Query failed: connection to localhost:9312 failed (errno=111, msg=Connection refused).
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Subscribe to our Patreon, and get image uploads with no ads on the site!
Base theme by DesignModo & ported to Powered by Vanilla by Chris Ireland, modified by the "theFB" team.
Comments
They're not horrible, you'll be surprised. Have a look at the Aria MSG-05, that's got a bolt on neck, you can't see the bolts because they're inside the guitar, it looks just like an ordinary glued on neck.
Front and back
IMO, Collings and Bourgeois are pretty much as good as it gets even at their huge price tags.
I found that very surprising given their price tags.
Studio: https://www.voltperoctave.com
Music: https://www.euclideancircuits.com
Me: https://www.jamesrichmond.com
Auto-Bounce by Tom Salta
Dreamhost Web Hosting
I did a similar test with an used Martin and one of its newer authentic aged models and the difference was minimal.
There are only three points of contact between the neck and body, and none of them are wood - one brass bolt at the back of the heel under tension, and two adjustable brass wheels under compression just below the fingerboard which allow the neck angle and alignment to be adjusted without even taking the strings off.
These guitars sound very much like normal acoustic guitars, and very good... and sell for about £6K I think.
There's also nothing wrong with a Strat-type joint, other than convention. If it holds the neck on a Strat or a Tele, it will hold the neck on an acoustic. Eko used them, and although they don't sound great that has more to do with the overbuilt plywood bodies than the neck joint - and they can always be set up to play really nicely, since the neck can be shimmed as well as the bridge being adjustable.
Fender's bolt-ons were mocked in the 50s too, but it's now more common than not on electric guitars... and still people argue about whether full wood-to-wood contact is inherently better than having an adjuster or a shim. (No it isn't.)
"Take these three items, some WD-40, a vise grip, and a roll of duct tape. Any man worth his salt can fix almost any problem with this stuff alone." - Walt Kowalski
"Just because I don't care, doesn't mean I don't understand." - Homer Simpson
Some more information here.
http://www.nkforsterguitars.com/blog/my-favourite-guitar-howe-orme/
Its never moved or shifted and stays in tune till one of the kids knocks it over.
I'd have bought a J45 or D28 many moons ago but this thing wont let me. There's no room for 2 acoustics in my life.
A great bolt on neck guitar if ever there was one !
Anyway, @AuldReekie has one, and I'm pretty sure he'll also tell you that it doesn't suffer from having no 'wood-to-wood contact' for 'maximum vibration transfer' between the neck and body.
In fact, I would guess that it might actually be the opposite - too much contact between two parts that happen to not resonate well together could *absorb* vibration, not sustain it.
And also, if anything bolts can produce a tighter wood-to-wood contact than glue, which always has a thin layer of glue in the middle - even if extremely thin - and lacks the constant pressure of a bolted joint when the bolts are done up fully... it's just an inert joint, whereas the metal bolt actually stretches slightly, like an extremely powerful spring pulling the surfaces together.
I know this comes as a shock to traditional luthiers .
"Take these three items, some WD-40, a vise grip, and a roll of duct tape. Any man worth his salt can fix almost any problem with this stuff alone." - Walt Kowalski
"Just because I don't care, doesn't mean I don't understand." - Homer Simpson
I don't have anything against bolt on necks, but anybody remember the original question ??
Why - because the wood eventually changes shape under the string tension. How often - about once every forty years or more.
So although it is true that it makes a reset easier, it's certainly nothing that would make it a major selling point for most people.
"Take these three items, some WD-40, a vise grip, and a roll of duct tape. Any man worth his salt can fix almost any problem with this stuff alone." - Walt Kowalski
"Just because I don't care, doesn't mean I don't understand." - Homer Simpson
I have owned quite a few (prob 6 or 7) of each brand, and mostly preferred the SCGC's for tone. I doubt that the preference was anything to do with dovetail vs bolt, and more to do with the overall build ethos.
And the seemingly greater stability of the Collings obviously would not be anything to do with bolt vs dovetail, just thicker wood almost everywhere on the guitar. You can visibly see that. Or just weigh them and that will tell you all you need to know. If I was going to take a guitar to a desert island and spend the rest of my life away from human contact and more importantly any access to a luthier, then I might take a Collings.
My current Bourgeois beats them all for me personally, and that's a bolt joint. I would say they are generally somewhere in between SCGC and Collings in terms of lightness of build. Not really seen any over about 10 year s old, so no idea about long term stability.
Bolt neck might not be a selling point as such, but it's quite nice to know it would be an easy fix if needed. I have seen some guitars that were never the same again after a full invasive neck reset. Also, if a new neck was ever needed due to damage, warping, whatever, that would be much easier. Quite unlikely though really.