-thrus are for the feeling of the instrument as a nice piece of wood in your hands; they're smoother. Until you're wheedling on the 24th, the effect of this is purely psychological and usually unconscious, but it's there.



Brightness does not necessarily come from the fact that it's a bolt on. My KE2 with Zakk Wylde set is a neck through and it has brighter tone than my Ibanez which is a bolt on and african Mahagony which sounds a bit fuller.

The tone wood and pickups has a much bigger effect here.


----------



## azyat (Dec 10, 2015)

Jujex said:


> This dude knows what he is talking about, just look at his profile pic.


Thanks mate! It's a bit outdated though, and I need to make a new snowflake picture like this for this winter


----------



## ToneLab (Dec 11, 2015)

After atleast 30 guitars over 30 years of playing I agree with every post in this thread. What does that say? lol....great thread....


----------



## laxu (Dec 14, 2015)

You can make a great guitar with all kinds of construction methods. Having no heel at the high frets is generally a non-issue as people tend to adapt to what they have. I have no trouble playing on the high frets on my old block-heel Ibanez RG550.

That said, the few neckthrus I've owned I've sold. I don't know what it was but I never bonded with their sound and feel. I really can't tell you why but I doubt the neckthru construction is a factor.


----------

