What is the big deal about Suhr guitars?

[dfrattaroli]

Am I going to argue that I think that a bolt on guitar is inferior? No....because I wouldn't get anywhere even if I did argue that point.

You wouldn't get anywhere because it's a stupid fucking point.

I guess I grew up on that you had a real guitar once you stepped up to a full on neck thru.

Yeah, well that's just wrong.

For me, bolt on vs. neck thru is like what a tube amp is to a solid state amp for many.

A horrible analogy.

 

[Atropos_Project]

In defense of some of the arguments here, I have to say that growing up, it seemed to be considered common knowledge (or myth, whatever) that neck-thru designs were "better", or a superior way to manufacture a guitar. It certainly seems like a more costly or difficult method of creation.

Growing up thinking that, one could easily look at guitars like Suhr etc, and wonder exactly why the price is what it is. I mean.. the cheapest Squier guitars are bolt on, right?

Bolt-on has some advantages to it that neck through does not, however... a higher amount of wood choices, the capacity to change, replace or fix the neck if there is damage, and less glue / more uninterrrupted wood structure (most if not all neck thru guitars require glued on wings) across the entire instrument.

From a scientific viewpoint, it'd be interesting to see what parts of a guitar are responsible for the most resonance and string reaction. I'd tend to think that the bridge area is most crucial, but I also know that, for example.. hanging a pair of vice grips off the headstock can drastically change the sound of a guitar (just by adding weight up there).

As far as Suhr goes, one fact rings true.... if their customers weren't overwhelmed and happy with the product, they wouldn't be in business.

I'd love to own one (and will at some point).

 

[RJF]

Am I going to argue that I think that a bolt on guitar is inferior? No....because I wouldn't get anywhere even if I did argue that point.

You wouldn't get anywhere because it's a stupid fucking point.

I guess I grew up on that you had a real guitar once you stepped up to a full on neck thru.

Yeah, well that's just wrong.

For me, bolt on vs. neck thru is like what a tube amp is to a solid state amp for many.

A horrible analogy.

Again, you're equating "design" (bolt on versus neck thru) with "build quality". That's stupid. A set neck can be built like shit too. You're implying that building a bolt on is simpler than building a neck thru and therefore, should be cheaper. That's stupid too. It's not simpler to build a bolt on. You still have the same neck alignment issues and concerns as with any design.

If that makes me a Suhr fan boy, fine. But you're clearly a Suhr basher. Because Anderson makes pretty expensive bolt ons too and you haven't tried to shit on them. At least not yet. Oh wait, TAG only uses 2 bolts! The world is coming to an end! Grosh? Tyler? Got Bolts?

For one, calm down a hair, you don't need to be an ass to get your argument across.

I do think Neck thru is better, why? Because I've played many examples of both build style and VASTLY prefer a neck thru. I would pay $4K for a high quality neck thru, I would NOT pay $4k for a high quality bolt on, because I simply prefer one style of build over the other. Am I biased? yes, but you don't need to flip your lid over it, especially as I haven't even made any kind of bashing talk towards them anyway. If anything, it was a light, fun poke, mainly to intrigue Suhr players to get some conversation going on them.

I don't care if it's a Suhr, Anderson, whatever, if it's not a neck thru I am likely not going to buy one. On the other hand, Caparison DOES build many neck thru guitars and I am likely to purchase one, because it's the build style I prefer. Regardless, I have no doubt Suhr builds some of the best bolt ons around.

Just like another gentlemen said above me, growing up in the 90's, neck thru seemed to be the hot ticket. many pros were going that route and many were going to that build style, not to mention that neck thru guitars were usually higher priced, due to what was supposedly a superior building style that was more difficult to build.

Am I just simply a Suhr hater? Nope, I'd jump at the chance to play on one, and if I really like it, I'll probably even buy one.

 

[Bob Savage]

If anything, it was a light, fun poke, mainly to intrigue Suhr players to get some conversation going on them.

You're quite the facilitator of discussion.

 

[Code001]

On the other hand, Caparison DOES build many neck thru guitars and I am likely to purchase one, because it's the build style I prefer.

Caparison makes 3 models that are neck-thru (TAT, TAT Special and Orbit). You consider that to be "many?"

 

[headlessdeadguy]

I dont care either way. If it sound good/plays good that is okay for me. The only guitar I stay away from is Agile ...but I am sure some of their guitars are good.

 

[dfrattaroli]

...you don't need to be an ass to get your argument across.

Practice what you preach.

 

[Ventura]

If anything, it was a light, fun poke, mainly to intrigue Suhr players to get some conversation going on them.

You're quite the facilitator of discussion.

Tongue planted firmly in cheek, I see...

V.

 

[lolzgreg]

I dont care either way. If it sound good/plays good that is okay for me. The only guitar I stay away from is Agile ...but I am sure some of their guitars are good.

I have an Agile that plays better than your Charvel