neck thru tele

[michaelrfr]

possibly a dumb question but has it been done before? from what i understand, a neck thru has greater sustain. would there be any other advantages/disadvantages? would there be any other changes to the tele other than a difference in sustain?

[aznrambo481]

It is probably NOT possible to say that neck-thru has greater sustain. Too many other factors (even from two otherwise completely indentical guitars) are involved. Although it does seem logical that a neck-thru would give you more sustain, I believe that a neck and body screwed together tightly could generate as much as anything else. I have not seen one on a telecaster.

One major disadvantage would be the lack of what made Fenders extremely accessible and inexpensive (compared to other models) in the first place is the idea of interchangeable parts. Say you were mimicking an extremely complex aerial acrobatics maneuver that Pete Townshend pulled off. In the process you smashed your neck beyond repair. With a normal telecaster you could take ANY strat, telecaster, or copy neck and stick it on there in time for your next gig. If that guitar were your prized neck-thru telecaster, you would need to find some way of repairing it, a rather costly procedure. I do not know about any other differences in playing (other than the alleged "more sustain").

that being said, if you want more sustain, stand closer to your amp

[jwells393]

The Merle Haggard Tuff Dog Tribute Telecaster is a neck thru. Fender has made a few others ............ I seem to recall imports from Korea.

[esteban]

I thought about this for a good 30 seconds, and here is my unbiased, scientific conclusion brought about by centuries of hard evidence:

A through-neck guitar would have the most sustain, as the only thing between the bridge and the nut (the two endpoints for the string) is one solid piece of wood; the vibration caused by the strings does not have to transfer into different materials. A set-neck guitar (like a Gibson) would have slightly less sustain, as some vibration is lost between the neck and the body, where it is glued. A bolt-on neck guitar would have the least sustain, because there is a small gap between the neck and the body, which causes a disruption, and I'm betting the screws also have an effect.

How much of a difference there is between the three types, well, iono...

[michaelrfr]

i was just wondering if it would make a considerable difference really. i am planning on starting a project in a few months and was just doing some research. i know a neck thru would be alot more work than the alternatives but if i'm going to spend time on one, i want the best i can get. the biggest problem would probably be finding one. i am not familiar with truss rod adjustments on a neck thru so i don't know how that would differ if any.

as far as gigging goes, i have my tele and a SG standard for backup purposes. i'd smash my sg before i'd smash my tele any day. no doubt.

[jwells393]

Brad Paisley and many others do just fine with screwed on necks. Until you can play better than those players I wouldn't be worrying about the loss of sustain.

[stevieboy]

The Tele Jr is a set neck design. I have one, but I can't really begin to address what difference it makes because it also has a mahogany chambered body, P90's and a Strat hard tail style bridge--way too many variables from a Telecaster for my little pea brain to sort out!

I personally would go with a bolt on in any tele project from scratch that I might do, the advantages of being able to change the neck if I had the desire would far outweigh any possible noticable difference in sustain.

[The String King]

Tele's (in my experience) don't have much sustain, and if you can get more, do it... One downside of a neck through is... It's a neck through... If you don't like the neck, TOUGH!

[Crawfishman]

Great guitar, made of walnut w/ rosewood fretboard. SUSTAIN FOREVER...I'll send pics if you'd like to see it.

[lukeness]

I did own one of those Korean made Scorpion Esquires at one point. It wasn't a neck thru, but it was a set neck I believe. It had really good sustain, but I attribute it more to the higher gain settings that it begged for. When it came down to it though, I just couldn't stand the scorpion inlay and I sold it. But now that it's discontinued, I wish I still had it.

But my new esquire I just build destroys it in every way... so I guess I don't miss it too much.

Right now I have 2 PRS's and 2 teles... The PRS's are my main instruments, but the lack of sustain that the teles have compared to the PRS's are inconsequential. I find that the teles have enough sustain anyways cos I think it's more in the fingers. This came to me as I got better as a player, as I used to rely on the neck thru as a crutch for sustain. Now the neck thru is just another style of guitar to me. I'm fine with either.

[thepassivevoice]

Yes, please post pictures. I'm sure many are curious.

Thanks.

[bosrocker51]

I have a Fender Tele, made in Korea, either a neck thru or set neck guitar. It's painted, so I don't know. Sustain is nice, but it really does not matter these days. You can get compression/sustain pedals, there is all kinds of software available, and a decent overdrive/fuzz unit or onboard electronics can give you essentially infinate sustain. Wood matters, and generally I think my Gibsons have better sustain than my Fenders, but it depends on the guitar, the wood, the pickup, the amp... and how well you can hold a note. here's a pic:

[bosrocker51]

My Fender neck-through Tele: according to the guy I talked w at Fender, production numbers are not known for my guitar so it may be rare, made in April 2003, it's called an Esquire Custom Scorpion and came with an Atomic 2 humbucker pickup originally. Made in Korea, stock pup replaced w a Gibson '57 Classic humbucker. Body is scooped in back like a strat or aerodyne body.
It has a thin neck, fast action & tons o fun to play.

Here's a link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=93beJ9h-3RE

keep rockin, kids~

[Alamo]

I have a Hoyer "Black Lady" Tele, which probably is a neck thru build .
I assume this because that's how Hoyer built some of them.
http://www.musikkeller.com/mk/index....=hoyer&lang=en
I can't say I notice more sustain or such - it just sounds different than any of my other Teles.
I won't be fitting a bolt-on neck anytime soon just to find out it did have more sustain.

[BigDaddyLH]

In the current catalog the FMT HH Tele has a set neck, which is not the same as a "through the body" neck, right?

http://www.fender.com/products//sear...tno=0262000561

I find that model interesting, but in the continuum or space of Telecaster-essense, it's an outlier: twin humbuckers, mahogany neck and body, 15.75” radius, black chrome hardware...

The black cherry burst is sweet, however:

[LuvN Guitars]

Originally Posted by michaelrfr

possibly a dumb question but has it been done before? from what i understand, a neck thru has greater sustain. would there be any other advantages/disadvantages? would there be any other changes to the tele other than a difference in sustain?

In theory a neck through should have more sustain, but as others have mentioned there are a lot of other factors in play. For the first fifteen years I was building guitars I only built neck thru's. I began guitar building in the mid 70's, neck thru's were all the go back then. Most of my early builds went the full 70's route, neck thru, with brass bridges and nuts. Either maple necks or laminations from mahogany, maple, blackwood and myrtle. They certainly had great sustain, but I have built or played set necks and bolt ons to match them. Based on my experience only I'd say that you'd have less chance of getting a guitar with poor sustain with a neck thru construction than with other methods. Assuming you use decent woods.
As has also been mentioned, you'll loose the convenience of a bolt on should a neck need replacing, but hey, if you're building your own, give it a go.
One advantage of a neck thru can be the flexability you get when it comes to merging the neck into the body, no heel.