confidence

That makes sense. PA schlep and set up is a PITA. I don't gig much any more, but when I do this sort of weight is fine by me (I'm actually upgrading from my Oberheim MC2000 which is 10lb heavier AND requires an external sound source). I'm more interested in getting a setup into as few boxes/units as possible. What's your 26.4lb hammer action, out of interest?

I've never played a real Wurly. What is the action like? How does it compare to a Rhodes, or a piano?

Haha, that's interesting. I was just doing some digging around for info and came across the soundonsound CP4 review again, and noticed that the reviewer said virtually the exact same thing as me: https://www.soundonsound.com/reviews/yamaha-cp4-stage

Funny, that's my reaction too. I didn't buy it primarily for AP but when I do play, I tend to choose one of the second bank of pianos rather than leaving it on the CFX it auto-loads to. It just seems to have slightly too much brightness and edge in the attack and a slightly unnatural and hollow decay to my ear. But then I come from a classical background and tend to like electronic piano sounds on the more subdued and natural side.

Dockeys - Yeah I think that's what it is, I remember now. I was considering the CP88 but was put off by the extremely small number of sounds, and had seen that Yamaha are dribbling new ones out every so often. For some reason I assumed the CP4 had evolved via the same process. Not to worry - as I say the number of sounds is ample and they're exceptionally consistent in quality. In fact I'd wager that the number of sounds in this that I'm likely to actually use is higher than in most 1000+ patch workstations. I considered the CP88 and tried one briefly in a shop, but was put off by how few sounds it had. Maybe in a few years, if they keep going. The additional onboard controls would be nice, although I must admit I don't find the menu-centric nature of the CP4 as much of a problem as some people have suggested. The system is logical, concise and consistent, so it's easy enough to memorise where everything is and go straight to where you have to change something. In some ways I quite like having a keyboard that doesn't feel like scrutinising a computer screen as I play it. The CP4 is a classic example of an instrument that makes a clear, unapologetic statement about what it doesn't do, and then gets on with doing everything that it does do to the very highest possible quality. Props to Yamaha - they know their onions. I'd love to get a Montage but it's 29 kilos and the size of a small house, and I just know I'd never want to take it anywhere.

Just that really. Just spotted a good price on a barely used one of these from a dealer with warranty, and nabbed it. OMG, I can't believe I've never played one before. Everything about it is gorgeous. Love the APs and EPs. Love the strings. Love the synths and pads. I even love the brass, and I've never in my life played a rompler/preset keyboard with brass that didn't make me laugh. And I SOOOOO love the action. Only possible weak spot is organs, and I'm not worried about that as I have a Hammond SKX. The two boards complement each other brilliantly. Was tossing up for ages whether to get something like this or spend a bit more on a cheaper-end workstation with more comprehensive features. But now I've got it, I'm keeping it. I keep doing that thing where I switch it on just to quickly look up a setting or something referenced in the manual, start playing, and then "wake up" 20 minutes later realising I've just been exploring one patch all that time. Two questions: 1. For some reason I had thought that Yamaha had released incremental updates to this with additional sounds, but now that I look I can't find any. Maybe I had it mixed up with a different keyboard? The operating system shows as version 1.01, from 2014, but there are no upgraded versions after that on Yamaha's site or anywhere else I can see. It has 433 voices. Is that the max available or did they add more? I'm not complaining - that's a decent range of sounds for a stage keyboard of this type and they're of exceptionally consistent high quality. Just want to make sure I've got it running everything it can. 2. I came across a free downloadable pack of performances here - they sound pretty good. Are there other things like this available - programming that people have done and shared? Any other tips gratefully received.

Really? Did you SEE the collars and lapels?

Oh well I'll just go and give up my dreams and be miserable then. Mummy always said I was no good anyway - at least now you've confirmed she was right. Thanks.

I don't hear Never Gonna Let You Go in half time, I hear it in a slow 4/4. Half time is not just a slow tempo notated in doubled values, it's a particular feel. In half time you're still aware of the quarter note pulse, which might be in the hihat or whatever. It's just that the main focal effect of the snare is on 3 rather than on 2 and 4. This is not that, you can hear the backbeat on 2 and 4 at certain points - subtly, but there. And it puts the vocal line into 16ths, not 8ths. The melody may well be easier to read in eighths, but how many singers are actually going to perform it from reading the notation? Any singer going to do it on a gig will surely already know it, or learn it by ear. If they read anything in rehearsal it will be just for the words.

1. God yes. Legend action, by organ standards, is stiffer than a very stiff thing. I mean, take the first REALLY STIFF thing that comes into your mind, and imagine it being even more stiff. That's what she said, anyway. Seriously though, I actually sent mine back because I couldn't get on with the action so much, and got a Hammond SKX instead, which is a much better action. I feel you about how hard it is to quantify these things, and I kept holding onto it thinking "nah, I must be imagining it - it can't REALLY be that much of a problem" and trying to talk myself into it. But eventually I realised I was never going to be happy playing it. Moment I got the Hammond I knew I'd done the right thing. I'm not enough of a Hammond afficionado to compare them on all the finer points of sound, tweakability etc; they both sound great to me. But I can just sit down and play the Hammond and not constantly feel like I'm fighting against it. I make that two votes (Mate and me) for "stiff", and two (Dockeys and jeffinpghpa) for "not stiff". How? Who knows. Maybe it does loosen up over time and they were playing older models. Maybe there was a change in manufacturing process at some point? Maybe people just have different expectations. But as you're in Italy, the obvious thing would be to find somewhere you could try one. Easier for you to do than most of us, and at the very least I'd say the action is enough of an unknown quantity that you'll want to satisfy yourself regarding it before parting with your money. Or do as I did and buy from a big retailer with good returns policy, be careful with it and send it back if you don't like the action.

I'm not at all surprised... Really? I am. It's beyond me how anyone could play bass or guitar in a band without knowing that. It's V7 - I in no sharps or flats for christsake. Not exactly Giant Steps.

The thing about guitar (and other stringed instruments) is that the same note can be played in several different places and strings on the guitar neck, with different tonalities and other note characteristics in each place. So "just knowing where the notes are on your instrument like anybody else" is more complicated than knowing that on a keyboard. Box patterns are a convenient way to learn where the notes are that you want to use. Ideally, guitar and bass players learn the names of the notes and all the places they are on the fretboard, but many blues/rock players still depend on the box patterns they learned first to know where they can go on the fretboard. I can do a credible solo on guitar without knowing anything about which notes I'm playing. I can also do a credible solo on keyboard but I can see the notes I'm playing and hear where they are in relation to other notes so I know what the notes are that I'm playing. I can also solo on sax but at this point in my development I don't need to know where the notes are or what the notes are â it's more like a direct connection between my brain and my fingers, same as for well-developed keys players. I can turn my mind off and just play. My fingers know where to go without me telling them anything. Yeah, I get it and I think I had a general idea that guitarists think this way, even though I didn't know the specifics. Not sure about other stringed instruments though. I actually played the violin as a kid to a high level - had to decide which to specialise in when looking at music college and chose piano. The relationship of the instrument to knowledge of notes and theory was much the same as piano as far as I can remember. Yeah, I could play a D major scale just up the D string changing positions, or I could swap over to the A string half way up. But I still knew it was a D major scale, what all the notes were and where they fit into the various theoretical patterns with other notes. I suspect it's got more to do with what a PP said about a lot of people coming to the guitar from an unschooled folk mentality background, whereas people tend to come to the piano (and violin) from having lessons as a kid taught by classically educated teachers.

It just means that the guitarist is playing notes in a pattern on the fretboard that form a box. On a guitar fretboard, this box pattern can be moved up and down to go with chord changes or to move a solo to another place. Many guitarists first learn these box patterns before they know what the notes are or any theory that goes with the pattern. So some guitarists can be described as just playing "in the box" without knowing anything else about what they're doing and why. In a way, it's similar to learning to play one pentatonic scale over all the chord changes in a blues. https://robinmayguitar.com/blogs/lead-guitar/posts/scale-box-positions "As guitarists we tend to regard scales as patterns that can be moved up and down the neck depending on which key we're playing in. We refer to these movable patterns as boxes or box positions." Thanks! I had no idea about all that. Seems like a lot of trouble to go to compared to just knowing where the notes are on your instrument like anybody else.

I don't play guitar at all, although I have a general idea how it works from playing with people who do, arranging etc. Can someone explain to me what is meant by a guitarist playing "in the box" as people have mentioned in this thread?

I don't know the answer to that question. I suppose the question that might illuminate it though is: What do the manufacturers themselves say? In their blurbs selling boards on the basis of having triple sensor action, what claims do they make about the supposed advantages? You can always then dispute whether those claims are true, but that's a different thing from judging them according to a claim they never made.

That's interesting. Why have they gone to so much trouble to make it look like a neo-Rhodes/Wurly then? And even named it as such . . .

Is this the specific claim being made by all these triple-sensor action manufacturers though? Or are they just selling the action as being generally more responsive?

Is this to try and replicate the escapement action of a grand piano? Are there any electro-acoustic keyboard instruments that can do what you're describing? It's a long time since I played a real Rhodes and I can't remember. Also can't say it's something I ever stopped to find out. Just wondering whether the whole thing has any actual relevance beyond the "I Want A Keyboard That's EXACTLY Like An Acoustic Piano But Weighs Less" market segment - which I wouldn't have thought was the main intended audience of the Legend 70s anyway. It seems more like a retro-Rhodes/Wurlitzer/etc. thing with a bit of piano thrown in as well.

I think this problem largely comes out of a desire to save money by using the laptop you already have. If instead you bought a laptop to dedicate it to music performance (looking at it the same way you'd look at the purchase of the keyboard alternative), you could set it up and, once you get it working, resist the temptation to keep adding new things and tinkering. Never let it connect to the internet. Just leave it alone, never update it, and then, just like your keyboard, it will be just the same at the next gig as it was at the last one. The problems of updates etc. don't happen by themselves, players are making them happen. One caveat though... this means avoiding anything cloud-based or that has to periodically "phone home" to re-authorize itself. (As an alternative to the expense of buying a new laptop for this, one could also possibly repurpose an existing one if you go to buy a new one out of a desire to upgrade your main computer, assuming your older one still has sufficient capabilities to run what you'd need it to run.) That's all very well in theory and it's pretty much what I did, and yes it certainly helps. It's never 100% thought. Simply using the software in various ways has an effect over time on its interaction with the OS. Drivers do wierd shit and require reinstallation. I was on Windows (though highly customised and bolted down) which may have been part of the problem. Maybe a mac rig would be better, but from people I know who have done it even that isn't 100%. I'm certainly not dead against the idea, so don't want to offend anyone. I was only making the point that there are factors to consider beyond the effects of fatal performance collapse, which (a) is rare, as people have said, with a well specced and looked after system, and (b) can happen with hardware too, anyway. Computers are "higher maintenance" than hardware, that's all. I keep thinking one day I'll get around to reintroducing a computer element as an "extra & optional" set of sounds that I can use just for the things they really excel in, while having alternatives on hand in the keys themselves to cover all bases as required. A bit of programming and planning for redundancy required, but that seem to me the best of both worlds.

Yeah that's what I was talking about - that vague feeling of uncertainty in the back of your mind that takes mental energy away from the playing. It's a cost, even when the setup works. Whether it's a cost worth paying is of course up to the individual, and can only be determined in relation to all relevant factors.

This is all good advice, but in a sense it just creates a new problem while addressing the old one. That is, the sheer amount of time, headache and hassle involved in keeping a laptop in a reliable gig worthy state. For me, this is the thing that actually turned me away from using them, not having them fall over which actually only happened to me once (not in a gig but in an audition, so also with bad results). Working often in unpredictable conditions for crappy pay with a lot of "meta-work" (travelling, lugging gear etc.) around the actual work, we have to be realistic about additional time and work commitment looking after the gear. I can just pick up a keyboard, take it to the gig and it works, same as it did at home. A module slightly less so, in that I have to have thought about the MIDI relationship between master keyboard and module, but still with near-100% ease once I've done that. But a laptop I have to be constantly thinking about OS updates, driver updates, software settings, attending to the question of whether every little change might have fatal consequences. No doubt that computers can provide superior sound results, due to the much greater memory and processing available. So it's great if you're up for it. But for me, nah.

Ah yes, that makes sense.

Couldn't you just turn the volume up?

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.

To be fair, I have yet to find awesome solo brass/sax samples in ANY HARDWARE INSTRUMENT EVER INVENTED.