Official Luthiers Forum!

I like Feiten's system. Mike Doolin wrote THE BEST article I have ever seen on intonation ( go to his site ). It fully explains why guitars are out of tune BY DESIGN. So the closer and better we all make our fret boards using the rule of 18 or the Pathagorean Theorem, the more we build a guitar that is "out of tune with itself". Many people/builders say "oh nonsense" well I think they just can't hear as well as some others. I know as a kid ( I started playing when I was 8yrs old) I sold many a great guitar because I just couldn't get it to play in tune all over the neck.

BFTS - Buzz Feiten Tuning System is an attempt to correct some of this " out of tuneness". It IS NOT 100% by any means so it is not "the cure". It is a good starting point tho. It is the only one that I would consider putting on my guitars.

Basically BFTS adjusts the distance from the nut to the first fret...that's where we have alot of sharpness because of string tension. It is also the place that I have found to be the most inconsistant and inaccurate among the Large Manufacturers. What I mean is that while most of the big guys use CNC and get very accurate fret slots for some reason I find they don't consistanty cut there nut positions in the exact same place. I dont know why. But I have done hundreds of these retro fits and I measure( using calipers to fourth decimal place) and calculate the distance to the nut from the first fret and NOT one has ever been the same even among the same models ( lets say Les Pauls for instance). Of course I take into consideration Scale length. They just aren't consistent. So each job is different, every time. So once we correct that, Buzz has specific settings for re-intonating the guitar based on the gauge and string windings ( we treat an unwound third different than a wound third string for instance). Acoustics, mandolins, electrics, bass guitars, etc. are all intonated different.
Does it work? I think it does. I also think it's a real good starting point from which you then tweak the instrument further.
One last comment...Alot, NOT ALL, builders/techs that knock the system don't fully understand the system. Also because you must be licensed to install it, and pay royalties on each installation, many techs knock it as well. Some people claim he is the inventor of nothing others were doing it before him...maybe so...but he holds four U.S. Patents on the system.
If you are still interested in learning more go to www.truefire.com ( do a search of my name) and read some of the articles I wrote on the topic. DEFINITELY GET MIKE DOOLINS ARTICLES IT IS GREAT!Dave-SKG38447.4231134259

_________________
Dave Bland

remember...

"If it doesn't play in tune...it's just pretty wood"

For those who haven't read it, in addition to Mike Doolin's article on compensation, there's Stephen Delft's article on compensated nuts, their use, and how to make one. Available over at the MIMF. Very much worth a read, and you won't have to pay anyone royalties for a very specific version of a system that was by no means really invented by a single person. Buzz Feiten just managed to get everything so specific it was patentable, and did a great job marketing the stuff (kinda like Novax and his 'invention', the fanned fret(r)(c) fingerboard...still want to try one of those, and since I'm not selling in the US market, I don't have to worry about license fees..) Patents, IMO, don't necessarily mean very much at all, particularly when it comes to instrument construction. Seems like everything's been done before, many times, in very many different ways.Mattia Valente38447.4704976852

I'd pay no more than $25 for the Feiten system, and it's only worth that to know what the hype means. Has he gotten more patents? When he first started, he 4 patents on things that weren't related to the intonation system. To be pointed about it, when he first started marketing his system, he was blatently lying about the nature of his patents. Our patent system is broken, and I wouldn't doubt that he has patents on moving the frets around, but my understanding is that his system isn't patentable.

Mattia, would happen to know the link to the Stephen Delft article. I searched the archives and didn't find it. TIA.

_________________
Don Atwood
Arlington, VA

Sorry, it was on the MIMF links pages.

Stephen Delft's compensated nut article

Very Interesting comments. Thanks!

_________________
Dave Bland

remember...

"If it doesn't play in tune...it's just pretty wood"

What is the going price to retro fit a guitar with a Feiten system? What are you charging to do that?

I am curious because while some are yelling hype, I am thinking to myself maybe this is just "branding".

Think about it. There are a lot of obvious and silly products on the market but branding becomes the value. (Bottled water for sure... but then there is Evian... a "high end" bottled water.)

So if a customer walks into your shop (presuming you do repairs and are Feiten certified) plunks down a few hundred bucks (or more) for a Feiten system. How can you say that is hype? His popularizing this system and marketing it just made you money. They probably have no idea about the other ways to improve intonation, but they HAVE heard of the Feiten system.

Now if the technology doesn't work and this is snake oil, then that is another issue. But my understanding of his system (and admittedly it is limited) is that it does make some improvements, but it is not absolutley perfect.Brock Poling38448.405

_________________
Brock Poling
Columbus, Ohio
http://www.polingguitars.com

Excellent question/comment Brock!
Let me say this...other repair men like Dan Erlewine and Don McRostie are both Feiten Certified techs. Don puts BFTS on every one of his Red Diamond Mandos. Tom Anderson puts it on everyone of his guitars. Washburn puts it on their top line models.

Larry Carlton, Steve Vai, Robben Ford, Joe Satriani and a few hundred more Accomplished musicians all OPENLY endorse the system. Is it hype? of course...I think that's what get's everyone so mad about...the fact that the system seems to be the only Nationaly and Internationaly recognized System and has that kind of endorsing. As I said previous...a lot of the techs, in my opinion, put the system down without ever thoroughly investigating it. I like it. I hear a difference.

How many people go out and spend hundreds of dollars for a pedal that ultimately sounds like garbage?

Also, it is expensive to become a Level II Tech...that's the level you must attain to work on ALL stringed instruments vs. Level I guys who are only licensed to do electric guitars and basses.

There's no big accomplishment here... any builder with some experience can do the work... it's a matter of Going to L.A. working with Buzz and Greg for 4 days or so, doing all kinds of guitars/instruments - you get level II. Level I guys watch a video in their home and use a computer program that tells them how much to adj. as well as how to do it. Obviously a big difference in cost to get level-II vs. Level-I. Level-I is geared toward the music store tech. The chains.

I charge $350 for BFTS on an Acoustic. On Electrics - $175. The BFTS people recommend pricing - $140. for electrics and are open on Acoustics since it is much more work. They don't set prices but do recommend the $140 price for electrics. I charge more because I feel being a Level- II I do a better job. There are 7 or 8 other guys in Florida, Some level I, some level II, so if someone dosen't want to pay my premium they can go to them.

It definitely is a strong marketing thing and I have gotten a lot of business from it. Every Month I know when G.P. hits the stands because I start getting emails for BFTS. Dave-SKG38450.6929282407

_________________
Dave Bland

remember...

"If it doesn't play in tune...it's just pretty wood"

[QUOTE=EricKeller] Our patent system is broken, and I wouldn't doubt that he has patents on moving the frets around, but my understanding is that his system isn't patentable.[/QUOTE]

European musicians have been moving their frets around at least since the 16th century! Indeed I still do move them around on my 8 and 10 course lutes. Sometimes I even do it on purpose! But my frets are made of gut knotted around the neck. Maybe I shouldn't have said that now someone is going to patent it, just like Paul Simon copyrighting Scarborough Fair when it was Martin Carthy who taught him the 300 year old English folk song, mind you over here we completely ignore his copyright



ColinColin S38448.4627777778

_________________
I don't believe in anything, I simply make use of a set of reasonable working hypotheses.

So you have to pay him for every fret job you do? Can you say how much? For me, his approach was very offensive. EricKeller38451.0918287037

Eric,
The trueth is an absolute defense to Slander. You say his "approach was very offensive". What does that mean? You have met Buzz and he offended you? Also " if some of the stories seen can be believed, his behavior has bordered on extortion at times" Can you please explain what you have writen? I honestly can't understand what you are trying to say.

P.s. why would I "pay him for every fret job I do? His system has nothing to do with fret jobs." Dave-SKG38448.867037037

_________________
Dave Bland

remember...

"If it doesn't play in tune...it's just pretty wood"

The Feiten system is interesting and it definitely works. It can be likened to piano tuning where each note is not tuned perfectly to pitch but tuned so it doesn't fight the other notes on the piano. I have tested the system using identical guitars: one set up with and one setup without the Feiten system. What you notice right away is that chords played on the Feiten guitar ring even without the "warbling" sound of the normal setup. The “warbling” is created by frequencies canceling each other out. The problem is that most people expect to hear the “warbling” as the natural sound of a guitar. When I had a Feiten tech working with me, we might have done one or two Feiten setups per year. I never got certified myself because they wouldn't let my tech teach me the system (it isn't that difficult for a skilled luthier) and it just wasn’t worth the $1,000 cost they charge (plus time and air fare). By the way the adjustments involve moving the nut slightly closer to the first fret and then adjusting the intonation of each string plus or minus a certain number of cents off of “perfect” intonation. The frets are not changed. Many builders including Taylor have moved the nut closer to the first fret for years. The real “secret” is the saddle intonation formula that Feiten developed for each string.

[QUOTE=EricKeller] So you have to pay him for every fret job you do? Can you say how much? For me, his approach was very offensive. And if some of the stories seen can be believed, his behavior has bordered on extortion at times. [/QUOTE]

From your comments, like the one above I can tell you are criticizing the system and know little about it. BFTS has nothing to do with fret jobs.

_________________
Dave Bland

remember...

"If it doesn't play in tune...it's just pretty wood"

Neil... excellent points.

Did you know Ed Roman actually spent the money to get BFTS certified twice? Once for him at the store up north and again in the new store in Vegas. I guess he feels it's worth while!

By the way the cost for me was closer to $5000. when you add up six days off from work, Hotel, Airfare, Car rental, Cost of training, and Piano Strobe tuner. But I also brought the wife and kids...so I had a larger Airfare bill.

_________________
Dave Bland

remember...

"If it doesn't play in tune...it's just pretty wood"

Frankly, that Ed Roman likes the system doesn't mean anything at all to me. I enjoy reading his site, but the only information I get is what I glean out of the photographs, not the crazy-talk that inhabits most of the site..

Wow, $5000? I'm amazed. how many retro-fits have you done?

I use the Greg Byers system for my guitars, more or less. Just reduce the distance between the nut and first fret, and then compensate both the but and saddle, which adjusts fret placement over string length.

I'm not that familiar with the Feiten system, but as I understand it from several years ago one has to tune the guitar differently (ie. a few cents sharp for one string, maybe a few flat for another, etc - there are tuners that register this specifically for the system, or there were).

When it comes down to it I don't really like "patents" on things guitar related. Patenting a raised fingerboard, an intonation system... these are hardly original ideas.

I think a lot of the offense people have in the luthier community for Feiten is that he wants to make money off of us. I take the road of just not using his system, since the Byers and Gilbert systems are likely just as good (and free to use), rather than being offended. But it is hard for makers to accept someone's innovation when the motives are monetary, particularly because the luthier community at large is very much a sharing bunch.

_________________
Instagram: @jfrenchluthier
Web: https://www.jfrenchguitars.com/

[QUOTE=Mattia Valente] Frankly, that Ed Roman likes the system doesn't mean anything at all to me. I enjoy reading his site, but the only information I get is what I glean out of the photographs, not the crazy-talk that inhabits most of the site..[/QUOTE]

My point, which you obviously missed, was that Ed Roman a successful music/guitar store owner, made enough money from being able to offer the system that he paid for it again. You don't just get BFTS business from happy customers, you get re-frets, neck resets, NEW GUITAR orders...knock knock . I have NEVER had an unhappy BFTS system installation.

I wasn't droping names... I did that earlier above - re-read. I'm not trying to convince anyone here that it works, that you should use it, or you should buy it or get certified. Someone asked about the system...I responded because I know about the system.

_________________
Dave Bland

remember...

"If it doesn't play in tune...it's just pretty wood"

[QUOTE=jfrench] Wow, $5000? I'm amazed. how many retro-fits have you done?

I think a lot of the offense people have in the luthier community for Feiten is that he wants to make money off of us. I take the road of just not using his system, since the Byers and Gilbert systems are likely just as good (and free to use), rather than being offended. But it is hard for makers to accept someone's innovation when the motives are monetary, particularly because the luthier community at large is very much a sharing bunch.[/QUOTE]

JJ, Two good issues/points....
I have done alot and I mean alot of BFTS retros...but more importantly I have met people and gotten customers I never would have gotten. I don't advertise in the local papers or have a big neon sign on a major road. My business comes from word of mouth and from people visiting Feiten's site and seeing that I am a certified tech who also builds. That sets me aside from some of the regular guys that just repair. It also opens the door to a huge audience as they advertise every Month in Guitar Player Magazine...usually a Full page advt. ...no cost to me( I can't ever imagine affording that!). I can also say I have gotten more than 5 times my money back in the sales it has generated for me.

Second point you made...Making Money...so what! everyone wants to make money!...ultimately it's every luthiers goal isn't it?...make a beautiful instrument AND get paid for it. The music/guitar business is just that... a business. Some people (like Ed Roman) make good money at it. Others don't even try...both are o.k. in my book. Everyone doesn't have to be profit motivated. But why knock those that are, simply because they are? As far as patents go there are a lot of rich people that are glad they have them and a lot of poor people that wish they had. So I think it's a plus. If you stole someone else's idea and got rich off it well it says a lot about you. It's also all going to be answered for some day.

_________________
Dave Bland

remember...

"If it doesn't play in tune...it's just pretty wood"

Dave,

Thats great it has turned out to be quite profitable for you. No doubt the system works well. Your point about advertizing is very well taken.

I agree with you regarding patents. Certainly it is ok to get a patent on something for one's hard work, and then make money off it. Maybe its even okay to patent something that isn't one's own ideas/work. But at the same time I tend to shy away from things luthier-related that are profit driven (in terms of ideas, rather than materials and tools - a catch 22 surely).

Personally, I really like the openness of guitar makers. It encourages us to make it on the quality of our work and empirical experiences, rather than secrets. While I'm not suggesting the Feiten system is holding secrets, the fact that it is profit driven is somewhat inconsistent with general attitude of openness I've observed amongst guitar makers. This and the availability of other systems keeps me from pursuing it.

I'm not knocking it even slightly, and I know Mr. Feiten must have put much time into developing and refining his system - and it is his right to make money off it. But I find it slightly off-putting, but not for anything I could consider much of a good reason. Mostly since I tend to equate guitars and their makers as art and artists respectively, which to me signifies intentions toward something greater than monetary gain.

Obviously we all need to make money, and my view is somewhat utopian, even unrealistc in some ways. But this is why I find it a bit off putting, at least in comparison to Greg Byer's and John Gilbert's methods.

Best wishes,
Joshua

_________________
Instagram: @jfrenchluthier
Web: https://www.jfrenchguitars.com/

Joshua,
i see your point and it is a good one! Some years back there was a workshop at Healdsburg Festival and Gilbert and Byers and Feiten were all there talking about intonation...I think LMI still sells the video if you ever get a chance, take a look at it, it is real interesting. Also, as I said earlier above...for me The BFTS is realy a good starting point. I then tweak it for each instrument to get the most I can intonation wise out of the guitar. One other thing ... there is/are no secrets to BFTS because it's patented...all the info is available to the general public thru the US Patent Office.

Thanks!Dave-SKG38450.6943402778

_________________
Dave Bland

remember...

"If it doesn't play in tune...it's just pretty wood"

Sorry if I seemed hostile and ignorant. I'm not really that ignorant about it, it's just been years since I thought about the system. My take on it from a builder's viewpoint is that the nut needs to be closer to the first fret than the straight formulas tell you, that's why I was thinking fret job. Forgot about the overhanging nut. And I've been working too much and I'm grumpy.

I became aware of the Feiten system back when I first got into building guitars, and I was offended from the first article about it I read in Guitar Player magazine. I'm biased aginst patents, there are too many of them where someone just wrote down what everyone knew and patented it to be able to sue people. To Buzz's credit, it doesn't appear that he's tried to sue anyone to get them to stop them from setting the intonation of their guitars.

Ok so I read up on it. Buzz The web page mentions two patents on the system now, but there are at least 8, see below. The first is a nut that overhangs the fretboard. Borderline patent in my book, but it does save you cutting up the fretboard to move the nut back on an existing guitar. There is a certain amount of comedy on their site where they talk about using their overhanging nut when it doesn't do anything, such as on a zero fret guitar. They describe the other patent as being a set of formulas to set the intonation. The patent system has been the victim of a lot of stupid meddling in the last few decades, but you didn't used to be able to patent a formula, and as far as I know that's still the case. Maybe they hid the fact that it was a formula in the patent application. As penance for my misplaced hostility and ignorance, I've looked up the patents.

most most recent patent This one tells you pretty much exactly how to use the system.
Here's a newer patent that explicitly makes a claim on the idea of having the nut to first fret spacing between 1% and 10% shorter than the rule of 18. That's a license to sue if I ever saw one. And I still find that claim rather offensive, as well as the willful neglect of prior art. Better not be too sloppy cutting that first fret slot.
better written patent

list of patents The ones that belong to Buzz have the title " Method and apparatus for fully adjusting and providing tempered intonation for stringed, fretted musical instruments, and making adjustments to the rule of 18" There may be more, I just couldn't find them. I didn't see a reference to the overhanging nut in the ones I read, but I just scanned them.

The fact that it is still around 10 years later and is an effective marketing tool for some people is softening my objections somewhat. And it does bring a method to something where many people just wing it.EricKeller38451.1105439815

It’s funny that this should turn into a discussion about patents. I saw a news segment a couple of days ago about the J.M. Smucker Co.’s patent on their take on a peanut butter and jelly sandwich (Wall Street Journal article). It seems that the patent office is issuing patents on almost anything these days. Including a patent to a grade school child for his method of swinging on a swing set side to side instead of the normal way. Many legal experts say that it has gotten out of hand.

All good and logical points tho ( I mean on this thread)...I love that! Maybe we should start another thread for patents...here goes...


THanks for participating everyone...Dave-SKG38451.5659606481

_________________
Dave Bland

remember...

"If it doesn't play in tune...it's just pretty wood"