Suhr about to "ditch" BFTS

[Armando]

Hey everyone,

First off, I don't own a Suhr(love my Koa HDT!! and my next guitar would be another Andy, hands down!) although I'm aware of their rep. Plus I'm a solid believer in the Feiten system. TA and BFTS keep me "very" happy.

Now to the topic, I hear that for now, Suhr is charging extra for BFTS implemented on his guitars with plans to do away with it totally due to the technology they use to install their frets. Plus, I guess with BFTS, it's either all or nothing if you plan on advertising it's use in your instruments.

Anyone care to share thoughts on this(no trashing please, I'm not trying to knock a competitors product). Thanks!

[pipedwho]

BFTS/Buzz Feiten are primarily marketing tools these days - this is not necessarily a bad thing, and help standardise the approach. There are a number of ways to achieve the same results (eg. Earvana and other similar nut compensation methods). Also, a lot of people just don't care about the extra tuning sympathy that you get from compensated nuts and tuning offsets.

But, fortunately, we can trust Tom to always offer the best. That's why by default we get SS frets, BFTS, two bolt necks, etc. :)

[mbrown3]

Well, I understand Suhr's position, because I believe Feiten charges for each use of their system/name/etc, so I understand it as an upcharge (especially if Feiten is raising their fees, but who knows)...though not to do away with it altogether. I hope Tom doesn't go that route, though, because I like the fact that there are certain things that are a given with Tom's guitars, like BFTS and stainless frets.

I DO believe that the Feiten system is much better than many of the alternatives (like the Earvana, which is crap in my humble opinion)...but it's not as good as some others (like Gerard Melancon's proprietary system, which is the best I've yet heard/played).

[tom]

bfts=marketing? i don't get that comment. when i first heard the difference it changed my life. i still can't enjoy a non compensated guitar. we won't be changing any time soon. tuning is a very subjective thing. how many times have you tuned a guitar then handed it to someone else only to have them re tune it? some don't hear it some do. some are happy with crappy gear some are unhappy with great gear. not too many absolutes in what we hear. one guy after playing our guitars at a show asked why he should spend the money for ours when the korean knock off was as good? i told him he shouldn't.

[theatomicjeff]

one guy after playing our guitars at a show asked why he should spend the money for ours when the korean knock off was as good? i told him he shouldn't.
Good answer.
Some people are just wired to be _____.

[pipedwho]

bfts=marketing? i don't get that comment. when i first heard the difference it changed my life. i still can't enjoy a non compensated guitar. we won't be changing any time soon. tuning is a very subjective thing. how many times have you tuned a guitar then handed it to someone else only to have them re tune it? some don't hear it some do. some are happy with crappy gear some are unhappy with great gear. not too many absolutes in what we hear. one guy after playing our guitars at a show asked why he should spend the money for ours when the korean knock off was as good? i told him he shouldn't.
Sorry, I didn't mean the whole system was just marketing - it is clearly way more than that! :eek: What I was ineptly trying to say was that using the Buzz Feiten _name_ costs money. I believe the patents have expired, so anyone can implement the system for free, but they still must pay to reference the trademark.

Which IMO is a good thing, because it leads to a few benefits: 1. Quality control / consistency between different builders advertising the same system. ie. you don't have to second guess whether or not the builder actually 'got it right'. 2. An easy way to accurately describe a feature on a guitar that has proven its worth across the whole industry. 3. You know you're going to get a much more in-tune guitar.

If every builder was just implementing the system in their own (for whatever reason) slightly modified way and still calling it BFTS, it would be hard to determine the wheat from the chaff.

And, I agree, the first time I played an actual BFTS guitar I couldn't believe what I was hearing! There is no going back. :)

[tom]

the patent is not expired. before buzz brought this to all our attentions, we were happy to be unhappy with even temperament. "that's just the way guitars sound". we all tuned by ear to try to fix things without have a method or even reasoning why. when people heard it, they knew this was different and was better. but companies did not want to pay for something they could not see. so now people are doing their "own" version so they don't have to pay. doesn't feel right to me.

[mbrown3]

so now people are doing their "own" version so they don't have to pay. doesn't feel right to me.

I agree 100%, although some of the other versions were around before Feiten came forward with his system, if I'm not mistaken. I believe some very esteemed builders (like Bob Taylor, Terry Mcinturff, and James Olson) have been doing a minor type of compensation for years (i.e. moving the nut slightly closer to the bridge), I think...though I could be wrong.

But I do agree that copping Feiten's system and just not using the name so you can get out of paying (if that's what's happening) is totally wrong. If, on the other hand, someone has a system they just think works better, that's a different story. Like, Gerard does not offer BFTS because he believes that his system (which, apparently, is significantly different from BFTS) is better. And, FWIW, having guitars with both, I agree with him. Noticable difference between his system and BFTS...as much difference as there was for me when I went from a regular guitar to a guitar with BFTS. Anyway, in his case, I don't think it's a matter of trying to get around the cost of BFTS...I think he genuinely wanted to explore the issue and came up with a solution that he truly feels is superior. Whether or not it is, that's up for each player to decide. But in this case, I can accept his decision, as opposed to someone who just wants to stand on Buzz's shoulders and then not pay him for his work/ideas (and I'm not saying that's what Suhr is doing, but it seems like some folks are).

[pipedwho]

the patent is not expired. before buzz brought this to all our attentions, we were happy to be unhappy with even temperament. "that's just the way guitars sound". we all tuned by ear to try to fix things without have a method or even reasoning why. when people heard it, they knew this was different and was better. but companies did not want to pay for something they could not see. so now people are doing their "own" version so they don't have to pay. doesn't feel right to me.
I stand corrected. For some reason, I thought BF was around in the '80s. I remember talking to a guy back then about angled frets, adjusted nut and fret positions, and basically all about why my guitar never sounded in tune and his always did. I only played acoustic guitar back then and I could never get my guitar 'in tune'. Years later when I started reading about BFTS on the net, I just assumed that it was the same thing that that guy was talking about. But, looking at the patents, they are from '96, which means that they are much more recent and don't expire for quite a few years more.

So, really, nut compensation does pre-date BF, but reading the patents, it is clear he did a lot of work to achieve excellent results, while still keeping the guitar looking 'normal'. It is probably something that people have done for decades on a less than scientific hit and miss basis. But, BF studied it, and licensed out a tried and tested solution.

If people are just taking Buzz's work and just slightly varying it to get around the patents, then that is just wrong. If as mrbrown says, people like Melancon have their own system that is not derived from the Feiten system, then I see nothing wrong with that.

But, IMO, the BFTS was the difference between, 'why is this guitar never in tune', and 'spot on'. That, to me, was all I needed to stop being distracted by the guitar's (lack of) tuning, and start worrying about which note I should be playing. Aw, who am I kidding, now I spend my time trying to work out why this or that overdrive pedal doesn't quite get the perfect tone. ;)

[Mister T]

BFTS/Buzz Feiten are primarily marketing tools these days - this is not necessarily a bad thing, and help standardise the approach. There are a number of ways to achieve the same results (eg. Earvana and other similar nut compensation methods). Also, a lot of people just don't care about the extra tuning sympathy that you get from compensated nuts and tuning offsets.

But, fortunately, we can trust Tom to always offer the best. That's why by default we get SS frets, BFTS, two bolt necks, etc. :)

Earvana doesnt work nearly as well.

[pipedwho]

Earvana doesnt work nearly as well.
Agreed. And it looks strange too. :)

[mbrown3]

Agreed. And it looks strange too. :)

Plus it's cheapo plastic. No can do, in my book...

[Drew]

how many times have you tuned a guitar then handed it to someone else only to have them re tune it?

This happened to me today. I just finished tuning my Anderson Classic and it sounded perfect to me--when the bass player of the band (who happens to be a really good acoustic guitar player) asked to borrow my guitar to show us an idea he was working on.

As soon as he had his hands on my guitar, he played a chord and tried then to re-tune it. Fortunately, he wasn't familiar with the locking nut on my Floyd Rose and couldn't adjust the tuning. I laughed to myself.

[pipedwho]

This happened to me today. I just finished tuning my Anderson Classic and it sounded perfect to me--when the bass player of the band (who happens to be a really good acoustic guitar player) asked to borrow my guitar to show us an idea he was working on.

As soon as he had his hands on my guitar, he played a chord and tried then to re-tune it. Fortunately, he wasn't familiar with the locking nut on my Floyd Rose and couldn't adjust the tuning. I laughed to myself.
I've had that happen too and the Floyd thing is just hilarious! It's like double locking protection from people who can't help themselves from retuning other people's guitars. ;)

Here's a similar story. When I play electric, I have a super light touch, and so have my guitars set up with super low action and intonated accordingly. One time our acoustic player (who has the usual grip of steel) picks up my electric to 'try it out', and immediately I can hear the guitar go way out of tune with every single chord he played! Then he tried to retune it, but, enter the Floyd locking nut ... The look on this guy's face as he cursed out one of the best guitars ever made: priceless! :D

[SonicGator]

Here is a link to Gerard Melancon's explanation of his compensated tuning system. Basically, the frets are moved very slightly to compensate the tuning versus moving the nut.

Melancon Tuning (http://205.214.78.138/board/showthread.php?s=&threadid=763)

I've never played a Melancon, so I couldn't tell you if there is a difference between his system and the BFTS. However, I can tell you that the first time I ever played a guitar with the BFTS, a TAG no less, I immediately noticed a difference. Notes were sweeter and complimented each other much better than a standard tuned guitar.

[Mister T]

Yamaha has an interesting system on the Frank Gambale guitar. Steve Vai also has a guitar I have seen with frets that are kinky (can't think of a better word right now) that s eems interesting.

Bending seems like it would be odd on both systems.

I have had all of my guitars (except for the one vintage instrument I own) modded to BF and am happy as can be.

[Flash]

As someone in this industry, I can tell you that while there is some truth to this rumor, this thread is blowing it way out of proportion. Suhr Guitars are going to start charging extra for the BFTS next year but the upcharge is going to be very, very slight - a Boss DS1 will cost you more money than the BFTS will on a Suhr. And they are not getting rid of it.

[SonicGator]

As someone in this industry, I can tell you that while there is some truth to this rumor, this thread is blowing it way out of proportion. Suhr Guitars are going to start charging extra for the BFTS next year but the upcharge is going to be very, very slight - a Boss DS1 will cost you more money than the BFTS will on a Suhr. And they are not getting rid of it.


I don't see where anyone has blown this out of proportion. In fact, the person starting the thread stated that he did not want to see a product bashed. I think most posters are just inquiring as to what the change might be as well as discussing some of the differences in the BFTS and other options.
I think I can speak for everyone on here in that we all have a great deal of respect for other builders and John Suhr has always been spoken of with high regard on here, both by Tom and other posters.

[dannopelli]

Ever play one of those guitars with "fan" frets? That's an interesting concept. Not for me, but when I got to play one it was just way different...

[michaelomiya]

some don't hear it some do. some are happy with crappy gear some are unhappy with great gear.

NO ONE on this forum!!:p :D


one guy after playing our guitars at a show asked why he should spend the money for ours when the korean knock off was as good? i told him he shouldn't.

insanely ignorant. love the NAMM show and all of the musical geniouses it attracts.

[bud]

Ever play one of those guitars with "fan" frets? That's an interesting concept. Not for me, but when I got to play one it was just way different...

Fret's that fan, frets that bend into curly-ques. Nuts that... oh nevermind.

Sorry. Some things are just WRONG. Give me my BFTS! :D

[SonicGator]

If you want to truly intonate correctly, go fretless. That's as close as you can probably ever get with a guitar.

[tom]

i would have to admit that i am ignorant about some parts of my life so i'd have to cut that guy some slack. guitars are one of the things i obsess about, but there are things that i just buy because it's easy. i've tried to be better about not buying disposable junk but sometimes you don't have much of a choice. in the end it comes down to being a good steward of the resources we have.
how's that for getting off topic?

[guitarzan]

i've tried to be better about not buying disposable junk but sometimes you don't have much of a choice. in the end it comes down to being a good steward of the resources we have.



I have nice things that last a long time and I have disposable junk that seems to stick around like a venereal disease. What I'm trying to do is judge my equipment on its usability/merit/giggability while still keeping my head straight. Frankly, my ears don't really hear marked differences between cables, but I'll obsess over the feel of one guitar pick vs. another. Other times, I sometimes forget to check the knobs on my MOD50 and will go half a gig with the treble turned all the way off because I accidentally bumped that knob in transit. On the flipside, I've got a bunch of the modules and I only use the BMAN and the SL2, without fail.

All this is to say that I hear some things and am oblivious to other things... I don't so much hear the difference in the BFTS as much as I feel it. I think when I play the venereal disease guitar mentioned above, I feel like I need to play differently to cover some of what's lacking in a well-made and tempered instrument.

At the end of the day, I think my problems are so much more psychological than they are musical. :)

[tom]

ah yes. i think one of bruces strengths is that he does not let the knobs do so much that we can get into bad tone land. some amps controls go so far that it's easy to get way far one way or the other. bruce is watching out for us!

[Yngve]

i would have to admit that i am ignorant about some parts of my life so i'd have to cut that guy some slack. guitars are one of the things i obsess about, but there are things that i just buy because it's easy. i've tried to be better about not buying disposable junk but sometimes you don't have much of a choice. in the end it comes down to being a good steward of the resources we have.
how's that for getting off topic?
I just bought a Roland TD9-KX electronic drum kit :eek:

[Flash]

I don't see where anyone has blown this out of proportion. In fact, the person starting the thread stated that he did not want to see a product bashed. I think most posters are just inquiring as to what the change might be as well as discussing some of the differences in the BFTS and other options.
I think I can speak for everyone on here in that we all have a great deal of respect for other builders and John Suhr has always been spoken of with high regard on here, both by Tom and other posters.

I didn't say anyone or anything was being bashed. However, OP states that he heard that Suhr is going to first charge for the BFTS and then do away with it and the title of the thread is "Suhr about to "ditch" BFTS." Again, while there is some truth to the initial post, the rumor is much more extreme than the facts.

[bud]

I thought the thread was about electronic drum kits, or was it amp knobs :confused:

[tom]

you know me, i can turn any thread into an amp thread:o