GuitarGuy Posted February 14, 2007 Report Share Posted February 14, 2007 Exactly as the title says. I got to thinking about fanned frets and how it seems to be the in thing these days and how Novax has the patent on it. I started thinking that all they did was make the mathmatics perfect instead of the traditional guitar scale length compromise. People have been adjusting the scale length of guitars for years via compensated nuts and through intonation. It really appears that this is a natural progression of guitar evolution. My point is that Novax is basically patenting the mathmatics of a guitar. Those mathmatics cant be changed and so how can they hold a patent on perfect intonation. Thats like applying a copyright to a chord. So if you built a guitar with an individual scale for each string it would be the same thing and subject to legal action. When really you are just building what a guitar was meant to do. Play in tune. Just my take on things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fookgub Posted February 14, 2007 Report Share Posted February 14, 2007 The Novax patent has expired already. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GuitarGuy Posted February 14, 2007 Author Report Share Posted February 14, 2007 Nevermind then....lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
another doug Posted February 14, 2007 Report Share Posted February 14, 2007 I started thinking that all they did was make the mathmatics perfect instead of the traditional guitar scale length compromise. People have been adjusting the scale length of guitars for years via compensated nuts and through intonation. It really appears that this is a natural progression of guitar evolution. I'm pretty sure that compensated nuts and intonation don't actually alter the scale length. A low E on a strat may longer than 25.5. but it's still considered a 25.5 scale length. The frets are the same distance apart for the high E as they are for the low E. My understanding of fanned frets is that each string has a different scale length, with the distances between frets being different for each string. I think they may still benefit from compensated nuts, and the low strings would still be longer than the scale length suggested by the fret distances. That said, the idea of fanned frets is hardly rocket science, and I agree that it is part of the natural progression of guitar technology. Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if someone did it hundreds of years ago and we just didn't hear about it. As far as the patent is concerned, it seems silly that they would have had a patent on such a simple idea. But then again, when I come up with my simple and cheap idea, I still want to make my millions Doug Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aidlook Posted February 14, 2007 Report Share Posted February 14, 2007 Or there's this... true temperament Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erikbojerik Posted February 14, 2007 Report Share Posted February 14, 2007 (edited) The Novax patent has expired, and if you follow the math in it, you will actually arrive at the wrong result. IIRC, his patent specified that the fret lines projected on the treble side had the result that all the lines met at a common point. This will actually give a fretboard with incorrect intonation. There is apparently another guy who has a patent that would cover the correct way to do it, which is to select separate scales for the bass and treble sides, and connect the dots. Read it here The things that get patented are pretty comical sometimes. Hey, drug companies can patent the genes of living creatures...yes that's right....they can patent not only the application of products derived from research on the genes, but the ACTUAL genes themselves. If they can patent genes, they can patent anything. Edited February 16, 2007 by erikbojerik Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
another doug Posted February 14, 2007 Report Share Posted February 14, 2007 There is apparently another guy who has a patent pending that would cover the correct way to do it, which is to select separate scales for the bass and treble sides, and connect the dots. D'oh! I have always assumed that that's how fanned frets were done! Another missed chance to make my millions. Don't see how it warrants a patent though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattia Posted February 14, 2007 Report Share Posted February 14, 2007 Thing is, I doubt either of these would stand up in court if challenged. Reason being that multi-scale isntruments are anything but a 'natural evolution'; they have a history going back centuries, quite literally. Like almost everything in lutherie, it isn't a new idea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Crimson_Ghost Posted February 14, 2007 Report Share Posted February 14, 2007 It is definitly not a new thing, read this. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-scale_fingerboard Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
another doug Posted February 14, 2007 Report Share Posted February 14, 2007 A couple interesting things in that Wiki article: 1 - The idea goes back a long way (no real surprise there) 2 - The connect-the-dots method was done in 1977 (and probably many times before) 3 - The patent may have expired and be difficult to uphold in court, but there is also the copyright issue with the "fanned-fret" name, which is now almost synonymous with a multiscale instrument, a la Xerox. 4 - All of that "plurality of strings" lingo is hella boring! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GregP Posted February 15, 2007 Report Share Posted February 15, 2007 I always assumed the "connect the dots" way was the way it's done, too. That true temperment link is wild, aidlook! I thought, "isn't bending going to be wonky?" but then in the video the guy was playing pretty much the way I and a million other blues-based rock guitarists play. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spazzyone Posted February 15, 2007 Report Share Posted February 15, 2007 Or there's this... true temperament ***!!!!!!!!!! how do you bend on those without altering the scale length of the bent string. it could never play correct Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhoads56 Posted February 15, 2007 Report Share Posted February 15, 2007 Or there's this... true temperament ***!!!!!!!!!! how do you bend on those without altering the scale length of the bent string. it could never play correct How you do play a "normal" guitar, because when you bend, you're changing the scale length then too! The increase in tension from bending, is much more promonent than the shortening of the vibrating string length if the fret bends so its closer to the bridge. And dont come back and tell me you use the SAME bending pressure on all different strings, at all different positions, so you wont be able to 'feel' the notes being bent to pitch... because you dont. :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GregP Posted February 15, 2007 Report Share Posted February 15, 2007 Exactly. You get an instinct for the bend and your fingers learn to co-operate with your ears. I have to confess, I still mess up half my bends, but my ear is always aware of it, and my body also seems to know when a plan has come together. Watch the video(s)... they're bending just fine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aidlook Posted February 15, 2007 Report Share Posted February 15, 2007 I always assumed the "connect the dots" way was the way it's done, too. That true temperment link is wild, aidlook! I thought, "isn't bending going to be wonky?" but then in the video the guy was playing pretty much the way I and a million other blues-based rock guitarists play. That's what I thought as well, but apparently it doesn't....well except for maybe those extreme ones.. I just happened to stumble across the site because one of the guys of that company writes for the biggest Swedish guitar magazine... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwedishLuthier Posted February 16, 2007 Report Share Posted February 16, 2007 The True Temperament idea isn't really a new thing. Yamaha had a guitar in the late 80's or early 90's that had the few first frets curved to enhance the intonation on the first frets. I remember that Frank Gambale (anyone else remeber him? I'm getting old...) used to make ads for his signature model with these special frets. It wasn't a big hit and I don't belive that True Temperament necks/fretboards will be either. Guitarists are way to conservative. Hey we still pay muchos dineros to play on a historical correct Telecaster and that model is almost 60 years old. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GregP Posted February 16, 2007 Report Share Posted February 16, 2007 Washburn had something, too. Just on the 3rd fret I believe it was... I agree, it'll never be "big." I'm interested, though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Irizarry Posted February 16, 2007 Report Share Posted February 16, 2007 Here's another approach - Kritz guitars uses what they call Smile Frets for improved intonation - Kritz Inventions. Regards, Rob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Irizarry Posted February 16, 2007 Report Share Posted February 16, 2007 fat finger - sorry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aidlook Posted February 16, 2007 Report Share Posted February 16, 2007 The True Temperament idea isn't really a new thing. Yamaha had a guitar in the late 80's or early 90's that had the few first frets curved to enhance the intonation on the first frets. I remember that Frank Gambale (anyone else remeber him? I'm getting old...) used to make ads for his signature model with these special frets. It wasn't a big hit and I don't belive that True Temperament necks/fretboards will be either. Guitarists are way to conservative. Hey we still pay muchos dineros to play on a historical correct Telecaster and that model is almost 60 years old. I actually don't believe in the idea at all to be honest....ok it might help intonation a bit....but it looks like ****....And EVERY legendary guitarist ever has sounded quite good without it....also the price is waay to high. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Posted February 16, 2007 Report Share Posted February 16, 2007 ok it might help intonation a bit....but it looks like ****.... Going about different ways of getting close to perfect intonation is nothing new. But I'll agree with you here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ryanb Posted February 17, 2007 Report Share Posted February 17, 2007 ....ok it might help intonation a bit....but it looks like ****....And EVERY legendary guitarist ever has sounded quite good without it....also the price is waay to high. Well, they do say right on the site that it looks "organic" (i.e. it looks like a pile of sh*t). I just know that I sure as hell wouldn't want to have to do a fret crown on one of those! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aidlook Posted February 17, 2007 Report Share Posted February 17, 2007 ....ok it might help intonation a bit....but it looks like ****....And EVERY legendary guitarist ever has sounded quite good without it....also the price is waay to high. Well, they do say right on the site that it looks "organic" (i.e. it looks like a pile of sh*t). I just know that I sure as hell wouldn't want to have to do a fret crown on one of those! I actually read that if you manage to wear them out they'll replace them for a nominal fee...although the neck is like 600 bucks anyway... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.