JFP

These are bad times for dealerships. They must be anxiously looking at stage piano's sold the in last 30 days and keep fingers crossed people don't start sending them back or cancel orders now that new gear is being released. Times we're already tough. Hope the manufactures compensate them in some ways, like stock protection rebates.

Just pretend it's only three zones--which would not have been a disappointing answer to the how many zones question--and you won't be disappointed by the lack of a fourth fader. ;-) OK, so I pretend : - The PX5S has half-pedalling and expression input - The CP480 has no looping - The Kurzweil Artis has string resonance and half pedaling for the internal AP sound - The Physis Piano has coating on the black keys instead of a clean plastic surface - Nord, Kurzweils and new ES100 have 3 sensor keybeds - ... Just making fun, but if I'd have to pretend away everything that strikes me as odd or missing , the perfect board could have been a Casio Tone two or three decades ago ;-) Sometimes I just fail to understand the decisions that are made dusting product development. Can imagine Yamaha R&D: - Let's make a stage piano with four zones - Yeh ! Good idea; let's give it four faders then - No no no no, too expensive (says guy in suit); two faders thats more than enough ! - Ah...come on... give us the faders - we need them - Ok ok ok, we'll give you three; but that's the max we can do. Otherwise we go bankrupt and the CP production cost will soar (an extra $ 3 dollar cents). - Deal, compromise, we'll sell it to the people with a good marketing story about how you can use a switch (?) to go from layer 1~2 to 3~4 for fader control...or something It will be great anyway. It will sell anyway. I'd perhaps buy it anyway. But IMHO it's OK to point out some striking details of a new product , even from the limited info we have have available until now. Or 'pretend' it away, we'll see...

Regarding piano sounds and action, this is what I understand so far from the add in the magazine and Athan's remarks. Please correct me if I'm wrong: 1) AP sounds use SCM . The full processing, so not just fixed sample snapshots of the parent technology , like voxpops and I first feared. 2) EP sounds use SCM. (Also the real processing) 3) Keybed is a new version of GH3 with Ivory tops and wood incorporated in some way. 4) There is no organ modeling on board (no tone wheel emulation), but there probably is a good collection of organ sounds of the Motif series available. 5) Rest of the collection is Motif XF based. Any idea on a certain bias in sound categories ; just bread & butter, or also a collection of fresh synth sounds ? - so the keybed is graded and has three sensors and incorporates wood . - SCM modeling provides for a lively sound with natural dynamic range and no audible looping (right ?) . On previous sample based Yamaha's (CFIII) looping is quite obvious in the higher octaves. Hope this is history in the new CP with SCM. Question: will the keybed have a certain coating on the black keys as well ? I recently played a TP40Wood with Ivory tops and it mysteriously missed any coating on the black keys, making it old-fashioned plastic slippery keys. Just nitpicking about the design: - Mod/wheel could be next to the controls , lower to the keys if technically possible (see my mockup picture). It would free up the entire upper part of the instrument and is also more consistent in design esthetics. Apple would have put them there ;-) - there are only three faders, whilst its a controller with four zones (?!). Why / why not four faders ?! I thought the CP4 was about getting everything exactly right , making the perfect stage piano. Three faders for four zones is odd to say the least. End of nitpicking. For the rest the CP4 looks promising, almost perfect and very competitive !!

What does 'based on' mean in his context? Does this mean that the CP4 no longer utilises the SCM sound from the CP1 (and CP5?)? Of course, I'll understand if you'd prefer not to disclose this information. Cheers, James x Funny, I was thinking exactly the same thing when I red that text. "Based on" usually means precisely that in marketing speech ; no SCM, but a selection of sounds that were SCM generated (resampled ??). My guess is if it was all truly SCM it would be one of the first features listed in the magazine add. On the other hand I thought , let's wait for monday first and see what the full specs on the Yamaha website will tell. Then start asking these questions. If it doesn't become clear from the specs , I hope Athan can and is allowed to answer. Same goes for the three sensor question.

Makes more sense to me. If wonder if there is really less space above the keys in the front than further back. I thought the Yamaha mechanism was always facing downward. Pity if they could have done it in this way, but simply didn't cause they simply didn't think about it.... If it's technically not possible, I understand. http://www.pianoworld.com/Uploads/files/cp4-II.jpg