Yamaha CP88 and 73 - Deserve their own thread

[dazzjazz]

The CP4 has some decent controller facilities, but my attempts to get it to integrate in my studio for controller VIs such as BBC Symphony Orchestra failed. The sliders are set to fixed CC"s unfortunately. The 3 available user manuals are somewhat unclear and I burned through several hours trying to figure it out.

 

In terms of sound, I haven"t felt the urge the upgrade to the CP88. The UI seems to be its biggest advantage.

[AnotherScott]

I had a chance to spend a little time with a CP73. Some observations:

 

* Cool "hidden feature": A Live Set includes not just all the currently selected sounds and settings for each of the three sections (whether those sections are enabled or not), but also all the currently selected sounds for each inactive category within those sections. So, for example, if your Live Set #1 includes your favorite Rhodes sound (selected in the EP section), the memorized EP section settings can also include your favorite (unselected) Wurli, Clav, and DX sounds, each in their respective categories (albeit not with different fx settings). Extending this concept to all three sections, this means that your Live Set #1 can include 12 of your favorite sounds, all available almost instantaneously via dedicated, labeled front panel controls. You have nearly instant access to your favorite Grand, Upright, CP, Layered piano, Rhodes, Wurli, Clav, FM EP, Pad/String sound, Organ, Chromatic Percussion, and one Other.... and all largely splittable and layereable with each other (for up to one sound in each section). All from within a single Live Set, without any scrolling or menus, and if it's your first Live Set, without ever so much as having to hit a single "unlabeled" button. Just turn the keyboard on, and a few seconds later (it boots fast!), you'll always have those 12 sounds of your choice, instantly available from their clearly named controls.

 

* Thank you to Counterpoint and Chazkeys earlier in this thread for the tip about how to turn off sustain pedal on a split bass sound (or organ, whatever). And btw, the appropriate setting is savable per patch. Related... overall, the manual is pretty good, but boy, some valuable information like that is well hidden.

 

* Things that I'd like to see improved:

 

... DIRECT PATCH NAVIGATION: I'd like an alternate way to directly navigate to Live Set banks instead of only being able to scroll through them with the plus/minus buttons or wheel. For example, there could be a shortcut where some other button (like Transpose)--which currently disables the 8 Live Set selection buttons entirely--instead allows you to use those 8 Live Set buttons to directly navigate to any of the first 8 banks. (Ideally, you could even use another button to get to banks 9-16.) Then we could get from a sound in Bank 1 to a sound in Bank 8 without having to hit the plus key 7 times (or do a long wheel scroll). It's also good to have an "absolute" button combination to get to a particular sound every time, no matter what sound you're on, as opposed to the current method where the buttons you have to hit to get to a sound are relative, i.e. vary depending on the location of your current sound. Also, it would let you navigate to patches even if you could not easily read the display, which could be an issue for outdoor gigs, or if it's the bottom board of a stack where the board above may be impeding easy visual access to the screen, or if the player is visually impaired.

 

... MIDI ZONE VOLUME CONTROLS: While the 4-zone Master Keyboard function looks nice, there's no way to adjust the volumes of the zones on the fly, which is a nearly-essential function on a controller. I'd again suggest a re-purposing of a button to alter the operation of other controls (since we obviously have to work within the controls that already exist). So, for example, we could again use something like the Transpose button, and while that button has been invoked, the first four endless rotaries along the bottom (Piano Volume, Piano Tone, EP Volume, EP Tone) would function instead as volume controls for the 4 zones. Or instead of those knobs, another approach could be to use the square section of 4 endless rotaries in the EP Effects section (Depth, Rate, Depth, Speed). But if you're buying a board in part to make use of its external zones, you probably really want some quick way to adjust their volumes. (And maybe doubly so if the board also doesn't include ways to turn the zones on and off on the fly.)

 

... SEAMLESS TRANSITIONS BETWEEN SECTIONS: I was dissapointed that the seamless sound switching philosophy did not extend to switching sections off with the silver toggle switches. For example, within a single Live Set, if you want to switch from your Piano category sound to your Sub category sound, while you can turn on the Sub section in anticipation of what you're about to play there, your Piano sound will unfortunately cut off as soon as you turn that section off, instead of letting any existing held/decaying notes continue to fade naturally. (OTOH, a pleasant surprise was that seamless switching DID work within sections. So for example, you could be playing Rhodes, hold a chord, turn the knob to Wurli, and your Rhodes sound will not cut off. Excellent!)

 

... SOUNDS: In terms of sound updates, there are just a few sounds that I think are still missing in terms of covering most "common" sounds... I'd like to see trumpet, sax, banjo, and violin/fiddle. Those last two are near-essential "bread and butter" sounds if you ever get called on to do country. For a "cover most typical territory" board, I think these four are the common sounds that are most conspicuous by their absence. Other than that, the purist in me says that a top tier stage piano (and somthing competing to some extent with the equivalent Nords, Korgs, Crumar and Viscount) should at least have all 4 clav pickup positions (and preferably a mute bar and EQs and release samples), though in day-to-day gigging, I'm sure lots of folks would find the 2 clav sounds provided to be adequate.

 

... EDITING INACTIVE SECTIONS: {Corrected from my original post} -- The "Display Lights = On" option lets you nicely select a sound within an inactive section (so you can silently prepare to switch to a section sound you hadn't planned in advance)... however, the Voice navigation enhancement of update 1.4 was not implemented in this mode, meaning you can only see the category and number of the sound you're selecting, not its name. They should implement that enhancement (hold or double-click the big colored Voice Select button to see a navigable list) in this mode as well, so you could visibly scroll through the names of your selectable pending sounds. (In the mean time, there is a workaround for silently changing the sound in an inactive session while being able to see the names of the Voices... with the Section inactive, turn the volume down, then activate the sound to enable visible patch navigation, then bring the volume of the sound back up when you need it.)

 

... TRANSPOSE: The Transpose function does not affect the MIDI Out. So if you transpose down a whole step to accommodate a singer, and you have an external device connected for additional sounds, the internal and external sounds will be playing a whole step off from each other. There is very little need to be able to transpose the internal sound without transposing the external sound, so this would appear to be a bizarre design choice, making me think that, somehow, the board's architecture must have forced them into it. And in fact, the manual specifically states, "NOTE: This setting does not affect the MIDI output data." So this isn't a bug/oversight, they are well aware of it, and of the fact that people could find it to be an issue, and it hasn't been addressed in the updates either, all of which leads me to believe that it could well be unfixable. So for anyone thinking of supplementing this board with VB3m or B-3X for organ sounds, remember not to use the Transpose function when your patch includes that organ sound...

 

... DATA ENTRY: Incrementing/decrementing something with the data entry knob to the left of the screen is a little irritating when there are perfectly good plus and minus buttons directly below that do absolutely nothing when on screens that could really benefit from quick plus-and-minus controls, like Transpose. Touch would benefit, too, along with various menu settings. Wheels are good for navigating through large lists, but buttons are quicker and more comfortable to use compared to scrolling a wheel just a little at a time.

 

p.s. -- I have posted all those suggestions on Ideascale. If you'd like to see any of them implemented, please head over there and vote them up.

https://yamahasynth.ideascale.com/a/ideas/recent/campaign-filter/byids/campaigns/23361/stage/unspecified

 

Overall, I really like the basic ergonomics and aesthetics. Operationally, it may be the most "fun" stage piano I've played. But like everything, it has its strong and weak points. Most notably, while lots of people seem to really like the action, it just didn't connect for me. I thought it felt kind of "dead." And oddly, even though it is by no means a heavy action, it sometimes felt like a bit of a struggle to play. I think maybe because the lack of FTEC was prompting me to try to compensate by playing harder (even with Touch set to Soft). In this type of board, I found the SV1/SV2 to be much nicer to play. I'm curious to check the feel of the 88 some time, though it would be too heavy for me to regularly cart around (as the SV1/SV2 is as well, even in its 73 key version). In comparably lightweight boards that could similarly serve as a nice "lower," I prefer the feel of the Kurzweil PC4, the Vox Continental, and some Casios. But actions are very subjective, and if this one works for you, there's a lot to like in this board.

[Fleer]

Thanks A/Scott, another one bites the dust.

[ChazKeys]

I had a chance to spend a little time with a CP73. Some observations:

... MIDI ZONE VOLUME CONTROLS: While the 4-zone Master Keyboard function looks nice, there's no way to adjust the volumes of the zones on the fly, which is a nearly-essential function on a controller.

 

... EDITING INACTIVE SECTIONS: Unfortunately, any section that is not active cannot be navigated/viewed. So for example, let's say you're playing piano, and on a whim, you decide you'd like to switch to organ at the next verse.

 

... DATA ENTRY: Incrementing/decrementing something with the data entry knob to the left of the screen is a little irritating when there are perfectly good plus and minus buttons directly below that do absolutely nothing when on screens that could really benefit from quick plus-and-minus controls, like Transpose. Touch would benefit, too, along with various menu settings.( And actually, related to this, when bringing up a menu, instead of having to scroll through the items, it would be nice to also be able to hit a button, i.e. hit the "Live Set 3" button to choose the third item in the menu.) Wheels are good for navigating through large lists, but buttons are quicker and more comfortable to use compared to scrolling a wheel just a little at a time.

 

Most notably, while lots of people seem to really like the action, it just didn't connect for me. I thought it felt kind of "dead." And oddly, even though it is by no means a heavy action, it sometimes felt like a bit of a struggle to play.

 

Wow that's a pretty detailed reveiw/analysis and most of it is spot on. Here are some workarounds and the odd correction.

 

... MIDI ZONE VOLUME CONTROLS: I get around this by using the inactive sections volume control. That is potentially 3 zones but you will need to map that control to CC7 on your external gear. The CP gives you the option to keep the section controls lit and active even when the toggle switch is off. For example running Model D app (completely CC mappable) I use the Sub Section which gives me 6 controls mapped Cut Off, Resonance, Filter Contour, Attack, Decay and Glide. If you just need volume then a second pedal to FC2 and map it to any of the 4 zones. Note you could still use the Sub section by enabling the Advanced Mode Switch and routing to the Piano or EPiano section depending on needs.

 

... EDITING INACTIVE SECTIONS: When you turn a section off it's controls can still be edited although it will not update the instrument name in the display which is a problem. But you could leave the section active and simply turn the volume down. A combination of the 2 techniques above should be workable.

 

... DATA ENTRY: "Incrementing/decrementing something with the data entry knob to the left of the screen is a little irritating when there are perfectly good plus and minus buttons directly". Yes completely agree with you no reason why the Page +/- cannot be repurposed when in edit mode.

 

"( And actually, related to this, when bringing up a menu, instead of having to scroll through the items, it would be nice to also be able to hit a button, i.e. hit the "Live Set 3" button to choose the third item in the menu.)"

 

But...you can!!! You can just press the numbers - so I can get to Zone edit with 3 presses. Exactly what you suggested above - think that was added in OS1.3

 

I have to also agree about action. It is a nice weight but does seem as you say 'dead' - I can't understand it. But what I have noticed with the EPs is that as soon as you dial in some drive and maybe some chorus 2 you can really dig in - they are a lot more responsive and alive. Better velocity curves or at least a super soft (super light) setting would help. Even on Soft I can't easily max out the velocity but I have a light touch and don't play acoustic piano or weighted keyboards.

 

I would like to think Yamaha has struck a sensible balance with their approach to Zones. I don't see it as Controller Keyboard but a Stage Piano that can set up your external gear for each song. So everything is covered in the Zone Edit - Range, Split, Program, Bank. It's pretty comprehensive. There are workarounds for more control but they won't expect users to be getting their hands dirty. Note the CCs are fixed for example. So a bottom board that can set up your top bard for each song. Stick an Electro on top and you can even use it for pitch bend. But maybe they are just thinking of zones for iPad users?

 

The ability to layer/split any section up to 3 times has to be one of it's most powerful features. But you are right the Sub section still needs expanding and this would further exploit that feature.

 

I have also posted on IdeaScale - so will go and check yours out!

[AnotherScott]

MIDI ZONE VOLUME CONTROLS: I get around this by using the inactive sections volume control. That is potentially 3 zones but you will need to map that control to CC7 on your external gear.

Ah. The "Invert" option, yes? I had forgotten about that, thanks. So essentially, you still always have a total of only three volume controls, but you have a choice in terms of each one controlling either an internal sound or an external sound. That is useful, but obviously still pretty limiting... and complicated, with the remapping required, especially in the context of a board that is designed around easy direct control manipulation. It's better than nothing, though, and can be a useful workaround if you can function within its limitations/complications.

 

EDITING INACTIVE SECTIONS: When you turn a section off it's controls can still be edited although it will not update the instrument name in the display which is a problem. But you could leave the section active and simply turn the volume down. A combination of the 2 techniques above should be workable.

Thanks, I had missed the "Display Lights = On" option (or at least its significance). I've updated my post (and ideascale suggestion) to reflect the remaining related problem of not displaying the patch names (on Ideascale, it's now called "Visible Voice selection in inactive sections"). Your workaround of the using the volume control is a good one. A bit awkward, and irritating in that it should not be necessary, but quite usable. Basically, then, with Display Lights to On, when you want to alter the sound selected for an inactive section (while actually being able to see its name), you (a) turn the volume down on that section, (b) activate that section, © select the sound (since the name scrolling feature will now work), and then (d) deactivate the section, and (e) turn the volume up again. (Or you could skip step D and just turn the volume up when you need it.)

 

Yamaha often seems to come up with some of the weirdest naming conventions. Understanding their termonology is sometimes half the battle. Maybe in part because the people coming up with these things aren't native English speakers? And/or things are being named by engineers looking at the functions from an engineering perspective? I don't know. But "Display Lights" on/off might have been better at communicating its real usefullness if it had been named "Inactive Section Controls" (which could be "enabled" or "disabled"). "Invert" is not exactly communicative of that earlier option discussed, either. I'd go for something more like "Inactive Controls Send MIDI?" (yes/no).

 

You can just press the numbers "to select an option from a menu screen} - so I can get to Zone edit with 3 presses. Exactly what you suggested above - think that was added in OS1.3

Ah, thanks! Sure enough, the model I tried did not have the newest OS.

 

Better velocity curves or at least a super soft (super light) setting would help. Even on Soft I can't easily max out the velocity but I have a light touch and don't play acoustic piano or weighted keyboards.

I don't have a light touch, and I, too, would wish for a softer-than-soft setting!

 

I have hypothesized in the past that possibly the Montage/MODX pianos play better from the Montage actions because the velocity related code in the two boards is identical, i.e. they never implemented alternate velocity curves optimized for the different actions in the later MODX. I wonder if it's possible that the CP velocity curves were developed on/for the 88, and have perhaps not been optimized in the 73 for the action that is in the 73...? (Assuming that the sounds do indeed play better from the 88!)

 

Thanks again for all your input, I have updated my post above accordingly.

[ChazKeys]

Better velocity curves or at least a super soft (super light) setting would help. Even on Soft I can't easily max out the velocity but I have a light touch and don't play acoustic piano or weighted keyboards.

I don't have a light touch, and I, too, would wish for a softer-than-soft setting!

 

I have hypothesized in the past that possibly the Montage/MODX pianos play better from the Montage actions because the velocity related code in the two boards is identical, i.e. they never implemented alternate velocity curves optimized for the different actions in the later MODX. I wonder if it's possible that the CP velocity curves were developed on/for the 88, and have perhaps not been optimized in the 73 for the action that is in the 73...? (Assuming that the sounds do indeed play better from the 88!)

Yes that's good hypothesis - both instruments share exactly the same firmware so the differences in keyboard response would be in a layer below the firmware - if that makes sense. I'm thinking that a heavier wooden key once it starts travelling has more inertia and allows the player to hit the higher velocities using less force. BTW I note you had quite a long discussion with Bad Mister regarding the BHS keyboard. Somewhere in that thread someone said the key length was shorter on the CP73 though probably not enough to make much difference.

[AnotherScott]

Yes that's good hypothesis - both instruments share exactly the same firmware so the differences in keyboard response would be in a layer below the firmware - if that makes sense.

Yes, I think that makes sense... or alternatively, the downloadable firmwares could theoretically contain all the velocity curve info necessary for both instruments, and the code would "know" what to do based on what board it's been loaded into. So either way, yeah, I don't think we can get any clue as to the validity of the hypothesis from any "outside" perpective.

[stoken6]

Scott or Chaz (or anyone else really) - can you confirm the CP's capability as a MIDI slave? Can it play more than one sound at once? Can it only play whatever sounds are mapped to its keyboard?

 

Cheers, Mike.

[AnotherScott]

Scott or Chaz (or anyone else really) - can you confirm the CP's capability as a MIDI slave? Can it play more than one sound at once? Can it only play whatever sounds are mapped to its keyboard?

Unlike on the YC, I don't see any way to address any of its sounds independently (whether by assigning a sound to external control, or to a different MIDI channel). So then yeah, an external board would only duplicate the sounds you've assigned to the board's own keys.

 

If you just to be able to play a bunch of other commonly needed sounds even when you want to leave the board's own keys fully dedicated to some piano-type sound, the forthcoming Casio CT-S1 looks like it could be a nice simple, low-cost way to do that.

[AnotherScott]

Reposting something I basically posted in the YC thread, just because it's something people interested in a CP could be interested in, and those people may see this thread and not that one... and also specifically in answer to Mike's comment above:

I'm interested in a lightweight 73-hammer, and I don't need a clonewheel in it. The cost premium of the YC over the CP is a lot to justify for this one feature.

 

For its extra cost, the YC gives you a lot more than just the organ. There's also more "other" sounds, and related, the entire FM engine (which is used for the transistor organ sounds but also a whole bunch of other sounds, including FM basses, synth leads, bell sounds, harmonica, brass, strings, guitar, and of course, EPs). As ChazKeys said, YC also has "more Effect Types, Speaker/Amps and an Insertion Effect as well as more synth parameters eg Mono/Poly and Portamento." Also there's the "one feature" Mike alluded to above, it adds the ability to play one of its sound internally while playing another externally (which is always nice, but makes more sense on that model, since one of the biggest needs for this is for playing piano on one action and organ and maybe mono/lead synth lines on another).

 

But the CP still has a bunch of advantages over the YC. It has more piano/EP sounds; the ability to split/layer 3 non-organ sounds instead of 2, albeit from a smaller total selection of sounds (whereas on the YC, a third split/layered sound must be organ); the ability to save customized EQ for each Live Set; and the interface is more direct, which I think can be especially significant since direct interface is so much of the appeal of these boards in the first place. For example...

 

... On the YC, all your non-organ sounds are selectable from 4 categories: piano, EP, synth, and other, which leads to a lot of scrolling. The CP gives you direct access instead to 11 non-organ categories (Grand, Upright, CP, Layered pianos, Rhodes, Wurlis, Clavs, DX eps, pad/strings, chromatic perc, others), which means there's a lot less scrolling to get to the sound you want. The YC does have shortcuts to jump to sub-categories within its major categories, but it's not as obvious/intuitive or as quick as the front panel knobs. (This also relates to the cool feature I described in post #3093503, that you can turn in your CP and immediately have near-instant access to your favorite sounds in 12 categories, from their own dedicated, labeled front panel controls.)

 

... On the CP, you can glance at the panel and see/access every setting simultaneously. On the YC, you can't see everything at once... you activate the A section to get to the A settings, then you can switch to the B section to get to the B settings.

 

... On the CP, you see the name of each effect that you can choose from, and can see "where you are" relative to "where you want to be"; on the YC you scroll through some vague number of cryptic 2-character abbreviations.

 

... The CP has Attack and Release knobs, the YC has a single EG/Filter knob, which provides more options, but whose use is not so intuitive.

 

All of those largely come down to the fact that, to fit all the organ and other new controls on the YC, the piano+other controls had to be ganged up and consolidated. Meaning that the CP is a bit more immediate and simple in its operation, while the YC is deeper, but not as immediately clear.

 

I don't know if I've covered every YC/CP difference here, I may have missed some. But I think it's worth noting that a YC is not a "CP and more" as some people may be seeing it -- there are some valuable things you give up, too. Based on my own priorities, the CP would actually be the preferable board... but that depends on your needs, and also what else you may have available to pair it with.

[AnotherScott]

Better velocity curves or at least a super soft (super light) setting would help.

Is there any chance you have an app that lets you alter MIDI velocity curves? On iOS, that would include (I believe) Midiflow and MIDI Tools, and there are others for Mac/PC. You'd have to run the keyboard in Local Off, to feed the keys out of the CP into the app and then back into the CP to see how the new velocity curve would affect the playability... and that, in itself, will add a (hopefullyonly tiny) amount of latency, so it's not a perfect test, but if you could indeed find a curve that makes the action "come alive," that would imply that the issue we're noticing is fixable and not inherent in the hardware design of the action.

[AnotherScott]

I was able to try a YC88 today, same action as the CP88. Much better. I'm not going to say it's among by all time favorite actions (it's still just a bit slower/heavier feeling than I'd like, especially as you get to the lower end of its graded action), but it's quite nice. And for a reference point, since I mentioned that the YC73 did not feel as good to me as the PC4, I'll also say that the 88 feels better than the PC4. If the CP73's action had played like the 88, I'd have probably bought it. (Or conversely, if the CP88 had been under 30 lbs, I'd have probably bought it.)

[Morrissey]

I was able to try a YC88 today, same action as the CP88. ... If the CP73's action had played like the 88, I'd have probably bought it.

 

I'm in this camp.

[pawelsz]

I was able to try a YC88 today, same action as the CP88. Much better. I'm not going to say it's among by all time favorite actions (it's still just a bit slower/heavier feeling than I'd like, especially as you get to the lower end of its graded action), but it's quite nice.

 

Heavier? Yes. But slower?

[ElmerJFudd]

The actions on the YC88 and CP88 are the same. It"s a very grand-piano-like action with the compromises of compact design in a portable slab. The key lengths are not as long as the real deal and there is no escapement mechanism. The action is not slow. The feeling of weight or weighting is not as light as a Steinway or other lighter feeling grand actions. I prefer it to the Kawai ES8 which is also very good. The P-515 is one to compare it to, I"ve played both and the P-515 is very nice feeling to play. It is not however as compact and portable. In a nutshell, first quarter 2021, CP-88 is about as good a slab piano action as anyone is making right now if action is your focus. If getting weight down for travel is important - Kawai ES-110 or a Casio PX-5S/560 are responsive and play well for piano. YMMV

[confidence]

Good summary, but it's worth clarifying that the CP88 at 17.5 kilos is hardly heavy for an 88 note board with a really good action.

[ChazKeys]

Better velocity curves or at least a super soft (super light) setting would help.

Is there any chance you have an app that lets you alter MIDI velocity curves? On iOS, that would include (I believe) Midiflow and MIDI Tools, and there are others for Mac/PC. You'd have to run the keyboard in Local Off, to feed the keys out of the CP into the app and then back into the CP to see how the new velocity curve would affect the playability... and that, in itself, will add a (hopefullyonly tiny) amount of latency, so it's not a perfect test, but if you could indeed find a curve that makes the action "come alive," that would imply that the issue we're noticing is fixable and not inherent in the hardware design of the action.

Yes - I have used the velocity curve function in MidiFlow and I could get those higher velocities. I will revisit that setup and also test it again with Scarbee in Module Pro. Although the curve editor in Module Pro is very basic. I've never noticed any latency using MidiFlow although there has to be some of course. TBC....

[AnotherScott]

Better velocity curves or at least a super soft (super light) setting would help {on the 73}

I added that as another ideascale request, if you'd like to upvote it.

 

As for the heavy/slow thing, I guess the distinction does blur a bit beneath my fingers. If something offers more resistance (which we would call heavier) is struck with a given amount of force, it will move more slowly than something with less resistance (which we would call lighter) struck with the same amount of force, yes? So there is some kind of relation between heaviness (in weight) and slowness (in speed). So from that perspective, I'm not even sure it's possible for a board to feel both heavy and quick, as Elmer and pawelsz appear to be describing. Maybe we're just running into the limitations of epxlaining physical experiences with words. But either way, I'd say it means that, for example, a single note one-hand (multi-finger) reptition is more difficult to pull off than on some other boards.

[stoken6]

the heavy/slow thing

I think I get the distinction. SLOW=dragging a ping-pong ball through honey. HEAVY=throwing a bowling ball through the air. Once the heavy thing is moving, it carries on moving with very little additional effort. The slow thing requires effort all the way through its travel.

 

Cheers, Mike.

[AnotherScott]

Interesting analogy, Mike, I'll have to give that some thought. But I also wanted to add that I think there's a distinction to be made between the different "phases" of the keystrike. There's the force required to strike the key and get, say, a forte response; there's the amount of finger force needed to keep a struck key held down; and there's the speed at which in returns to the resting position on release. That return is tricky, because you want it to be fast, yet you don't want it to have so much energy behind it that it feels like it's pushing up at your fingers when you're holding the note down, and you also don't want it coming up with such force that it bounces at the top. So you want the key to come up with speed, but not force. Thinking about it, I'm kind of amazed that pianos work at all. ;-)

[pawelsz]

the heavy/slow thing

I think I get the distinction. SLOW=dragging a ping-pong ball through honey. HEAVY=throwing a bowling ball through the air. Once the heavy thing is moving, it carries on moving with very little additional effort. The slow thing requires effort all the way through its travel.

 

Cheers, Mike.

 

I describe it that way:

heavy - big moment of inertia , light is low inertia

slow - when the fast repetition is hard to achieve and/or tiring (what I experienced with Roland Ivory Feel-S before switching to Yamaha NWX), fast is self-explanatory

hard - when it is hard to start the key movement and how hard the keys try to lift up your fingers, may also be combined with short pivot length, when considering "hardness" across the key length.

 

Yamaha NWX action is for me heavy, very fast and a bit hard (to play pianissimo, it also depends on the reaction of sound module and dynamics curve)

Korg SV-2 is significantly lighter, a little bit slower and soft (kind of "universal" among hammer actions, you can play some synth stuff on it), Korg has much better pianissimo sound than Yamaha.

Roland was (from what I remember), a little bit lighter than Yamaha, slower and a little bit softer than NWX

 

it is why actions like Grand Feel 2 can be very heavy being at the same time soft and fast (long keys)

 

The pivot length also affects the key behaviour difference at the end of the key / near the fallboard. It is why I really dislike Fatar TP100. From the three actions I believe the Korg has the longest pivot (maybe Roland), then Roland with 22 cm, then Yamaha with around 20,5 cm, maybe 21.

Also, some purists say that Yamaha GH family actions (also NWX, GH3, GH3X, GHE, NW-STAGE, BHE, but not GHS, not sure about BHS) are not hammer actions. Because hammer is not free. On Korg or Roland actions you can hold the key with one hand, then hit it rapidly with the finger of second hand - the force will cause the hammer to jump and hit the key you are holding when coming back to rest position. In Yamahas you can't do that, key and hammer do not move independently. But once Yamaha actions like NWX allows for fast repetition, I'm not complaining.

 

Considering fast action. I am able to play very fast repetitive notes on NWX three sensor action. I am able to do this also on Korg RH3 which is two sensor action (but they are located "low" so behave like 2nd and 3rd sensor of tri-sensor action), but Roland action didn't allow me to play repetitive fast notes without fatigue, even if it was quite long-pivot three sensor action. Also Roland had much more noticeable escapement simulation.

[Coker]

I"m thinking that there may be some natural resonant frequency of pressing the key down, then having the key bounce and push your finger back up. That bounce/push back up is one thing I like about CP88s action.

[pawelsz]

I"m thinking that there may be some natural resonant frequency of pressing the key down, then having the key bounce and push your finger back up. That bounce/push back up is one thing I like about CP88s action.

 

Maybe. I would say that I learned on NWX action to better use the weight of the whole arm than usng the force of muscles. Minimizing the force is the way to play healthy. Hands weigh enough.

[Nicky]

the heavy/slow thing

I think I get the distinction. SLOW=dragging a ping-pong ball through honey. HEAVY=throwing a bowling ball through the air. Once the heavy thing is moving, it carries on moving with very little additional effort. The slow thing requires effort all the way through its travel.

 

Cheers, Mike.

 

I describe it that way:

heavy - big moment of inertia , light is low inertia

slow - when the fast repetition is hard to achieve and/or tiring (what I experienced with Roland Ivory Feel-S before switching to Yamaha NWX), fast is self-explanatory

hard - when it is hard to start the key movement and how hard the keys try to lift up your fingers, may also be combined with short pivot length, when considering "hardness" across the key length.

 

Yamaha NWX action is for me heavy, very fast and a bit hard (to play pianissimo, it also depends on the reaction of sound module and dynamics curve)

Korg SV-2 is significantly lighter, a little bit slower and soft (kind of "universal" among hammer actions, you can play some synth stuff on it), Korg has much better pianissimo sound than Yamaha.

Roland was (from what I remember), a little bit lighter than Yamaha, slower and a little bit softer than NWX

 

it is why actions like Grand Feel 2 can be very heavy being at the same time soft and fast (long keys)

 

The pivot length also affects the key behaviour difference at the end of the key / near the fallboard. It is why I really dislike Fatar TP100. From the three actions I believe the Korg has the longest pivot (maybe Roland), then Roland with 22 cm, then Yamaha with around 20,5 cm, maybe 21.

Also, some purists say that Yamaha GH family actions (also NWX, GH3, GH3X, GHE, NW-STAGE, BHE, but not GHS, not sure about BHS) are not hammer actions. Because hammer is not free. On Korg or Roland actions you can hold the key with one hand, then hit it rapidly with the finger of second hand - the force will cause the hammer to jump and hit the key you are holding when coming back to rest position. In Yamahas you can't do that, key and hammer do not move independently. But once Yamaha actions like NWX allows for fast repetition, I'm not complaining.

 

Considering fast action. I am able to play very fast repetitive notes on NWX three sensor action. I am able to do this also on Korg RH3 which is two sensor action (but they are located "low" so behave like 2nd and 3rd sensor of tri-sensor action), but Roland action didn't allow me to play repetitive fast notes without fatigue, even if it was quite long-pivot three sensor action. Also Roland had much more noticeable escapement simulation.

 

very interested in your comments because I'm considering a Korg Grandstage (RH3 action) after owning a CP88...when just comparing the actions without sound, the CP is way more piano like...but there's something about the available velocity curves, together with the "dynamics" knob on the Grandstage that allows me to dial in the touch sensitivity I need (at least trying in a store), particularly with triggering piano plug ins. I wish Yamaha would allow for more "in between" variations of their soft, medium and hard settings.....like Korg and Roland do. I could never get Keyscape to feel right with the CP, even tweaking the velocity settings in Keyscape. I have the same issue with Nord Stages, beautiful piano sounds, but I don't agree with how they're "set up" velocity wise, and the available velocity control on the panel doesn't get me what I need (a harder, more digging in kind of curve).

[pawelsz]

Grandstage is probably one of the most tweakable when it comes to dynamics, also Vox Continental. I haven't played one, only my SV-2, but the action should be at least similar, maybe same RH3. In Grandstage you have dynamics knob and many different curves, including the curve "9" which is kind of "wide" dynamics range.

[ElmerJFudd]

Thoughts on Grandstage dynamics knob.

 

If you can dial in a behavior that suits the sound you"ve called up (which is something we hope Korg has spent some time doing when they matched the sample library or patch to the action). But, if you can dial it in to taste - is this feature adjusting the velocity curve or is it adjusting the sound engine"s behavior? And does it translate to the MIDI output? Or does it only work on the internal sounds? Important point to know when using virtual pianos hosted on PC or other external MIDI connected device.

 

Some software instruments like Pianoteq, have their own velocity curve adjustment parameters editable within the virtual instrument as opposed to trying to dial it in on the keyboard controller. At one point there was also an effort to offer custom velocity curves for the Kawai VPC-1 with the Ravenscroft VST. I have to Google it, but I would imagine there are also software plugins that offer velocity curve adjustment from within your DAW in real time. It may even be built into some DAWs or hosts like MainStage or Cantabile. Worth a look.

[Nicky]

Thoughts on Grandstage dynamics knob.

 

If you can dial in a behavior that suits the sound you"ve called up (which is something we hope Korg has spent some time doing when they matched the sample library or patch to the action). But, if you can dial it in to taste - is this feature adjusting the velocity curve or is it adjusting the sound engine"s behavior? And does it translate to the MIDI output? Or does it only work on the internal sounds? Important point to know when using virtual pianos hosted on PC or other external MIDI connected device.

 

Some software instruments like Pianoteq, have their own velocity curve adjustment parameters editable within the virtual instrument as opposed to trying to dial it in on the keyboard controller. At one point there was also an effort to offer custom velocity curves for the Kawai VPC-1 with the Ravenscroft VST. I have to Google it, but I would imagine there are also software plugins that offer velocity curve adjustment in from within your DAW in real time. It may even be built into some DAWs or hosts like MainStage or Cantabile. Worth a look.

the dynamics knob adjusts the velocity curve and yes, it translates to the midi output...tested it with my laptop trying out various virtual pianos

[ElmerJFudd]

Excellent. And have you found a setting that feels great with your virtual piano of choice? What"s the pair up? Ivory? A Kontakt library? Garitan CFX? The Yamaha in Keyscape?

[pawelsz]

I think there is even a setting if this works pre-midi or after midi. You should check in manual.

[keyboardologist]

Hello to all.

On the quick/slow action conversation, there are many key points apart from the actual key's weight (counterweight). In detail:

 

- Key's weight (Counterweight as it called)

- Hammer weight

- Hammer pivot

- The let-off mechanism (key escapement) as a mechanical point

- Key length (up to the pivot/fulcrum/balance pin)

- The key pivot/fulcrum/balance pin point. In cheap actions, it is at the end of the key, so the key does not extend further after the pivot and there is no other weight to compensate key's actual weigh (counterweight) or hammer weight.

- Sensor type: douple (down/up) or triple (down/midway up/full up release)

- The sensor/contact placement (in relation to the key pivot, hammer, etc)

 

You can check this: https://kawaius.com/technology/wooden-key-actions/

 

As you can see, in the cheap/budget actions, hammer and/or let-off might not exist.

 

Both P515 (NWX) and CP88 (NW-GH) are having 3 sensors but the CP88 lacks escapement/let-off.

CP73, S90XS and Montage 8 are having BHS action, which differs the weight of the keys (or counterweigh, or hammer weigh, not really sure) across the keybed (mostly in 3 or 4 group areas) but I found no more specs about other aspects of the action.

 

I also know that on older/cheaper Yamaha Actions like GH/GHE/GHS on my Motif 8, the main sensor is triggered by the key and not by the hammer. The hammer exists for its weight and probably only for the release sensor (not sure on that).

And also if I'm not wrong, on the GH3 (three sensors) all sensors are on the hammer.

 

In conclusion there are a lot of parameters defining the feel and/or the quickness of the key/action.

I had personally tried several actions and Î do separate the feel of the actual (mechanical) move of the key (it can be tested on any switched-off keyboard) and the sensor responsiveness (sensor type, sensor placement) along with the software velocity curve.

On my preference, I really don't like heavy actions because I have used to practice for many years on the very light action of my acoustic piano and I am now mostly playing on synth/semi keybeds.

In relation to this, I don't like keybeds with short key length (measuring from the far end of the key up to the pivot/fulcrum/balance pin, not the whole key length), either synth/semi/hammeraction, because they also tend to feel heavy, especially when a key is pressed closer to it's pivot/fulcrum and even more if this occurs on a black key. Think of playing Eb half-diminished and focus on Gb [black] and Bbb[=A white] keys and where the fingers are touching/pressing.

 

On topic, my questions are:

1. Does CP73 feels lighter than CP88? I personally hope so.

2. What is the key's length? Let's say in relation to the CP88, but mostly to my Motif's GHS or my Kawai's ES100/110 which are acceptable for me.

3. Is it quick on the sensor side so that you can play fast repeated notes, after a while where you will get used of the action and key responsiveness?

4. Does 'soft' velocity setting needs relatively higher finger pressure (it's hard) to generate the same velocity value than other keybeds (CP88, etc) or is it the velocity curve's progression which you don't like?

5. How would you rate the velocity curve in the below types? Keep in mind that on the CP, soft might mean the player's feel which is the opposite of this diagram's curve labeling: