Neck-Through vs. Bolt-On Neck Designs

[Torment Leaves Scars]

I already know this post is going to come off as a bit pretentious, and most likely, a bit..."petty," so I'm just warning everyone ahead of time.  :laughing8:

I'm sure a number of us have guitars aside from Warmoths, and some of us probably have some with neck-through designs, as well.  My question is probably one which has been beaten to Hell and back on more than one occasion, but I'm going to ask a few questions anyway.  :toothy12:

Do you have one preference over another when it comes to a neck-through vs. bolt-on construction neck?

Do you notice a difference in "feel," or do you think it's a "subliminal" thing?

Do you think there are advantages a neck-through construction guitar has when it comes to reaching the highest of frets (22-24), or do you think it's tough, regardless?

Do you find any credibility that a neck-through constructed guitar is any better than a bolt-on constructed guitar, or do you think it's all smoke and mirrors?

While I should be able to answer most of these questions on my own, as I own a neck-through Jackson KV2, I want some outside opinions.  I don't feel a Flying V is a great example, due to the lack of wood surrounding the neck.  I figure pretty much anything would be fairly easy to reach the highest frets with, considering the shape of the V.

****MODIFIED****

I'm modifying this post, because the focus tends to be aiming towards advantages as far as the construction of one design over another, but what I'm really aiming for is the "FEEL" of one over the other, however, all comments on one design vs. the other are welcome.  :icon_smile:

 

[line6man]

No comments, but as a note, bolt-on necks have the advantage of being detachable for various reasons, which makes them a superior design in some ways. I wouldn't want to have a set neck or neck through, personally, because the neck is not removable.

Also, I absolutely cannot get past the aesthetic of a neck through instrument, unless it has a laminate top and back or solid finish to hide the neck through part.
Most people probably don't care, but it really bothers me, especially on 6+ string basses.

 

[AutoBat]

AFAIK I haven't played a neck-through guitar. I have played a number of bolt-ons though.
The only axe I played with 24 frets is a friends Ibanez RG, and it's quite easy to hit the highs.

My strat is simple enough to get the 15-22 range on the 3 high strings, which is where I want anyhow.  24 pretty much runs into a wood problem. A Soloist or V would probably be much easier.
I think the lower horn is the ticket to access, and a contoured heel is helpful.

When I look at guitars now, I usually see the neck-through as a downside.  If anything happens to the neck on those you're pretty much SOL.

 

[Torment Leaves Scars]

No comments, but as a note, bolt-on necks have the advantage of being detachable for various reasons, which makes them a superior design in some ways. I wouldn't want to have a set neck or neck through, personally, because the neck is not removable.

Also, I absolutely cannot get past the aesthetic of a neck through instrument, unless it has a laminate top and back or solid finish to hide the neck through part.
Most people probably don't care, but it really bothers me, especially on 6+ string basses.

I would certainly agree with you that a bolt-on neck does have its advantages, and that with a neck-through, they just don't look right unless the entire back is painted, but I was aiming more for the "feel" of one vs. the other.  I didn't really specify that very well in my original post.  I think I'll edit it.  :tard:

 

[Torment Leaves Scars]

AFAIK I haven't played a neck-through guitar. I have played a number of bolt-ons though.
The only axe I played with 24 frets is a friends Ibanez RG, and it's quite easy to hit the highs.

My strat is simple enough to get the 15-22 range on the 3 high strings, which is where I want anyhow.  24 pretty much runs into a wood problem. A Soloist or V would probably be much easier.
I think the lower horn is the ticket to access, and a contoured heel is helpful.

When I look at guitars now, I usually see the neck-through as a downside.  If anything happens to the neck on those you're pretty much SOL.

So basically what you're saying is that it will be no issue to get the highest frets with a Soloist, but it's a problem with a Strat?

 

[AutoBat]

So basically what you're saying is that it will be no issue to get the highest frets with a Soloist, but it's a problem with a Strat?

That's what I was trying to say.  Clearly YMMV as we're all built different from the factory.

 

[Torment Leaves Scars]

So basically what you're saying is that it will be no issue to get the highest frets with a Soloist, but it's a problem with a Strat?

That's what I was trying to say.  Clearly YMMV as we're all built different from the factory.

So it's going the biggest determining factor isn't the type of neck joint, but how the body is sculpted.  In other words, it would still be just as difficult to reach the highest frets on a neck-through Strat, if there was such a thing...

 

[Damon]

At one point not that many years ago I owned the following, all at the same time:

Gibson Les Paul Standard DC+: double cutaway, 24 frets, set neck
Gibson Les Paul Studio: single cutaway, 22 frets, set neck
Fender AM STD Strat: double cutaway, 22 frets, bolt neck
Carvin DC127: double cutaway, 24 frets, neck-through-body

Here're my observations from playing that menagerie over the course of several years as pertains to your line of questioning. One thing to consider here is that I have somewhat larger-than-average hands with thick, stubby, slightly shorter-than-average fingers, so if you're one of those people with small hands or  long fingers, you may have a different experience. The Carvin had far and away the best access to the upper frets due to a combination of a deeper cut lower horn similar to a Soloist and no clunky neck heel to get in the way. My hand fit very nicely right into that lower horn cutout and my stubby fingers could reach the highest frets with no problems. The Strat and the LP Standard were in a close race for second and it would be hard to say one was better. The Strat had a deeper cutout while the LP had a less bulky heel. The Strat was fine for 22 frets with a little bit of reaching, but 24 would have been almost impossible. The LP was usable up to the 24th, but was a bit clunky to get above the 21st as I had to release the neck and reach under it a bit. I think the bolt-neck would have pulled ahead if I'd had one with either a contoured heel or a deeper neck pocket like the PRS bolt-ons, but even then it would have been a small margin for me. The Studio was barely behind the other LP. I'm not sure if there's an access difference created by the slightly different shapes of the lower cutouts between the DC and the typical LP, but for whatever reason the Studio was just slightly more difficult to play above the 19th fret. So in a nutshell, I find the neck-through to be a clear winner for me in comfortably accessing the highest frets, with minimal difference between bolt necks and set necks.

 

[Corey P.]

I primarily play bass, but play some guitar, and from either perspective I prefer the feel of bolt-on necks.  There's probably a slight degree more mass at the heel with bolt-ons simply due to the neck plate and bolts being there, but contoured neck heels are a nice way of addressing that.

It also may or may not be desirable, but I've found bolt-on instruments to be more resonant acoustically, which I love.  Whether that's a product of a distinct neck and body or just "subliminal," like you mentioned...  :dontknow:

 

[Torment Leaves Scars]

At one point not that many years ago I owned the following, all at the same time:

Gibson Les Paul Standard DC+: double cutaway, 24 frets, set neck
Gibson Les Paul Studio: single cutaway, 22 frets, set neck
Fender AM STD Strat: double cutaway, 22 frets, bolt neck
Carvin DC127: double cutaway, 24 frets, neck-through-body

Here're my observations from playing that menagerie over the course of several years as pertains to your line of questioning. One thing to consider here is that I have somewhat larger-than-average hands with thick, stubby, slightly shorter-than-average fingers, so if you're one of those people with small hands or  long fingers, you may have a different experience. The Carvin had far and away the best access to the upper frets due to a combination of a deeper cut lower horn similar to a Soloist and no clunky neck heel to get in the way. My hand fit very nicely right into that lower horn cutout and my stubby fingers could reach the highest frets with no problems. The Strat and the LP Standard were in a close race for second and it would be hard to say one was better. The Strat had a deeper cutout while the LP had a less bulky heel. The Strat was fine for 22 frets with a little bit of reaching, but 24 would have been almost impossible. The LP was usable up to the 24th, but was a bit clunky to get above the 21st as I had to release the neck and reach under it a bit. I think the bolt-neck would have pulled ahead if I'd had one with either a contoured heel or a deeper neck pocket like the PRS bolt-ons, but even then it would have been a small margin for me. The Studio was barely behind the other LP. I'm not sure if there's an access difference created by the slightly different shapes of the lower cutouts between the DC and the typical LP, but for whatever reason the Studio was just slightly more difficult to play above the 19th fret. So in a nutshell, I find the neck-through to be a clear winner for me in comfortably accessing the highest frets, with minimal difference between bolt necks and set necks.

Thanks for your insights.

Reason I'm asking all the questions is because I'm gassing for either a Jackson USA Warrior (neck-through) or another Warmoth "Star,' but built to even more extreme specs than I thought I went with, which turn out not to be real extreme at all!  :redflag:

The specs on my Warmoth are as follows:

Neck- Maple/Maple, Wizard Profile, 22 Jumbo SS frets

Body- Alder, Contoured heel

Pickups- DiMarzio Super Distortion Bridge pickup and DiMarzio D-Activator Neck pickup

The sound is super-bright, and has a ton of treble to it.  Sometimes it's actually a bit overkill, and I need to turn the tone down a good bit to get rid of that "screech," and get some "meat" behind the sound.  It's very close to that "Ace of Spades" type tone, and while great, it's not always great.

For my next build, I want to go with a beefier neck (but not too beefy), so I'm considering a "standard thin" neck.  Can anyone give me an idea or an example of a guitar that has this "type" of neck?  I'd like to play one prior to ordering if I choose to go the Warmoth route again.  I'm also considering going with Maple/Ebony, and 24 frets.

For the body, I will probably stick with alder again, but this time around, I'm going to go with active pickups, and 24 frets.  I will also go with the "720" mod, or whatever it's called, where the neck fits flush against the body.

As for the overall sound, I want to get a little bit more "meat" behind the sound.

Despite all the other issues, the issue that really bugs me is that I can't get a 24-fret neck with neck binding from Warmoth.  It may be a determining factor for me, because I've come to really like binding on necks.  :sad1:

 

[OzziePete]

To me, it's horses for courses.

If I want a Firebird I prefer it to be a neck thru. Ditto if I want a Yamaha SG2000. If I wanted an Alembic Tribute, it better be one of those hippie sandwich neck thrus.

Strat, Tele? Bolt on.    Les Paul? Well I would prefer it to be set neck, but understand that should not be any different to the guitar's tone than a bolt on, other than the mass of heel required for a bolt on LP. For a Flying V or Explorer I'd actually prefer a bolt on ,as the body shape doesn't lend itself to great confidence in a set neck neck attachment, though again, if the procedure is correctly done, there should be no difference......

But hands down, if you are looking at the various construction methods, bolt ons appear more superior due to their modular nature. Neck thru, though, probably has better possibility of good high fret access.

 

[Ace Flibble]

Depends on the guitar and the kind of tone and feel I want to get out of it. I hate Mayones bolt-ons but love their neck-throughs, best guitars in production today in my opinion. Conversely I wouldn't care for a Fender Jazzmaster that is neck-through. I like the idea of a neck-through Jazzmaster style guitar, just not a neck-through Fender Jazzmaster. Warmoth's bolt-on LPs are fine, but a bolt-on LP from Gibson would be awful.

I like my Fenders to be bolt-ons, GIbsons and PRSs to be set neck, 'metal'-style guitars to be neck-through and for any in-between hybrids, base it on what pickups it has: neck-through for humbuckers, set for P-90s and bolt-on for singles.