Acoustic Bolt On Necks
New member, first post. I found this forum about 2 months ago while doing research on a 2007 Taylor 214ce that I just picked up. Anyway, having 7 years of guitar repair experience (I'm by no means the next Dan Erlewine, or a great builder)
Having had a collection of 14 acoustics total (now down to 5) I've noticed several things. But, it's also brought some questions that I cannot answer myself. Right now my collection comprises of a 2007 Taylor 214ce, 08 Seagull S6 Cedar GT, 1975 Alvarez Yairi DY-75, 70's Sekova, and an Ibanez AEF20. The Taylor and the Seagull are the brightest. I tend to like this, as they're not overly bright, but provide great clarity (and with Pho Bronze strings, good bass response). Here's the spinner, they both feature bolt on necks. Now most people who are familiar with acoustics know of Taylor's NT (New Technology) Neck, and Seagull seems to have followed in their footsteps with almost the exact same construction (I've taken a few apart ) But they don't promote it much like Taylor does. The Alvarez is the darkest of them all. I'm very compelled to say "muddy", but I believe that has to do with the fact that my ears have adjusted to the Taylor sound. Unfortunately acoustics rely on so many small details to form their sound that it's almost impossible to compare one brand to another. Martin vs. Taylor vs. Lowden vs. Seagull vs. whoever else. Here's my question. Is it unreasonable to form the opinion that bolt on neck acoustics give a brighter sound? It's almost glass like in clarity but still incredibly smooth (especially with Godin's Quantum II electronics). Anyone else have an opinion? |
In my opnion, the neck joint has little to do with the intrinsic brightness of the tone. I think that the woods, overall design and voicing of the guitar override any minor difference.
|
Quote:
The liveliest guitar i own is a set-neck, most of the rest are bolt-ons, and they are all lovely. |
I haven't noticed that in my 40 years of playing - but never quite thought about it like that. Probably best left to be answered by builders here who have built both types of guitars and have an opinion based on empirical evidence. I'll watch for the opinions to roll in.
|
There are some Martin people who will swear that they can hear a dramatic difference between dovetail (old school, and the method used on all high-end Martins) and the newer mortise-and-tenon neck attachments. I've also heard the difference in "punch" between Martin and Taylor attributed to the Taylor bolt-on neck.
This sounds dubious to me, and I've never talked to a luthier who believed it. - mike |
I talked to Matthew Larrivee a couple of years ago when I toured the Oxnard plant...he gave me the tour personally. According to him, the type of neck attachment makes virtually no difference in sound, and no type of neck attachment is "better" than another. It's a builders personal preference.
FWIW. |
Just a thought - wouldn't a bolt-on neck be a lot easier to reset?
|
Haven't you heard, bolt-on necks are by definition a sign of poor quality!
Gibson lovers have been saying it for decades so it must be true! Seriously, it probably has little or no effect if the neck is attached properly. Of course, with low quality instruments usually having bolt-on necks because they're quicker to produce, it's quite possible that there is a difference between the average guitar with bolt-on neck versus the average guitar with set neck, simply because the averages in either class will sit in quite different market segments. |
Quote:
|
I used to think a bolt on neck was brighter but I was comparing Martin's and Gibson's to Taylor's and Collings. I don't think the neck joint affects the tone. My least favorite neck joint is a bolt on that still uses glue.
FWIW, I prefer dovetails. I use a hardware based dovetail on my guitars. It offers the strength and tradition of a Dovetail, but only takes a few minutes to remove the neck. I recommend buying a guitar for the total package, not because of the neck joint, finish, or other small factors. |
Quote:
Very unreasonable to think that any form of neck attachment has much at all to do with the sound of a guitar. That doesn't stop the romantic notions, though. HE http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=53PZkJsZ2t0 Playing a bolt-on Flammang maple/red spruce w/non-scalloped bracing |
Quote:
|
Hi sordid tales,
Welcome to ths wonderful forum. IMHO the necks joints, bolt on or dovetailed have got no bearing on the sound of the guitar. The guitar sound is dependent on the voicing, bracing, wood selection and the general skill of the builder. I have a Bourgeois OM which sounds heavenly and has a bolt on neck. Dana Bourgeois has a great system where the neck as well as the fingerboard extension is bolted, so if you unscrew 6 bolts the whole necks comes out and neck resets are a cinch. some builders have bolt on necks and the fingerboard extentions are glued. Some offer both bolt on and dovetailed. Kevin gallagher is in this category. Some are only into the traditional dovetailed like Jim Olson and my Larrivee. It depends om how the builder is set up. But to me bolt on necks is the way to go and i have guitars with both methods, there is no difference in sound. Micheal Baskin, John Ostoff, Tom Doerr, Gerald Sheppard etc are all doing bolt on necks. I do hope someday everybody shifts to bolt on necks. Best, Keyshore |
Quote:
- mike |
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:18 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, The Acoustic Guitar Forum