Hey,can someone tell me the differences between a set neck and a bolt on and which one is better?I got flamed in another website when i told a guy that if you break a set neck,you can replace the neck and set necks are easier to solo,but bolt ons are harder to solo,but necks are replacable if broken...Is that wrong?sorry, im a noobie...
Ibanez SA160QM
Laney HCM10
Squier Bullet Strat
MXR Carbon Copy
Zoom Tri Metal
Modtone Flanger(mini)
Korg Pitchblack
Timtone acoustic
With a set neck it feels good when you play high because there are no bolts in your neck.
Thats all i kno lol
A bolt on neck is bolted on to the body, therefore you can unscrew it and replace it. A set neck is glued in place, and therefore can't just be swapped. Set necks tend to have better upper neck access, but this isn't necessarily the case.
Well... A bolt on neck is bolted on to the body (Screwed with wood screws actually, to be very specific) and a set neck is set on the body with glue. If you break a bolt on neck, you can unscrew it and bolt another neck onto the body, you can not replace a set neck. The access to the upper frets all depends on the shape of the heel, many modern bolt on guitars have nice ergonomic and round heels that offer just as much access as set necks, Of course neck-through guitars have the most access to the upper frets. A type of set neck, the neck through method involves the neck wood extending all the way to the bridge and the guitar body being glued around it and as a result there can be virtually no heel whatsoever.