Greg Bennett AV-1 neckjoint

EugeneSmasher

New member
Hey people, I'm seeking clarification on the neckjoint of the AV-1 because according to the website, it is a set-neck, but there's a picture on the net and it appears to be a bolt-on with back-plate. So, I kinda need clarification for this.

Why I am asking is because I am planning to get my backup electric (it might become my main one if it turns out nicer than my Ibanez) and I'm preferring a set-neck. There is a high-chance of performing in June and I don't intend to go up without a backup guitar. Another model I'm considering is the TR-1 which I have tried before and found to be very nice.

So yeah, need some insight on these two models. Thanks!
 
Hmmm... Unless maybe the 2009 pieces onwards have set-necks. I think for the safe side, I'll go for the TR-1 then. I don't have anything against bolt-on necks but I'll feel more secure with a set-neck. What's your impression of your AV-1?
 
I kinda get what you mean by feeling more secure with set necks. But your Ibanez is bolt-on, yes? Isit giving you any problems?

Personally I feel that set-necks are like.. I dunno... neither here nor there. I rather go all out neck through. That's just me, though. :)
 
My Ibanez isn't giving me problems actually. It's just that since it doesn't have a backplate (most Ibanezs don't. I don't know why) so I worry about the screws eating into the wood over time. So yeah, I guess it's more about how secure it feels that I prefer set-necks and neck-thrus. But if the AV-1 has a backplate, I also feel more secure because the backplate prevents the screws from eating into the wood if they're well-drilled.

Also, anyone knows the retail price and the possible secondhand price range of the AV-3?
 
Last edited:
My Ibanez isn't giving me problems actually. It's just that since it doesn't have a backplate (most Ibanezs don't. I don't know why) so I worry about the screws eating into the wood over time.

Ah... I see, I see. You're afraid that the tarnished screws will cause some defect to the wood and make the joint unstable in the long run.

I never tried Greg Bennetts, but I'm definitely liking the look of the TR-1.
 
Last edited:
IMHO, gibson'ish guitars gotta be set neck and fender'ish guitars gotta be bolt on. Its just like that lah...
 
Hmmm... Unless maybe the 2009 pieces onwards have set-necks. I think for the safe side, I'll go for the TR-1 then. I don't have anything against bolt-on necks but I'll feel more secure with a set-neck. What's your impression of your AV-1?

Its a very good sounding and playable guitar for its price, bought mine for $250. It sounds better than my RG which is three times its price.

Nice hardware, Duncan Designed pickups and the machine heads are pretty good Grover ones. The only flaw was a loose jack. It does have a backplate.

If i were you i'd get the Av-1.:)

Btw, the frets are not jumbo ones and they may need some getting used to if you've been playing with big frets.
 
Last edited:
THOA: Yes, that's my worry. The screws aren't tarnished yet but they're taking a bit more tension than before since the bridge has been hardtailed and the strings are 10s. So my main worry is that the screws will eat into the wood. If so, perhaps both the body and the neck might have to be scrapped. Yup, I really like the TR-1, my friend's felt great and looked great too.

edder: Actually, I think hardtail bridge equipped guitars should have set-neck and tremolo equipped guitars should have bolt-ons, because hardtail bridges tend to have a little more tension on the neckjoint and neck. No tremolo to loosen the tension.

asdq: No worries about the frets. My Ibanez has medium frets actually. Sounds cool, now I gotta decide which one now.. Between the TR-1, FA-1 (humbucking tele) and AV-1.
 
Ever heard of vintage bolt on guitars that still function perfectly well?

How about Ibanez RGs? One of the most popular and abundant guitars - bolt-on design - from say the 80s. The 90s. 2000s. Now? Any issue with the bolt on design?


Hmmm?
 
I don't have an issue with bolt-ons in general. I have an issue with bolt-ons without metal backplates. I happen to have a guitar which has become a lemon because the metal screws ate into the wood.
 
I think on his part it's more of a psychological thing, which I can somehow understand. I'm pretty sure the bolt on design can last a lifetime if need be. But if it's a fear that it MIGHT happen affects his choice and preference, then it is still a choice and preference.
 
I just spent a whole night thinking about it. Come to think of it, the screws can still eat into the wood with a metal backplate, just in a different direction. Either way both can eat into the wood and get damaged over time. I guess it is no longer down to the type of neckjoint, but the quality of the neckjoint, that matters.

Come to think of it, I think I was being overly paranoid. After all, like Shredcow has said, the RG series with no backplates (as well as the SAs, no backplates) are very popular and what I fear does not seem to happen. I guess I ought to check the quality instead of the type of neckjoint. :mrgreen:

And furthermore, in a set-neck design, it is a glue holding it in place, so in actual fact I'd deem it less secure than a good bolt-on, because a bolt-on has metal screws holding it in place, rather like reinforced cement slabs.

I can sleep easier now..
 
Heh. Honestly, dude, by the time that the screws of the bolt on neck joint ever corrode and effect the neck (which will probably take years) then it's time to get a new guitar, liao :mrgreen:

Perhaps to help the joint better, I was told of this trick by FGL: wood glue in the screw cavity of the guitar. Need to leave it a few minutes for the resin to seep in before screwing. Try it! ;)
 
just another point. most RG uses Basswood which is probably the softest wood around for guitar bodies. well those vintage RGs are still holding up fine.
 
Back
Top