| Author | Message | ||
| funkyjazzjunky
Intermediate Member Username: funkyjazzjunky Post Number: 166 Registered: 5-2007 |
Why do some of you play bolt-ons? I realize that many fine bolt-ons exist, but I consider neck-thrus inherently superior in construction. I also believe that the legendary bolt-on growl is more attributable to the woods commonly used in bolt-ons (Basswood, Poplar, and particularly Ash). While Ritter, Sadowsky, Lakland and others make fine, basses, aren’t they innately inferior to comparable neck-thrus? Even when Warick, Ken Smith & others have bolt-on lines, aren’t they usually lesser models when compared to the top of the line? | ||
| bsee
Senior Member Username: bsee Post Number: 2012 Registered: 3-2004 |
If there were one ideal tone with huge sustain and the most massive bottom, then the answer would probably be that the bolt-on design is inferior. Then, lighter woods would also be inferior since the denser materials tend to provide a thicker tone. The reality is that there is no one "right" tone and everyone has personal taste, so they are just different colors on the palette. Are neck-thru basses superior in construction? I don't believe it is fair to generalize. Anything may be built well or poorly as the craftsman's ability and conscience allow. To generalize a little, it seems that it is significantly less costly to make bolt-on instruments as opposed to neck-thru construction. Since they cost less, they can be sold for less. I wonder what the difference in tone would be if you could take two identical neck-thru instruments and figure out how to laser cut the neck out of one and then bolt it back on. How different would they sound? In terms of tone, all the wood and construction methods can do is take things away. A "perfect" instrument would involve the strings stretched over a solid piece of something like granite. A substance so dense and solid that it would not absorb any of the frequencies of the vibrating string. What you would hear in that case is the pure sound of the string and very long sustain. The properties of the various woods and the joints created in the construction absorb some amount of the string's energy reducing sustain and altering the tonal properties. | ||
| elwoodblue
Senior Member Username: elwoodblue Post Number: 546 Registered: 6-2002 |
good points bsee... My aluminum strat with a graphite neck leaves alot of overtones in the strings...wood mellows the tone...sometimes having all the overtones present as the string produces them is like having a soup with so many ingredients that the palette is overwhelmed. At the G&L website they show at one of the stations someone takes the paint from the neck pocket with a dremel wire brush to increase the vibration transfer and I know all my G&L necks have to be very carefully angled out of the pocket and back in because of the tight tolerance. ...Maybe a Neck-thru might be better more often for a second set at a concert after the ear fatigue has set in for the audience to keep things fresh....of course the first few songs while the eardrums are fresh are the times to make sharp impressions in the crowds memory. so many things to consider....thanks for letting me bend your ears. | ||
| white_cloud
Senior Member Username: white_cloud Post Number: 459 Registered: 11-2007 |
It is an interesting subject and point! I always select my basses simply by liking the tone - I think of that, along with feel, before I even consider the type of construction used! For me the whole point of a bass is to hear to tone of the woods, combined with the other factors, used - A bass that sounds entirely of strings and electrics is a waste of time in my book! Also - I wonder how set neck basses compare with neck through/bolt ons? Are they more of a compromise..something of a middle ground? Interestingly enough most of the very greatest players to ever pick up the instrument played bolt-ons - I believe the the most important factor in any bass is the fingers that are playing it  John. | ||
| svlilioukalani
Junior Username: svlilioukalani Post Number: 23 Registered: 6-2008 |
With all of this talk about increased sustain in set neck basses compare with neck through; has anybody ever put a clock on the 2. I wonder how much longer the sustain really is on a through neck. I would love to try myself, but only have set neck Alembic basses. Anybody out there equipted for this type of research. | ||
| hieronymous
Advanced Member Username: hieronymous Post Number: 395 Registered: 1-2005 |
"Interestingly enough most of the very greatest players to ever pick up the instrument played bolt-ons - I believe the the most important factor in any bass is the fingers that are playing it" Although I whole-heartedly agree that the player is the most important part of the equation, I have to disagree that the greatest players played bolt-ons - obviously many important players played Fenders - Donald "Duck" Dunn, Carol Kaye, Jaco Pastorius, to name a few - but I can think of a bunch of great bassists that didn't: Paul McCartney - set neck Hofner, neck-through Rickenbacker Jack Bruce - set neck Gibson EB-3 Chris Squire - neck-through Rickenbacker Geddy Lee - neck-through Rickenbacker Stanley Clarke - do I even need to say it? Jack Casady, Phil Lesh - Alembic-modded Guilds (set neck), Alembics So not really disagreeing, just wanted to give props to Rickenbacker, Gibson, and Alembic playing greats! | ||
| lbpesq
Senior Member Username: lbpesq Post Number: 3245 Registered: 7-2004 |
Rick Danko - also a Gibson Bill, tgo | ||
| bsee
Senior Member Username: bsee Post Number: 2015 Registered: 3-2004 |
Hpw many choices existed for the Motown and Stax crews? Not many high-end neck through instruments sold in the early 60s... Jaco? He was probably fortunate to scrape up a beat up Fender with everything that was happening in his life. I've been watching some VH1 shows on the making of many classic albums. They often play some of the original solo instrument tracks and, those tracks often sound like total crap before the recording engineers perform their magic. It definitely doesn't take a top quality bass to make a great record. | ||
| funkyjazzjunky
Intermediate Member Username: funkyjazzjunky Post Number: 172 Registered: 5-2007 |
I disagree with WhiteCloud. Please add to the list by Hieronymous above: Fleetwood Mac’s John McVie Alembic Victor Wooten Fodera Anthony Jackson Fodera Brothers Johnson Louis Johnson Alembic Freddie Jackson Ken Smith Listen to the bassist for Lakeside, Brick on Alembics. There are a host to other great bassist playing Tobias (original neck-thrus), BC Rich (original Koa bodied neck-thrus), Specter (original neck-thrus), Pedulla, and other high end basses. Besides, the fact those great bassists choose bolt-ons does not address my initial Question: are neck-thru basses are inherently superior to bolt-ons? | ||
| eligilam
Intermediate Member Username: eligilam Post Number: 131 Registered: 2-2006 |
to addend post 395 by heironymous (which is, incidentally, my favorite handle name in the club): Geddy Lee has played Fenders almost exclusively since the early nineties...including every album since Counterparts. Although his Ric-work on Hemispheres remains his greatest work, IMO. | ||
| hieronymous
Advanced Member Username: hieronymous Post Number: 396 Registered: 1-2005 |
Thanks for pointing that out Will - I was thinking about that myself but didn't go into detail. A lot of Geddy's "classic" work (this will differ depending on who you ask) was played on Rickenbackers, but not all - even parts of Moving Pictures were played on the Jazz. Personally, I think that the peak of his sound is Exit... Stage Left which is exclusively Rickenbacker. | ||
| rami
Senior Member Username: rami Post Number: 843 Registered: 6-2002 |
The bulk of my Bass collection is about 50/50 Alembic and Fender. Dramatic differences in sound, quality, woods, electronics, and certainly in price. There's no denying the superiority of neck through construction for sustain, but what turns me on for sound is purely subjective. I just like variety. What's really "Better" is in the hands of the beholder. There are countless examples of the greatest Bassists playing both bolt-on and neck-thru. | ||
| white_cloud
Senior Member Username: white_cloud Post Number: 467 Registered: 11-2007 |
Well, for me the peak of Geddy Lee's sound was actually the studio recording of "Moving Pictures" - on which Geddy mostly used his vintage fender Jazz! Undoubtedly Geddy used his Rickenbacker 4001 to great effect throughout the Rush early/mid years but I have to say I consider the 4001 to have ONE great sound...and thats it! I have owned three of them in my time - it is a one trick pony bass - but it does it superbly well! IMHO Geddys best ever bass sound was his Wal custom - another bolt on - so much better than the sound he favours nowadays! In fact the Wal custom that I owned was an incredible bass - the preamp probably being as close to on a par with an Alembic series as you could hope for at half the actual price of a comparative Alembic! I never lost any sleep at that stage of my musical life on any loss of sustain because of the bolt on neck - neither did Geddy, Percy Jones, Mick Karn, Justin Chancellor, Jason Newsted or Paul Mccartney to name but some others! I dont really think that having a massive sustain actually aids bass playing very much on a practical level in most musical situations - not unless your name is Nigel Tuffnell and you play for Spinal Tap! I think there is a danger of elitism when you start to say things like "a thru-neck is superior to a bolt-on!" As musicians we naturally want the very best tools for our trade but as I previously stated, the very finest tools in the hands of a sloppy craftsman dont make him a master. I could fill page after page of the amount of bassists who have used bolt-on neck instruments but it actually proves little. If you have a neck-thru bass and the neck goes badly wrong..well you are looking at a new bass (believe me - it does happen!) More food for thought! John. | ||
| georgie_boy
Senior Member Username: georgie_boy Post Number: 527 Registered: 8-2005 |
Well Said John!!! | ||
| thumbsup
Member Username: thumbsup Post Number: 91 Registered: 7-2008 |
Yikes!..I dont want to get my head bit off here but in all reality doesn't electric amplification,electronics and PU adjustment (heigth to string) play the biggest part in sustain. I've played bolt ons the majority of my life and could always get good sustain if wanted or when needed by increased volume or balance volume/mst volume (with out overdriveing) or PU adjustment.And new strings are a must. Don't get me wrong,I love my neck thur Alembic but mainly because of its feel and playabillity and sound (love those PUs!) I think Alembic could build identical basses, one bolt,one neck thru. Could you really tell a noticeable difference? There I've spoken my uneducated but highly experienced thru school of knocks opinion. What say the rest of you? Please let me have it | ||
| davehouck
Moderator Username: davehouck Post Number: 7018 Registered: 5-2002 |
Yes, there should be a significant difference in both tone and sustain between a neck through and bolt-on version of otherwise "identical" instruments. A neck through instrument will do a better job of keeping the energy in the strings than will a bolt-on. One of the most informative previous discussions here about instrument construction is this one, which is featured in our Must Reads section. A one-piece bolt-on Maple neck is not going to sustain like a neck-through multi-laminate neck with Ebony and/or Purpleheart lams. There is another great previous discussion of this topic here. And if you're still wanting to read more, run a search of the site and you'll find other previous threads on the topic. | ||
| benson_murrensun
Member Username: benson_murrensun Post Number: 63 Registered: 5-2007 |
Somebody correct me if I am wrong here, but isn't it true that once the string stops vibrating, the sustain is over? This has little to do with the intrument's electronics or the amplifier. What we get from the amplifier is feedback, which can make the string vibrate in it's own way, which usually sounds different than the original sound. I have about 15 basses, and the one with the best sustain is a bolt-on design, made from raw lumber by my buddy J-Bone Waszak. It is a one-piece mahogany neck (rosewood fingerboard) and a one-piece mahogany body. The neck pocket is TIGHT TIGHT TIGHT! There are no gaps there. I realize this is empirical, and flies in the face of solidly-grounded theory and perhaps even scientific measuring. Perhaps what we can learn from this is that the construction of the instrument is as important as design and material choices. | ||
| funkyjazzjunky
Intermediate Member Username: funkyjazzjunky Post Number: 177 Registered: 5-2007 |
Thank you Dave | ||
| 811952
Senior Member Username: 811952 Post Number: 1481 Registered: 10-2003 |
Another factor to keep in mind is that a low-mass instrument will allow more string vibration to be converted to vibration of the entire instrument than will a higher-mass instrument, regardless of rigidity. It's especially relevant in the lower frequencies. Also, any acoustic sound made by the instrument is wasted energy, as far as the pickups are concerned.. John | ||
| white_cloud
Senior Member Username: white_cloud Post Number: 478 Registered: 11-2007 |
Its an interesting thread for sure. I still think, for me, that the single most important factor in all of this is the fingers that are attached to the musician - and the creative brain that is directing them! I suppose im just not a tech minded kind of guy really. I just plug-em and play-em! If its good its good and if its not its not! I have owned some great neck-thru's and some equally great bolt-on/set necks and have never seriously gave much thought to how long each instrument sustained for! This may be out of slightly out of context, and perhaps not particularly relevant to electric bass construction, but acoustic guitars&basses, Violins, Cellos etc dont have neck thru construction - they seem to be okay in the sound quality area! John. | ||
| 811952
Senior Member Username: 811952 Post Number: 1482 Registered: 10-2003 |
Completely agree that the fingers are the single most important factor, without a doubt. John | ||
| anarchyx
Intermediate Member Username: anarchyx Post Number: 115 Registered: 10-2007 |
well, like, if you crack the neck on a set- thru, you can only either get it repaired or get a new guitar. you can switch necks with bolt- ons, as long as their the same width and length or whatever. if I'm wrong, i apologize. just a 13- year- old, so you'll have to excuse me. what's the difference between a neck- thru and a set- thru? | ||
| funkyjazzjunky
Intermediate Member Username: funkyjazzjunky Post Number: 187 Registered: 5-2007 |
Perhaps I should expand the question... Why do some of you play bolt-ons. I think neck-thru basses and set-neck basses are superior instruments on average. Compare a bolt-on model Warick to a neck-thru model Warick. Compare a bolt-on MTD to a neck-thru MTD. compare a bolt-on Ken Smich to a neck-thru Ken Smith. | ||
| eligilam
Intermediate Member Username: eligilam Post Number: 132 Registered: 2-2006 |
This discussion is getting a little cyclical. There are no bolt-on Alembics, bolt-on Rickenbackers or neck-through Fenders as far as I know. The argument/question should be further refined to put things in perspective and make it all relative to specific companies, to wit: I proffer this as the relevant question: "Why would you play the bolt-on variety of a model that also makes a neck-through variety?" [In my case, with my Worker Bee 7 string bolt-on, there just simply wasn't a neck through Queen Bee 7 around when I was looking for a 7. It was simply a matter of availability.] | ||
| lbpesq
Senior Member Username: lbpesq Post Number: 3264 Registered: 7-2004 |
Jared: It's "set-neck" vs. "neck through". On a neck through (or "neck thru") instrument, the same piece of wood (or pieces with a laminated neck) runs the entire length of the guitar. Wings are then glued to the sides of the neck to form the body. Examples are Alembic Series instruments and the Further, Spectrum, Little Darling, and California Special guitars. On a set neck, the neck is a separate piece from the body and glued into a neck pocket (as opposed to bolting into a neck pocket, like a strat). Examples are Alembic Orion, Skylark, and Tribute guitars, along with most Gibson guitars (Les Paul, SG, ES335). Bill, tgo | ||
| mike1762
Intermediate Member Username: mike1762 Post Number: 110 Registered: 1-2008 |
I agree with the argument that a neck-through instrument is inherently superior in CONSTRUCTION to a bolt-on. I don't think that's even a question when you consider the tolerances that must be maintained through the length of the instrument. However, does the build technique translate into a better sounding instrument? I don't know, that's in the ears of the beholder. Don't forget that the electronics are a HUGE part of the Alembic sound. If I stuck passive JB PUPs in my Series I (don't worry, I wouldn't actually do something like that... anymore), I don't know what it would sound like... but I bet it wouldn't sound like an Alembic. I love my Alembics: the variety of tones they can generate continues to astound me, but they can't do everything. My Stingray has a sound that my Alembics are hard pressed to emulate; therefore, I still reach for it when I want a punchy exaggerated mid-range tone. | ||
| funkyjazzjunky
Intermediate Member Username: funkyjazzjunky Post Number: 193 Registered: 5-2007 |
So tell me, would your Stingray be better bass if it were a neck-thru? | ||
| mike1762
Intermediate Member Username: mike1762 Post Number: 111 Registered: 1-2008 |
It would be a better bass from a mechanical/construction perspective. However, it would then have a markedly different tone (and I'm sure I would prefer the sound of a neck-through Alembic to a neck-through Stingray). While I might like the tone of a neck-through Stingray, it just would not be what draws me to that particular bass. Stingrays do a great "frown" tone. Admittidly, lots of players don't like that type of tone. But it worked well for the music I was playing at the time. I guess my point is that both construction methods have their place in that they result in unique sounding instruments. If Alembic made a bolt-on, I'd probably try to acquire one. Hey... I could buy yours after you decided you hated it!!! !LOL! | ||
| anarchyx
Intermediate Member Username: anarchyx Post Number: 119 Registered: 10-2007 |
i also found out that neck- throughs are more durable than bolt- ons. this guy i know has a Schecter neck- thru model. he's had it for a long time, and regardless of how many times its fallen or been hit, it has one nick in it. a very small one, i might add. | ||
| rushfan
Junior Username: rushfan Post Number: 16 Registered: 9-2008 |
well, i think it depends on what your preferences are. for me, being 13, the only option i have are bolt-ons. i have played neck-through instruments, and i find them more comfortable and fuller sounding for the high solo stuff, added to just basic bass or guitar playing. like i said before, preferences. | ||
| 811952
Senior Member Username: 811952 Post Number: 1516 Registered: 10-2003 |
"Durability" is an entirely different issue.. I had an old (probably early '70's) Fender Jazz Bass that lost its head with only a minor bump. I've seen pictures Alembics that have suffered a similar fate. I had an early '70's fretless Jazz Bass that I used to surf down a friend's basement stairs before practice, set on fire regularly and generally bash-around. Nothing fazed it and it always played very well and sounded good. I finally traded that neck for a custom 5-string neck in the mid-80's. I think durability is something we *really* try hard to not discover with our Alembics. ;) John | ||
| lbpesq
Senior Member Username: lbpesq Post Number: 3278 Registered: 7-2004 |
My Strat had it's 47th birthday on Monday. It's a bolt on. And, as the years have proven, it's durable. Bill, tgo | ||
| white_cloud
Senior Member Username: white_cloud Post Number: 495 Registered: 11-2007 |
Amen to vintage Fenders! Oh dear to the new breed John. | ||
| funkyjazzjunky
Advanced Member Username: funkyjazzjunky Post Number: 207 Registered: 5-2007 |
So some advanteges of Bolt-on are; 1 A particular sound some players love 2 Cost 3 Adaptablity (replacable neck) What else motiviates bolt-on owners? | ||
| bsee
Senior Member Username: bsee Post Number: 2022 Registered: 3-2004 |
Tradition and nostalgia. Since bolt-ons were among the first great electric basses, so much of that great music was recorded with them. Just about everything out of Motown, Nashville or Memphis in the day was played on a Fender because there just wasn't any other option at the time. Old Fenders are super expensive because of these feelings at least as much as the way they play and sound. | ||
| anarchyx
Intermediate Member Username: anarchyx Post Number: 120 Registered: 10-2007 |
yeah Josh! power to the 13- year- olds! I'm 13 too. and John, I'm sure that Fender Jazz Bass did lose its head easily. Fender guitars and basses are BOLT- ON, which is why i said NECK- THROUGHS are more durable | ||
| anarchyx
Intermediate Member Username: anarchyx Post Number: 121 Registered: 10-2007 |
yeah Josh! power to the 13- year- olds! I'm 13 too. and John, I'm sure that Fender Jazz Bass did lose its head easily. Fender guitars and basses are BOLT- ON, which is why i said NECK- THROUGHS are more durable | ||
| mike1762
Intermediate Member Username: mike1762 Post Number: 117 Registered: 1-2008 |
 It happens to the best of us!!! | ||
| funkyjazzjunky
Advanced Member Username: funkyjazzjunky Post Number: 208 Registered: 5-2007 |
What became of that tragic beauty? Since the electronics and hardware are valuable, was it saved? | ||
| kenbass4
Advanced Member Username: kenbass4 Post Number: 305 Registered: 10-2003 |
See HERE | ||
| rushfan
Junior Username: rushfan Post Number: 17 Registered: 9-2008 |
kenbass4, id like to buy that. just to look at it or for repair.really, im serious | ||
| rushfan
Junior Username: rushfan Post Number: 18 Registered: 9-2008 |
kenbass4, id like to buy that. just to look at it or for repair.im serious | ||
| kenbass4
Advanced Member Username: kenbass4 Post Number: 306 Registered: 10-2003 |
Sorry, Joshua, but that bass is not mine...it belonged to Steve Wood, another club member. He had it insured, so the insurance company probably owns it now. | ||
| rushfan
Junior Username: rushfan Post Number: 22 Registered: 9-2008 |
nuts!!! | ||
| funkyjazzjunky
Advanced Member Username: funkyjazzjunky Post Number: 210 Registered: 5-2007 |
S_Wood's mis-hap has taught me to always use a secure bass stand with a latch | ||
| mike1762
Intermediate Member Username: mike1762 Post Number: 120 Registered: 1-2008 |
I do wonder what the insurance company did with the "wood". Can you imagine walking by a trash can and seeing that? | ||
| rushfan
Junior Username: rushfan Post Number: 24 Registered: 9-2008 |
if i did id have nightmares. | ||
| cozmik_cowboy
Advanced Member Username: cozmik_cowboy Post Number: 358 Registered: 10-2006 |
Nightmares? No. A quick dumpster-dive & quicker shipment to Santa Rosa? You betcha! Peter | ||
| anarchyx
Intermediate Member Username: anarchyx Post Number: 123 Registered: 10-2007 |
that looks like a pretty decent bass. i wonder how it sounded, though. | ||
| rushfan
Junior Username: rushfan Post Number: 25 Registered: 9-2008 |
dang, i shoulda thought a that. i definatly would dumpster-dive for it! | ||
| 811952
Senior Member Username: 811952 Post Number: 1519 Registered: 10-2003 |
Dumpster diving for Alembics. Welcome to America. :P I bet it sounded awesome, until it made that one really really awful cracking sound. ;) John | ||
| anarchyx
Intermediate Member Username: anarchyx Post Number: 124 Registered: 10-2007 |
I think i would dumpster- dive for it as well! |
