# Neck thru vs bolt on?



## Brohoodofsteel75

I hear so many different pros and cons of both like you get better action with a neck thru. If your neck gets messed up you could get another one. What's really better? I want extremely low action (kinda over dramatic) no fret buzz and a good tone.


----------



## Force

Neck type wont determine action, that will vary from guitar to guitar, however, neck condition will, also a decent set up will help.

I prefer bolt on, mostly for asthetics but also incase the unthinkable happens, I can pop a new neck on.

This bullshit about thru giving more sustain etc, is just that, bullshit. As long as the joint is tight with as little space between neck & body, it's all good. 

It's like a car, smaller diameter wheels will improve acceleration slightly, larger give higher top speed but it's hardly noticeable.

If you want sustain, mod the fuck out of the axe........when in doubt, gain it out.


----------



## Ironbird

I agree with Force, don't listen to the hype.

A good bolt-on has as much sustain as, or even more so, than a neck-thru. Why? A bolt-on guitar (with a tight neck pocket) has direct wood-to-wood contact between the neck and the body. On a set neck and neck-thru, glue comes into play, and glue is a deterrent of vibration.

I prefer neck-thru guitars mostly for the feel of the heel. They just seem right to me.

Summary: a guitar's construction method shouldn't come in between you and the guitar you like!


----------



## Bigfan

I prefer bolt-ons for price, looks, comfort and ease of repair.

It does depend on the individual guitar though, really.


----------



## straightshreddd

I kinda dig both. Bolt-ons get a +1 for ease of repair though. A really well constructed neck-thru is cool, too, though.


----------



## asilayamazing

like both my jackson bolt on sounds btter than my set neck ltd viper. but my other guitar thats one whole piece thru n thru is pretty sweet too. but i always find myself going back to the bolt on even though it supposedly "isnt as good" as a set neck or neck thru. ALSO isnt set neck glued and neckthru one piece?


----------



## MJS

Ironbird said:


> On a set neck and neck-thru, glue comes into play, and glue is a deterrent of vibration.



I wouldn't worry about glue too much, considering how many bodies are multiple pieces glued together. Then cover the entire surface with glue again if you want a different top wood. When that's all done, drown whatever wood is left with paint and call it a day. 

Not to mention, the neck that's getting bolted on to avoid using glue... is usually 3 - 5 strips of wood glued together, with some more glue to holding the fretboard on, which probably has a bunch of frets glued into it. Throw in some more glue if there's a scarf joint or headstock veneer. 

Plus, a lot bolt-on necks out there have been shimmed, so the contact surface is greatly reduced... and no one seems to notice a difference in sound.


----------



## asilayamazing

MJS said:


> I wouldn't worry about glue too much, considering how many bodies are multiple pieces glued together. Then cover the entire surface with glue again if you want a different top wood. When that's all done, drown whatever wood is left with paint and call it a day.
> 
> Not to mention, the neck that's getting bolted on to avoid using glue... is usually 3 - 5 strips of wood glued together, with some more glue to holding the fretboard on, which probably has a bunch of frets glued into it. Throw in some more glue if there's a scarf joint or headstock veneer.
> 
> Plus, a lot bolt-on necks out there have been shimmed, so the contact surface is greatly reduced... and no one seems to notice a difference in sound.


----------



## JeffHenneman

From my prospective and experience, the bolt-on vs neck thru is usually unfair comparison and this is why. Most people's experience with bolt on is usually on a cheap guitar. Its these cheap guitars are not the best bulit or built of great quality wood. I think this is why bolt on guitars get such a bad rep.
I had a esp ltd f-250 that was bolt on and I so regret selling it. It had a great neck joint and the neck felt great. It had no problem with sustain. 
I have yet to meet someone that said there quality Ibanez had bad sustain. Plus if you are useing EMGz with your bolt on, those pick ups tend to color your sound so you need not worry about the neck. 
Just my two cents on the matter of sustain.
I personally prefer a neck thru guitar. The reason being is all the ones I have owned seem to have a much more stable neck. I do not have to do that much adjustment of the russ rod. All the bolt ons I have had seem to need alot of adjustment thru the year.


----------



## ImBCRichBitch

I myself prefer a bolt on, but its all up to you man. if, god forbid, the neck gets fucked on o bolt on, buy another one. same situation, neckthrough, your fucked hard in the ass with no lube.


----------



## technomancer

Coke or Pepsi? Same debate that boils down to personal preference.

The only real thing I've heard that's an advantage for a bolt on is that you can replace a neck, but let's be real how often do you get a non-repairable neck break? Or a neck break at all?


----------



## iRaiseTheDead

Bolt on neck - if something breaks or cracks you can replace

Neck-thru - if you break it, you've pretty much broken your guitar :/


----------



## Miek

I like bolt-ons because I can shim the neck if necessary. I'm a little more wary of lower end neck-thrus (admittedly they're not that common so it's not a big deal) because there's no salvaging the neck angle if it's wonky.


----------



## Erazoender

Depends on a guitar. Guitars with all access neck joins like Suhr moderns or Ibanez are really good bolt ons, though in my heart I prefer neck thru. It feels better in my hands and gives better access for me. I used to be more like NECK THRU OR DIE but I've realized that it's kind of stupid to think that way so just pick what feels more comfortable for you.


----------



## asilayamazing

Erazoender said:


> ....... NECK THRU OR DIE...


----------



## iRaiseTheDead

asilayamazing said:


>



Oh don't worry, you will die if that thing breaks


----------



## TRENCHLORD

I like both styles, but neck breaking as a reason to chose bolt-on seems so ridiculous.
What in the world are people doing that would cause neck breakage?


----------



## Ghost40

I give props to the bolt-on. Most of everything I have is a bolt. I think that sustain difference is negligible. At least to the ear. There are tons a high end bolts as well. But action isn't related to bolt-on vs neck-through...


----------



## nausea_87

The best guitars I've heard so far have always been bolt ons. 
Also, with a neck thru the sound mostly comes from the neck, it vibrates all the way down to the body and even the bridge is mounted on it. i dont think it contributes in a good way if you like to experiement with certain woods. also i think a one piece body should give better frequency, but I doubt if someone could hear the difference.

with a bolt on you kinda get the sounds from body and neck in a better relation. 

I was never scared of breaking my guitar neck, but still, I always loved bolt ons.

There is absolutely no superior system. every guitar feels and sounds different. If you think you hear the differnce between neck thrus and bolt ons and you cannot decide then go for a set neck, its maybe the best of both worlds...

hope I could help.


----------



## Joelan

Miek said:


> I like bolt-ons because I can shim the neck if necessary. I'm a little more wary of lower end neck-thrus (admittedly they're not that common so it's not a big deal) because there's no salvaging the neck angle if it's wonky.



This is how I feel too. I don't really consider the effect on the tone because there are so many other factors that you could easily negate the effects the neck joint would have. It all comes down to comfort/ease-of-repair/ease-of-setup for me.

That said I won't dismiss any guitar because of its neck joint type.


----------



## fassaction

Damn...I feel like a sucker sometimes. Up until I started coming to this site, I was always under the impression that bolt on necks were "cheaper" Every guitar I have ever owned has always been a set/neck through design.....


----------



## asilayamazing

fassaction said:


> Damn...I feel like a sucker sometimes. Up until I started coming to this site, I was always under the impression that bolt on necks were "cheaper" Every guitar I have ever owned has always been a set/neck through design.....


i dont descriminate. jus some bolts arent as easy to go higher or comfy down there


----------



## ericguitar48

If you take good care of your guitars it shouldn't matter.


----------



## purpledc

I much much prefer the sound of a bolt on. They are snappier in the attack and have more articulation. Great for rhythym chugging. Neckthroughs to me have a more liquid fluid like response to the attack. But i prefer the look and feel of a neckthrough. But i now play set necks as they are sorta in between. There really is no better or worse just different. As for the action there is no difference. You can get them bot low equally. In fact a bolt on has the ability to shim the neck at different angles where a neckthrough is fixed. Action challenges are more of a bridge and neck angle thing. I would get to a store and play examples of both and see what works for you.


----------



## Zeus1907

Erazoender said:


> Depends on a guitar. Guitars with all access neck joins like Suhr moderns or Ibanez are really good bolt ons, though in my heart I prefer neck thru. It feels better in my hands and gives better access for me. I used to be more like NECK THRU OR DIE but I've realized that it's kind of stupid to think that way so just pick what feels more comfortable for you.



I prefer bolt on necks. Just my personal preference. And I agree, some bolt on mecks have better access than others. Ibanez's have great access, the Rusty Cooley signatures have amazing access.


----------



## You

Upon reading the title of the thread, I expected vast disagreements and mindless arguing that is common upon the internet. I see that my expectations have been wrong. 

The majority of the guitars that I possess are bolt on, for as I do not bear the fundings to acquire a neck through. I will say, however, that my bolt on guitars play splendidly, though I would be quite interested in a neck through guitar as well.


----------



## Bearitone

Necrobump 

Alot of brands are doing bolt-ons correctly today.

If you're at the semi-custom or custom level the quality difference between neck joints is a non-issue.

Pick bolt-on and save some money.


----------



## GuitarBizarre

Kindsage excluded, good job not realizing the thread was bumped from 4 years ago people.


----------



## Casper777

As long as the neck heel is done correctly, I would say bolt on...

And nothing will replace the snap and attack of a bolt on construction!


----------



## purpledc

kindsage said:


> Necrobump
> 
> .



and I posted. I really do try to check the dates. But its Halloween time so I guess a little necro is fitting. Night of the living thread.


----------

