Trems after 2003:Still paying?

[nienturi]

Are still those "new" bridges being manufactured under Floyd Rose licence? Do Hoshino still paying money to them?

I knew that they were patented by ibanez?

And last

Is there any engraving on the back side of new trems about "Floyd Rose"?

Thanks for comments.

[Ant1981]

I was informed that Ibanez redesigned the trem so that they didnt have to pay floyd fees.

I can't see why, as I can't see that Ibanez don't have the money, unless the reason they don't is that no one wants to buy a cataloge of bland guitars. They're not what they used to be.

And on another note, the Ibanez trems are still of the floyd design or type (as was the Edges), double locking floating trem. So where's the difference?

[Rich]

The pattent on the OFR ran out in 03'. Ibanez like several other manufacturers redesigned, the only problem is their redesign was based on the Lo Profile OFR [both the EP and EP2], which is still patented until [I'm not sure]. FR sued, Ibanez and several others lost [I heard Ibanez had to pay 1/4mil in fines to the patent owners]. The "Licensed by Floyd Rose" was omited from the mold, but soon after they began installing paper sticker on the trem blocks to comply with the labeling. The next year they released the Edge3, no royalties.

[C.Thep]

you never cease to amaze me with you ibanez knowledge, Rich. Where do you get this kind of information?

I wonder how much 250k is to Ibanez.
So the reason the Edge3 doesn't have to pay royalties is because its not based on the lo profile?

[Rich]

I have lots of friends and feelers.

250 large is a lot. It's not that big a company.

It's based on the OFR.

[nienturi]

Thanks guys for your care.

[Ant1981]

So does this mean we will see more of the Edge3 and less of the Edge Pro? Or was the payment on the Edge Pro just a 'one off' and they can produce as many as they like?

[Rich]

They still have to pay royalties for each EP and EP2 they sell.

[Ant1981]

In that case why did they get rid of our much loved Lo Pro Edge?

[nienturi]

Originally Posted by Ant1981

In that case why did they get rid of our much loved Lo Pro Edge?

Yeah! Curious point

If they are still paying, why let players to use ep's not lo pro edges?

[Rich]

The Lo Pro was 12 years old and LONG overdue for a redesign.

[jemsite]

Originally Posted by Rich

The Lo Pro was 12 years old and LONG overdue for a redesign.

please explain the deficiencies of the LoPro... glen

[Rich]

They're only deficiencies when you consider the refinements of the EP. The EP is even LOWER a profile, smoother contoured, and the lock blocks are now integrated into the saddle and don't fall out when you turn it upside down. [who cares if you can leave the ball end on or not]. The saddle inserts are supposedly advantageous to tone and attack [in some way, suposedly] even though they probably decrease overall string life.

[jemsite]

Originally Posted by Rich

They're only deficiencies when you consider the refinements of the EP. The EP is even LOWER a profile, smoother contoured, and the lock blocks are now integrated into the saddle and don't fall out when you turn it upside down. [who cares if you can leave the ball end on or not]. The saddle inserts are supposedly advantageous to tone and attack [in some way, suposedly] even though they probably decrease overall string life.

come on. the profile was not a deficiency. most of us like the original Edge. Not to nitpick but the thing is you originally said this:

Originally Posted by Rich

The Lo Pro was 12 years old and LONG overdue for a redesign.

which is nonsense. trem design is 99,999 out of 100,000 on the THINGS TODO LIST - never mind they removed the locking studs ...glen

[Rich]

12 years with most designs today IS long overdue.

If you recall the word was the molds were also about to the end of their useful life.

If you're just looking for an argument go find another thread and another poster, I have too much to do today