Right! If you break the neck time to get a new guitar,but i`ve had probably over 40 guitars in my time and i never broke a neck!first off would be the increased sustain, the second would be the smooth neck heel for fret access. the bad part would be if you crack your neck, game's over
Apparently the plan behind the body-sized headstock on a certain manufacturer's guitars?Actually I was recently told that a bolt on has the best sustain, set neck second place and Neck-thru the least amout of sustain in a scientific experiment. Same guy told me that a larger/heavier headstock improves sustain.
hmmmm............had he recently experimented with peyote?Actually I was recently told that a bolt on has the best sustain, set neck second place and Neck-thru the least amout of sustain in a scientific experiment. Same guy told me that a larger/heavier headstock improves sustain.
I've got 5 guitars. A UV777BK (bolt on), a Jackson rr24 (neck thru), Fender Strat (bolt on), Dean ML (neck thru) and a Squier Tele (bolt on).What do you think are the advantages if any of a neck thru guitar?
+1I actually prefer bolt ons, FWIW. It's something about the harmonic content - there's a bit more in the midrange on a neck thru whereas the fundamental and upper harmonics on a bolt on are a little more prominent by comparison, because of what's not there... It translates into a clearer tone with a bit more sparkle and snap to the attack. Likewise, the body wood comes to play more of a part in the sound with a bolt on, whereas the neck through's construction means the neck wood tends to dominate.
I'm a Strat guy from way back, so I just sort of dig the sound of a maple necked bolt on with an ash or alder body. Personal taste, I'll admit, but it's what I like.
Hmmm..... especially from guitarists ? Point taken (although in this instance I'm pretty sure it's valid).Things get reputations for all sorts of stupid and valid reasons; it doesn't mean those reputations are valid.