Neck through vs Bolt on

[groverj3]

Don't get me wrong, my good old DXMG with a good setup and better pickups plays and feels great, but my SL2H blows it out of the water in my opinion, playability and tone-wise. My main point being, maaaaaybe the wood is better in a more expensive bolt-on, but in the end you're paying more money and they're just going to screw it together the same way.

However, neck throughs are just my preference. Interesting to hear others chime in on this. Out of all my guitarist buddies I play with, I am currently the only one who plays a Jackson, and most definitely the only one that actually owns a neck through. Maybe the others just haven't seen the light

[Grandturk]

To me, bolt on necks sound much better and respond to the fingers much more instantly than set or through necks.

[Trem]

For the most part a neck thru sounds like the neck material, so if it's maple it's pretty bright with a maple or ebony board, lots of attack, and with like woods like alder it enhance it a bit.
For neck thru i like maple thru mahogany cause the mahogany rounds it off a bit and gives it some bass and depth but still has the attack also depends on the body shape or the mass of the wings that are glued to it. Maple thru alder i like less as it's kind of a hollow sound (to me) less depth and more midrange and bite which a maple neck thru already has enough of that considering from the nut to the bridge everything is attached to the maple itself.

Seems to me other than paint, a bolt on should be harder to make or at least more time consuming, as opposed to just gluing wings onto what is basically the bulk of the guitar the neck and body part of the neck extension. Bolt on has more variables to deal with. First..well only guitar i decided to build i chose a neck thru for the simple fact it was easier, i didn't make the neck got it from carvin but as far as getting it together it was easy as gluing two er..3 pieces of wood together. In that way the neck is basically the bulk of the guitar. So it's kinda funny that a neck thru would be considered a more expensive instrument seems cheaper and far easier to build to me besides if it has binding or whatever.

[Axewielder]

Regarding the neck-swapping thing, it's not exactly all "cake and ice cream" when that happens on a bolty guitar. Those woodburn necks aren't exactly easy to come by anymore, and assuming you do find a suitable replacement neck, you are going to be left with a mutt which likely has a different feel from the original guitar. You'll probably have to settle for a MIJ Pro Mod neck with a ghey strathead, and at an inflated price.

[Sukkoi19]

I like them both so much I make a point to have them both. The DK-1 feels better with the satin neck and in my opinion is snappier. The SL-1 is more playable all over the board. Honestly the only time I really notice the difference is when doing finger exercises before I practice. And then it is only when reaching for the 22-24 frets on the A and E string. I do not play anything that really requires 24 frets beyond the E and B string so honestly it is a non-issue for me. Of course the DK-1 has EMGs and the Soloist has a SD Custom so I am sure that may something to do with the attack and bite in high gain situations.

In any case I think the DK-1 is worth every bit as much as the Soloists.

[DalyTek]

I have currently settled down with just 2 guitars: My Jackson KE3 (bolt-on) and my ESP custom shop (neck through.) Both of my guitars are alder body and maple neck, both have Floyd Rose (or licensed FR) and both play and sound fantastic.

I don't find that I have a preference for playing one or the other, although I find that tone-wise my ESP blows away my Kelly. I don't thing the construction has anything to do with it, I think it's just the pickups. The ESP has EMG 81/85 running 18v and the Kelly has the Duncan Designed Detonators. They are very different from each other, and both are definitely keepers.

[warlok]

I like neckthroughs because the ones I have just feel more solid than the bolt ons I've played. Honestly, I don't see much difference in sustain but the tone seems more beefy, as in, the low end has more grunt and low mids are more punchy in my NT's than the BO's I had with the same pups. As far as solid feel, I even like my '90 MIJ Soloist Pro more than my '93 USA Soloist Custom. So it really is each guitar itself that is different.