Set Neck vs Bolt-on

brendansmith

Patricide wrote: »

No, set means the neck is glued in place to the body, A set neck on the other hand is the neck being from the same wood as the body(i.e. there not 2 seperate pieces of wood to begin with). The main advantage of having a neck through Vs. a set neck is so that you have less of a heal and better higher fret access. Of course it also improves sustain and tone general tone also, to what extent though is argued to extremes.

But a set neck is better than a bolt on yeah??

Doctor J

brendansmith wrote: »

But a set neck is better than a bolt on yeah??

No.

kranog

I'd say 8 times out of 10...yes...a set neck is better than a bolt-on....don't mind Doc...he's just tryin' to "infact" us all with...."not every set neck is better than a bolt on...it all depends on the craftsmanship" angle....in fairness...he's right....but...it'd have to be a terrible job on the set neck and an excellent bolt-on job...if ya get my meaning!
But back to the point mate...it's been said already...there are far superior guitars on offer on adverts for the same money!

Doctor J

kranog wrote: »

I'd say 8 times out of 10...yes...a set neck is better than a bolt-on....don't mind Doc...he's just tryin' to "infact" us all with...."not every set neck is better than a bolt on...it all depends on the craftsmanship" angle....in fairness...he's right....but...it'd have to be a terrible job on the set neck and an excellent bolt-on job...if ya get my meaning!

I disagree entirely. Think about how much music is out there, if set neck is better tell me the records recorded with set neck instruments and the ones recorded with bolt on. Gimme a percentage of one vs the other. Do records with set neck instruments sound better? Surely one can hear the difference, yeah?

Are you saying a layer of glue between the body wood and neck wood transfers string vibrations better than the direct wood to wood contact of bolt on? If so, why aren't we making guitars out of glue?

kranog

Hell yeah bitch! Everyone knows that glue is the glue that binds a good guitar!

Nah....the sustain is better with a set neck....probably a little more due to the angle of the headstock...but still a set neck plays, sounds, feels, looks and eh...smells better than a bolt-on....there yar now Doc...The five guitar senses outlined!

Doctor J

I've got set neck, neck through and bolt on and neither is any better than the other, provided the build quality isn't **** to start off with. For playability and feel, ask an Ibanez RG player and a Les Paul player how easy it is to access beyond the 15th fret on their respective guitars. Sustain... I've never played a bolt on with a noticeable lack of sustain. Does anybody really actually need a note to hang around to Spinal Tap levels, what kind of music is that? Surely neck through would be better still at this, no? A well built guitar is a well built guitar, you might prefer one type of neck join over the other, that's cool, but one certainly isn't better than the other, otherwise we'd all be returning our Hendrix and Deep Purple albums due to lack of sustain :pac:

darrenw5094

Eddie Van Halen, J. Petrucci, Jimi Hendrix, Satriani, Vai, Clapton etc. etc.
All use guitars with bolt on necks......i don't hear those guy complaining.

The glue on neck, i think, gives a more fuller fatter sound for rhythm.
But to say that one is better than the other is not right. They are differerent than each other, so everyone to their own.

Darkstrike

Doctor J wrote: »

Does anybody really actually need a note to hang around to Spinal Tap levels

I do!















But I can do it with bolt on's.....:D

EDIT: I like bolt on's, neck throughs, but I don't have any opinion on set necks, I honetly think if the guitar is built well it dosn't matter how the neck's attached.

kranog

OK..
allow me to clarify my point a little please!

a few years ago, they made epi's with a bolt-on neck....these days they tend to use a set-neck.
Anyone gonna dispute that the modern ones are a far superior quality over the older ones?
The older LTD's had bolt-on (the cheap ones still do!), the set-necked versions are much better and the only difference is the neck!

Having said all this...the same applies to US Fender's and Squires.....both are bolt-on....but a US bolt-on is a far superior quality than a Squire bolt-on (in most cases!)

But to top it off....I have a PRS CE22...it;s a bolt-on and THE BEST GUITAR I'VE EVER PLAYED!
Still...the usual rule of quality in these cases is usually;

Neck Through
Set Neck
Bolt-On

I don't make the rules lads!

Karl Hungus

Hey guys, I've split this off from this thread, as it's kinda dragging the topic away from the original question.

joenailface

well as stated you're probably right but a guitar made of chipboard using terrible pickups with a set neck is going to sound worse than a decent bolt on, it depends on the craftsmanship. if your limiting value for tone is the fact that you have a bolt on neck then an set neck will be an improvement and a neck thru an improvement on that, assuming nothing else changes, but the types of wood, pickups, pickguards (on say strats), the type of paint and and anything that can effect the way sound moves closer to the pickups would have far more impact on your overall tone, take the 70's silverburst les paul, the only difference between that and other les pauls of that era was the metallic particals in the paint but it made a huge impact in overall tone because the sound was reflected more

but as for the original topic that guitar looks like a turd save yerself some hassle if you want a washburn and buy an idol, some come equipped with seymour duncans or emgs and have set/neck though configs, light as a feather, made with mahogony, happy days if you want a good all round guitar taylored to your needs...some of them do carry a hefty price tag though

Karl Hungus

kranog wrote: »

a few years ago, they made epi's with a bolt-on neck....these days they tend to use a set-neck.
Anyone gonna dispute that the modern ones are a far superior quality over the older ones?

You see, the problem with that statement is that it's taking the basis that all things are equal, barring the neck joint. With Gibson and Epiphone quality control issues, all things aren't going to be equal on two given examples that were manufactured at the same time, never mind examples made years apart.

Now, I'm not saying there won't be differences between neck joint contruction, of course there is, and if not from the standpoint of a listener, then certainly to the player. But on the grand scale of things, there's going to be much more significant difference between different types of guitar than there is between neck contruction. A tele sounds worlds apart from a strat, yet they're both bolt-ons. So I'd say there's definitely things worth more consideration if you're choosing a guitar for tonal or playability qualities.

Voodu Child

Its just different types of construction, there's no better or worse, it just depends what you're after, and also to a VERY large degree on the specific instrument.

Ive played bolt-on guitars that had better sustain than any set-neck or neck through. Ive also played ones that didn't.

Tone? Thats in the ear of the beholder so you can't really say anything is better or worse than anything else.

Quality? A neck-through is a lot harder to make well, than a bolt on. So you could argue that at low and medium price ranges, a bolt-on could be more consistent in terms of accuracy, straightness, neck angle etc.

On the flip side, you could say that bolt-ons have the advantage of serviceability and fixability. I usually take off the neck on any guitars im working on, its a lot easier/handier to level or polish frets on a neck on its own. And of course, you can replace a bolt-on neck if it gets damaged/broken.

Theres also instances where you'd like the trem to ride a little higher/lower (without changing the action), so the ability to pull the neck and shim it either way is another advantage that bolt-ons have (imo).

kranog

Of course bro....but what I meant was an old Epi Les Paul and a modern one....granted...the neck wasn't all that was upgraded I know, the overall guitar was upgraded...which is great....but I am focusing purely on the neck here....an epi bolt-on was terrible I thought....it really felt like it would actually break in your hands, whereas these days, they are built very solid...the neck feels, plays and even tunes a million times better!
I've no doubt that the crappy timber they used back then made for waeker neck...but I can't discard the notion that it's also just a shabby neck joint!

Take a good tele or strat for example....the neck joint is solid...you couldn't fit a plec in between the gap between the body and neck (or at least you shouldn't be about to!)
That's a good neck joint....try the same on a squire...there's a big difference is all I'm saying...
I personally prefer a set-neck over a bolt-on....in my experience, bolt-on's tend to "appear" as a cheaper or even downgrade option...again....just stating an observation here lads....so no stabbing please!
Like I said though....if a job is done right...I don't personally believe either option is better...in fact...if a bolt on is done right...I'd near prefer it for the safety factor....what happens if the neck breaks on a set neck.....ouch!
Big bucks to repair....and even then...it's never the same really!

Karl Hungus

kranog wrote: »

Of course bro....but what I meant was an old Epi Les Paul and a modern one....granted...the neck wasn't all that was upgraded I know, the overall guitar was upgraded...which is great....but I am focusing purely on the neck here....an epi bolt-on was terrible I thought....it really felt like it would actually break in your hands, whereas these days, they are built very solid...the neck feels, plays and even tunes a million times better!
I've no doubt that the crappy timber they used back then made for waeker neck...but I can't discard the notion that it's also just a shabby neck joint!

So, shabby guitar feels shabby? No surprises there.

kranog wrote: »

Take a good tele or strat for example....the neck joint is solid...you couldn't fit a plec in between the gap between the body and neck (or at least you shouldn't be about to!)
That's a good neck joint....try the same on a squire...there's a big difference is all I'm saying...
I personally prefer a set-neck over a bolt-on....in my experience, bolt-on's tend to "appear" as a cheaper or even downgrade option...again....just stating an observation here lads....so no stabbing please!
Like I said though....if a job is done right...I don't personally believe either option is better...in fact...if a bolt on is done right...I'd near prefer it for the safety factor....what happens if the neck breaks on a set neck.....ouch!
Big bucks to repair....and even then...it's never the same really!

I'm not trying to have a stab at you, certainly not. But honestly, it's far too hard to say with any certainty which is better, unless you've got 2 guitars that are identical in every aspect other than a bolt-on and set neck, and you can accurately measure the frequencies and sustain, and post the results for us, then it's just a circular argument.

Got a preference for set neck? That's fine, but you can't say that it's 'better' than a bolt on, certainly not '8 times out of 10' either.

kranog

Ah...I said in my experience it is....I've got a '52 tele...is awesome....doesn't have a great deal of sustain though....have a bolt-on PRS...lots of sustain there.....
a bolt-on acrylic prs with emg....the sustain doesn't end on that one!
a Les Paul...set neck....it's awesome.
A hollowbody Schecter ES style guitar....has the most systain I've ever heard on a guitar....it's got a set neck too....but I'd say it's the hollowbody doing the work as far as the sustain goes!

Seriously though....unless you are buying severe high quality stuff here...let's say mid-range down....a set-neck is probably nearly always gonna make for a "better" guitar!
My own humble opinion!

Karl Hungus

kranog wrote: »

Seriously though....unless you are buying severe high quality stuff here...let's say mid-range down....a set-neck is probably nearly always gonna make for a "better" guitar!
My own humble opinion!

You're a puzzling individual Kranog.

It's a neck joint, I don't see how it's going to be "Better" depending on the price range of a guitar. In fact, if we take into consideration what Voodoo Child states, that it's harder to make a set neck than a bolt-on guitar, then at lower prices guitars with set neck contruction are open to more manufacturing error and inconsitancies.

Now I've owned bolt-ons, set necks and neck-through guitars over the years, and I'd be hasty to say what's better.

kranog

hahaha...why thank you!

Well...that's why they have QA departments dude....crappy guitars usually don't end up on shelves!
Have you never picked up a cheap strat and noticed how, I dunno, cheap, it feels?
It aint just the wood....it's the bad craftsmanship on the neck joint.
All neck joints aren't the same ya know....some are great...some are poor.
As with a good Les Paul, the set neck is quality.....as is the bolt-on neck joint of a high end Strat!

Like a Mex Strat...I think it plays very well indeed....but it doesn't feel as solid as a good Schecter set-neck, like a Tempest or a C1....or of course a US Strat Custom Shop!

My examples, are those of which I have played...and I guess my arguement goes back to my original point of, it's all about craftsmanship!

Karl Hungus

kranog wrote: »

All neck joints aren't the same ya know....some are great...some are poor.

At the risk of sounding sarcastic... duh.

That's why it's pointless to say a set neck is going to be better than a bolt on "8 out of 10 times" because it varies too much between guitar or between manufacturer.

kranog

I get your point bro...I don't think yer getting mine though...
The market is gonna be 80% mid-range and lower....most guitar buyers don't spend over 500/600 euro for a guitar ( they should of course!:) ) and when we're talking about about that kind of money on a new guitar...quality is always gonna be key.
I am saying that Schecter around that price would more than likely beat a mex strat or a lower range ibanez in terms of quality...
It's not always the case of course, there are some gems out there...but it would generally be the consensus...

Voodu Child

kranog wrote: »

I am saying that Schecter around that price would more than likely beat a mex strat or a lower range ibanez in terms of quality...
It's not always the case of course, there are some gems out there...but it would generally be the consensus...

What has that got to do with neck-construction though?

Are you saying its a better quality instrument, or are you saying its a better quality instrument because of the neck joint?

Karl Hungus

I get your point, but I don't agree. Again you're comparing completely different guitars from different manufacturers, and saying that the difference is the set neck. Now, a Schecter around the 500-600 compared to an Ibanez of the same price, we're usually talking different woods there, mahogany and basswood, Seymour Duncan pickups on the Schecter are going to be better than the stock Ibanez pickups, then you're talking floating trem vs. fixed bridge, and then we gotta take into consideration the fact that the Schecter necks are a lot thicker than Ibanez necks in general, and that's going to have a big effect on tone and sustain. Far too many variables before we even begin to take into consideration the set neck or bolt-on construction.

And the fact is, there's always going to be huge differences between similarly priced guitars. Further up the price ladder, I'd say a Music Man is going to be a far better guitar than a similarly priced Gibson. Is it because of the neck construction? Nah...

Anywho, are you not getting tired running around these laps? Too much circular movement here, I'm exhausted.

Dord

Doctor J wrote: »

I've got set neck, neck through and bolt on and neither is any better than the other, provided the build quality isn't **** to start off with. For playability and feel, ask an Ibanez RG player and a Les Paul player how easy it is to access beyond the 15th fret on their respective guitars. Sustain... I've never played a bolt on with a noticeable lack of sustain. Does anybody really actually need a note to hang around to Spinal Tap levels, what kind of music is that? Surely neck through would be better still at this, no? A well built guitar is a well built guitar, you might prefer one type of neck join over the other, that's cool, but one certainly isn't better than the other, otherwise we'd all be returning our Hendrix and Deep Purple albums due to lack of sustain :pac:

I've got 2 neckthru basses, 2 bolt-on basses and a set-neck guitar. I also had a bolt-on guitar previously.

I prefer neckthru, but mainly for the easier upper fret access. Set-neck is usually pretty good for that too.

kranog

huh?

No....not at all...
The OP asked if a Set Neck is better than a Bolt-On and I replied rather controversially with "Yes...usually...maybe 8 out 10 times, a set neck is better but it all depends on the craftsmanship"

The neck joint doesn't make a better guitar and my apologies if I made anyone think that...

The truth is...if you go onto Ran Guitars or whatever and put a spec for them to build you two guitars with identical features with exception to the neck, one has a bolt-on, the other a set-neck...you'll discover that the bolt-on neck will be a cheaper option. Doesn't mean the guitar will suffer, but it's value will be less than that of it's set-necked brother!
I'm also saying that a poor quality neck joint is exactly that and can be found on lower end guitars and won't feel as solid as a set-necked mid/lower range guitar at the same price....again...in most cases...not all!

Any of this making sense at all?

Dord

kranog wrote: »

huh?

No....not at all...
The OP asked if a Set Neck is better than a Bolt-On and I replied rather controversially with "Yes...usually...maybe 8 out 10 times, a set neck is better but it all depends on the craftsmanship"

The neck joint doesn't make a better guitar and my apologies if I made anyone think that...

The truth is...if you go onto Ran Guitars or whatever and put a spec for them to build you two guitars with identical features with exception to the neck, one has a bolt-on, the other a set-neck...you'll discover that the bolt-on neck will be a cheaper option. Doesn't mean the guitar will suffer, but it's value will be less than that of it's set-necked brother!
I'm also saying that a poor quality neck joint is exactly that and can be found on lower end guitars and won't feel as solid as a set-necked mid/lower range guitar at the same price....again...in most cases...not all!

Any of this making sense at all?

The reason why bolt-on neck instruments are usually cheaper is because they're easier and faster to produce.

The reason why that method was chosen by Leo Fender (and others) is because the instruments were/are being made on assembly lines. So being able to bolt the parts together made it quicker to produce as both could be worked on simultaneously and "mated" when they're done.
Along with this, it made it easier for the neck to be replaced if it was faulty.

Karl Hungus

kranog wrote: »

The truth is...if you go onto Ran Guitars or whatever and put a spec for them to build you two guitars with identical features with exception to the neck, one has a bolt-on, the other a set-neck...you'll discover that the bolt-on neck will be a cheaper option.

Meaning nothing except that the set neck construction is a more labour intensive process.

kranog

Please dude!

And Karl...
Bolt on is more labour intensive?
Ya reckon?
Everything I've seen/read/heard points otherwise!
What makes ya think it's a more labour intensive endeavor than set-neck construction? Wouldn't being mre labour intensive make the bolt-on option more expensive than a set-neck?

Bah...nevermind....it's been fun debating ya'll....I'm outta here for today...I'll read all hatemail tomorrow!

Darkstrike

Ritter, bolt on, as high end as high end gets, fantastic upper fret access.

I also doubt they have sustain problems.

Karl Hungus

Ooops, fixed.

Dord

Darkstrike wrote: »

Ritter, bolt on, as high end as high end gets, fantastic upper fret access.

I also doubt they have sustain problems.

Yeah, of course it depends on the neck heel. The traditional Fender style is a bit of a pain in the bollocks but those newer contoured heels with no plate are much easier for access.

Darkstrike

Dord wrote: »

Yeah, of course it depends on the neck heel. The traditional Fender style is a bit of a pain in the bollocks but those newer contoured heels with no plate are much easier for access.

Indeed, I have a Squier V Jazz, upper fret acces is a b****, but the Rtter deal prives its not what type of neck attachment, but the skill and effort involved in the build.

Doctor J

Dord wrote: »

I've got 2 neckthru basses, 2 bolt-on basses and a set-neck guitar. I also had a bolt-on guitar previously.

I prefer neckthru, but mainly for the easier upper fret access. Set-neck is usually pretty good for that too.

I had a six string Ibanez with a bolt on neck and superb upper fret access all the way to the 24th, better than my old Ric 4003 and better than the SB. It all depends on the design, not the method. My bolt on Streamer also has superb upper fret access, but I couldn't give a ****e, tbh.

If you're playing that high on the bass, chances are you're in your bedroom and not in a studio or on a stage gettin paid, down low is where the bass notes (and payola) are :P

Karl Hungus

Doctor J wrote: »

If you're playing that high on the bass, chances are you're in your bedroom and not in a studio or on a stage gettin paid, down low is where the bass notes (and payola) are :P

Billy Sheehan wouldn't be impressed with that Doc. :pac:

Darkstrike

Doctor J wrote: »

If you're playing that high on the bass, chances are you're in your bedroom

Still want the best bass for the job though.;)

Doctor J

Karl Hungus wrote: »

Billy Sheehan wouldn't be impressed with that Doc. :pac:

Billy "bolt on signature Fender derived bass" Sheehan? :pac:

Darkstrike wrote: »

Still want the best bass for the job though.;)

What kinda job are you thinking of? :P

Dord

Doctor J wrote: »

...and better than the SB.

HERESY!! :mad:

Darkstrike

Doctor J wrote: »

What kinda job are you thinking of? :P

Oh you'll all know soon enough.................[/psychotic voice]

Doctor J

Dord wrote: »

HERESY!! :mad::eek:;)

Tis true. The Ibanez SR neck joint is a thing of beauty

Dord

Doctor J wrote: »

Tis true. The Ibanez SR neck joint is a thing of beauty

I don't see anything there, tis smooooooth.... :pac:

brendansmith

CONSTRUCTION/SCALE: Set-Neck w/ Ultra Access / 25.5”
BODY: Mahogany w/ Quilted Maple Top
NECK/FINGERBOARD: 3-pc Mahogany / Rosewood
FRETS: 24 Jumbo
INLAYS: Gothic Cross'
PICKUPS: EMG Active 81TW/89
ELECTRONICS: Vol(tap)/Vol(tap)/Tone/3-way switch
BRIDGE: Original Floyd Rose Tremolo
BINDING: Abalone
TUNERS: Grover
HARDWARE: Black Chrome
COLOR: Black Cherry (BCH)
US RETAIL PRICE: $1199


This is what im think of at the moment, unless anyone objects.

Darkstrike

That should be a fantastic guitar, heard a lot of good. :cool:

boycey

There's a few Schecter owners on here (or previous owners maybe?) and they all rave about 'em. Great guitars apparently. That one is a bit 'bling' for my tastes though but tis all in the eye of the beholder. The Washburn on the other hand would have been one of those 'what was I thinking' purchases.

brendansmith

Yeah i completely agree.
Was very hungover and wanted to cheer myself up and then that washburn happened upon me and i needed convincing not too get it. Yeah im gonna buy that schecter soon i think, i reckon guitars like that practically play themselves and it should sound loverly!

HAHA also my current guitar is a jackson flying V so im no stranger to the bling!

darrenw5094

The Washburn was a bit of a novelty.....if you were going to buy one because you are big into Dimebag, then you might as well buy a higher quality one.

People are always raving about the Schecters from Korea, so i don't think you can go wrong.

As for the bolt-on v. set neck......
One is not better than the other......2 different, tones etc.
So that is a taste thing more than one being better than the other.

brendansmith

What about the active pick-up? Pain in the hole? Battery eaters?

I have zero experience with them

kranog

Not at all mate....I have the same duracell battery in mine for the last 2 years and it's still grand. Just don't leave a lead in it when yer not playing it....but with that fine guitar, I'm sure it's safe to assume you'll be locking her up in a nice hard-case when not playing!
Great guitar...my friends has two of them...mind you...you could probably get it for next to nothing on ebay if ya look for a factory 2nd....meaning it'll have a finish blemish on it somewhere....it won't be noticeable but it didn't pass QA is all...so rather than throw them out...Schecter give them out as factory 2nd's to some dealers....there's usually loads of them on ebay...though I can't find any right now!

But I did find this...your guitar with free shipping to Ireland for only 850 dollars, which is €625 plus TAX which would be another €150 I'd say...altogether it's €775 or so...not bad right?
http://cgi.ebay.com/NEW-Schecter-C1-C-1-Hellraiser-Floyd-Rose-FR-guitar_W0QQitemZ160291167163QQcmdZViewItem?_trksid=p3286.m20.l1116

darrenw5094

According to the official EMG website, you will get about 3000 hours from a quality 9v battery. So realisticly, that's years worth of life. Changing is easy too, clip in and out, just like your effect pedals battery.

brendansmith

kranog wrote: »

Not at all mate....I have the same duracell battery in mine for the last 2 years and it's still grand. Just don't leave a lead in it when yer not playing it....but with that fine guitar, I'm sure it's safe to assume you'll be locking her up in a nice hard-case when not playing!
Great guitar...my friends has two of them...mind you...you could probably get it for next to nothing on ebay if ya look for a factory 2nd....meaning it'll have a finish blemish on it somewhere....it won't be noticeable but it didn't pass QA is all...so rather than throw them out...Schecter give them out as factory 2nd's to some dealers....there's usually loads of them on ebay...though I can't find any right now!

But I did find this...your guitar with free shipping to Ireland for only 850 dollars, which is €625 plus TAX which would be another €150 I'd say...altogether it's €775 or so...not bad right?
http://cgi.ebay.com/NEW-Schecter-C1-C-1-Hellraiser-Floyd-Rose-FR-guitar_W0QQitemZ160291167163QQcmdZViewItem?_trksid=p3286.m20.l1116

Yeah i had my eye on that one, but i live in Australia!

Hmmmmmmmm tax! Never thought about that now! Ill yhave to look into that!:o


Also, stop telling everyone about the blemish secret!!!!!! I only copped to it last week!

brendansmith

brendansmith wrote: »

CONSTRUCTION/SCALE: Set-Neck w/ Ultra Access / 25.5”
BODY: Mahogany w/ Quilted Maple Top
NECK/FINGERBOARD: 3-pc Mahogany / Rosewood
FRETS: 24 Jumbo
INLAYS: Gothic Cross'
PICKUPS: EMG Active 81TW/89
ELECTRONICS: Vol(tap)/Vol(tap)/Tone/3-way switch
BRIDGE: Original Floyd Rose Tremolo
BINDING: Abalone
TUNERS: Grover
HARDWARE: Black Chrome
COLOR: Black Cherry (BCH)
US RETAIL PRICE: $1199


This is what im think of at the moment, unless anyone objects.

Thinking about maybe getting a LTD MH-400 instead, good deal going on one, any advice? Please?

Darkstrike

I don't know much about guitars, but both seem to be very similar.
IMO, its down to do you prefer the Schecter's finish or the LTD's, or do you want the Schecter's push/pull coil taps.

I'd stick with the Schecter, seems better overall(I love coil tapping), and looks a little better too. All IMO, of course.

brendansmith

Darkstrike wrote: »

I don't know much about guitars, but both seem to be very similar.
IMO, its down to do you prefer the Schecter's finish or the LTD's, or do you want the Schecter's push/pull coil taps.

I'd stick with the Schecter, seems better overall(I love coil tapping), and looks a little better too. All IMO, of course.

push/pull coil taps - Any chance you could explain this to me?

What if getting the ltd knocked a third of the price?