The interesting thing about this topic, is that guitar players generally tend to voice opinions with either no scientific research to back it, or they claim they read somewhere from a credible source that some lab determined "x" build type "won" in terms of sustain, etc. Not saying that it has happened here, I'm just speaking generally about what I observe whenever I see topics like this being discussed elsewhere.
I guess the point is that it's all preference. To me, I LOVE neck-thrus to death, but at the moment I have 3 JPs, and no neck-thru guitars--I think that speaks towards the points that have already been made in terms of just playing what you like. The other thing to consider is that I think EBMM is arguably the best company out there for guitar making, simply because the prices aren't too inflated, and you get one of the best quality products possible. It's for this reason that I think it's unfair to compare another brand's set neck/neck thru to an EBMM, because you have to be a REALLY good company to stack up to EBMM (at least in my opinion).
That having been said, I think why there hasn't been an artist who requests anything other than bolt on, is because of the reliability issue. Like others have mentioned, bolt-ons provide more versatility in tweaking, and if something breaks it's a simple swap. That makes a HUGE difference when you are an artist on tour, where your guitars risk breakage everyday and go through huge temperature and humidity changes frequently. A lot of times, I prefer the feel of a heel-less neck-thru guitar, but obviously when I look at my current arsenal, I see that the preferred feeling takes a backseat to the other things EB has to offer (and it's not like a JP's heel is unplayable!). And even if a set-neck or neck-thru had more sustain/tone/whatever, would the extra few seconds of sustain make THAT much of a difference in the music we play, or even with the gear we play through?
Personally, I think that the gear your playing through, and your own skills as a player have such a huge impact on your tone, sustain, sound, etc. and that you can compensate for a lot of the "problems" you encounter. That is why I think playability is one of the most important things in a guitar, and EB offers some of the most playable guitars out there. Simply stated, it's easy to mitigate a tone problem (just EQ your amp or get a pedal, etc.) but it's much harder and more frustrating to try to get a guitar to play nicely, whether it sounds great or not.
So yeah, I'll echo Stratty in saying let EB build what EB wants, because clearly their philosophies are worthwhile and have built some groundbreaking guitars up until now.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by Matt Gillis
Bookmarks