New Yamaha stage pianos!

[Dave Ferris]

 

Yep. They need to focus on the piano midrange and the lows. The extreme lows and upper registers are virtually already there .

 

For Rhodes/Wurli's/clavs, no problem - they should sound great. They were already pretty decent before. Being the unbearable purist I am, I just think a "stage piano" should be a piano first.

 

Forget about all those other "sounds". For rock/pop/r&b players there's plenty of that stuff around already.

 

How about an instrument that caters to Jazz/Classical pianists only!

It does ONE thing but does it great. Maybe two piano sounds, one brighter for cutting in an ensemble and one for solo playing. Make it lightweight with solid, smooth non-toy like action and affordable.

 

Simple huh?! Not seemingly so. Not enough of a market you say? Make a good one and I'd bet you'd be surprised.

 

 

 

[David Loving]

That sounds like a casio 330

[burningbusch]

 

Yep. They need to focus on the piano midrange and the lows. The extreme lows and upper registers are virtually already there .

 

For Rhodes/Wurli's/clavs, no problem - they should sound great. They were already pretty decent before. Being the unbearable purist I am, I just think a "stage piano" should be a piano first.

 

Forget about all those other "sounds". For rock/pop/r&b players there's plenty of that stuff around already.

 

About an instrument that caters to Jazz/Classical pianists only!

It does ONE thing but does it great. Maybe two piano sounds, one brighter for cutting in an ensemble and one for solo playing. Make it lightweight with solid, smooth non-toy like action and affordable.

 

Simple huh?! Not seemingly so. Not enough of a market you say? Make a good one and I'd bet you'd be surprised.

 

 

 

My take is that the EPs on other digital hardware instruments are OK but really nothing to write home about. Issues abound and being more of a Rhodes purist I'm not satisfied with what's out there. They could be a lot better. Because the EPs are inherently easier than APs, I'd like to see those addressed and these new Yamahas MIGHT be the ticket.

 

As far as getting digital hardware to sound like a real piano, the only thing I've heard as been things like the very high-end Clavinovas and presumably the AvantGrand. But the critical thing is the SPEAKERS and placement of the speakers. As soon as you take the best piano emulation and send it out PA speakers or the like, it's going to start sucking badly. That's not how we hear an acoustic piano. There needs to be much more work done by manufacturers in designing speaker systems that are tuned for a particular piano emulation and designed to fill the room in a non-directional (acoustic) fashion. They should be built in or they could be removable to reduce weight, but they need to create a surround, acoustic sound.

 

Busch.

[MonksDream]

Yep. They need to focus on the piano midrange and the lows. The extreme lows and upper registers are virtually already there .

 

For Rhodes/Wurli's/clavs, no problem - they should sound great. They were already pretty decent before. Being the unbearable purist I am, I just think a "stage piano" should be a piano first.

+1 Every DP I've ever heard has issues from middle C to G above and some have fewer than others. Unfortunately that's prime melodic real estate on a piano, and if the piano sound doesn't make you smile what are you dragging around a weighted 88 for?

[SK]

As far as getting digital hardware to sound like a real piano, the only thing I've heard as been things like the very high-end Clavinovas and presumably the AvantGrand. But the critical thing is the SPEAKERS and placement of the speakers. As soon as you take the best piano emulation and send it out PA speakers or the like, it's going to start sucking badly. That's not how we hear an acoustic piano. There needs to be much more work done by manufacturers in designing speaker systems that are tuned for a particular piano emulation and designed to fill the room in a non-directional (acoustic) fashion. They should be built in or they could be removable to reduce weight, but they need to create a surround, acoustic sound.

 

Busch.

You're correct -that the speaker system has a major effect on "a piano" sound.

 

That's why, after I tweaked my FP4 like my 700SX and accepted it as the best I could do, I went on a long mission for piano speakers... went with Accugrooves and was satisfied for a while, and then went to a custom setup, that's so weird even I laugh at it when I try to explain it. But I can finally say I got the sound the best it can be for this sample.

 

What I found is: the main thing in speakers for piano is full range, with strong mids, warm woodlike resonance, and the power to disperse the sound naturally. There's a limit as to how well it can be reproduced through speakers, and then it's back to the quality of the sample and the processing. You can't make it sound better than the source, with the exception of added resonance.

 

Meanwhile, there's a lot that can be done with existing technology to make a piano sample sound more realistic. Knowing this by my own efforts, it makes me suspicious that designers of DP's may be emulating a piano sound by relying too much on frequency data, rather than by an inate familiarity of what a piano actually sounds like.

 

This is not simply my subjective opinion of what a piano should sound like. There are defining core characteristics in a real piano sound that any experienced pianist will automatically recognize. No DP yet does this, and no software piano has completely achieved it either.

 

Hey, didn't mean for that to sound like a rant. I'll stop now and I'm always encouraged with each incremental development.

[burningbusch]

If you were to take the output from the Yamaha AvantGrand and run it through a stereo system or listen to a recording of the output, I doubt that you would conclude "this is the best sounding digital piano I've ever heard." On the other hand, if you sat down to the AvantGrand in person I think you just might conclude it's the best digital representation of a piano you've ever encountered.

 

Imagine a jazz drummer who was playing a purely electronic kit, triggering the best samples available but running them through a pair of stereo speakers behind him. Would it sound like an acoustic kit? Of course not. But that's the same thing that happens with digital pianos. Now if the electronic kit was designed so that each drum/cymbal had its own speakers which amplify and enhance each particular sound, it might in fact sound like an acoustic kit.

 

I think jazz/classical pianists are searching/expecting that completely engulfing acoustic sound. That's how they hear the piano and that's the only way it is going to sound right with their music as the music is acoustic not electric. Generic, directional speakers screw up everything, IMHO.

 

Busch.

 

 

 

[SK]

Yes, "generic, directional speakers" are definitely the culprit with piano sound reproduction.

 

The point you're making is true (about separate speakers for each element of a piano sound)- and the AvantGrand is also in another league from portable keyboards. I haven't played it, but I did play the top Kawai digital grand on a lot of gigs, somewhat similar I suppose.

 

Then again, a well recorded actual acoustic piano will sound distinctly "pianolike" through a good stereo system. So the source sound: actual piano, modeled or sampled, plays a critical part.

[Mogut]

Some jp demos that have popped up on youtube

 

[video:youtube]

 

[video:youtube]

[funkphingerz88]

all sounds very flat to me..i.e. no movement in the raw sounds..effects should be an addition not make the sound useable! The Rhodes and Wurlies dont sound anything like the real things to me from the clips ive heard-the SV1 sounds a whole load better to me.

[Dana.]

all sounds very flat to me..i.e. no movement in the raw sounds.

The audio is so poor on those clips, I'm not sure how you can make that judgment.

[Floyd Tatum]

The upper mid to high notes sound great. Once again, I'm hearing a bit of synthetic hollowness in the mids like the V-Piano, but not nearly as much. At this stage, it's apparently something inherent in modeling technology. And there's a certain uniformity in the tones across the keyboard that makes it seem somewhat like the CP-300 and Yamaha's other DP's. Just from the demos, this comes off to me as a super CP-300, with modeling characteristics.

For me, I'm not prepared to form an opinion about it based on an mp3 (or whatever) web demo. I'll wait until I know more about it, and can try it person.

 

[funkphingerz88]

You can get a great idea of general tone via the clips with Stephen Fortner on. But i wouldnt be so foolish as to write off any product without trying it in person. All i know is the overall tone and impression im getting is that the sounds arent authentic to a real rhodes or wurlie, and certainly in comparsion to the sv1's mp3 clips i feel this is a valid point.

[SK]

The upper mid to high notes sound great. Once again, I'm hearing a bit of synthetic hollowness in the mids like the V-Piano, but not nearly as much. At this stage, it's apparently something inherent in modeling technology. And there's a certain uniformity in the tones across the keyboard that makes it seem somewhat like the CP-300 and Yamaha's other DP's. Just from the demos, this comes off to me as a super CP-300, with modeling characteristics.

For me, I'm not prepared to form an opinion about it based on an mp3 (or whatever) web demo. I'll wait until I know more about it, and can try it person.

And as you should. The demos are all we have to go on for now, so we just post our impressions. I said (and always say) I'll have to try it myself. Since you quoted me, maybe my post gave the wrong impression. NO ONE should buy a DP based on a demo.

 

But I 'heard what I heard'... the synthetic tones in the demos are there, like the V-Piano, which were later confirmed by some members who tested it. Whether it's an issue is up to the individual.

 

It'll be interesting to see what you think after you try it - nobody would be more thrilled than I if it's a quantum leap and sounds like a real acoustic.

[Mogut]

It'll be interesting to see what you think after you try it - nobody would be more thrilled than I if it's a quantum leap and sounds like a real acoustic.

 

LOL I'm putting money on you type guys never being happy with any DP's piano patches, no matter how authentic.

[SK]

It'll be interesting to see what you think after you try it - nobody would be more thrilled than I if it's a quantum leap and sounds like a real acoustic.

 

LOL I'm putting money on you type guys never being happy with any DP's piano patches, no matter how authentic.

Up to this point, you would be right. But that's not to say that "we type guys" don't appreciate the advances being made, or that we can't live with the quite usable DP's that have surfaced in the past few years.

 

And after having said that, I'm an optimist.

[David Loving]

With the adjustments possible on the C1, if you do not like the sound, it's your own fault!

[SK]

With the adjustments possible on the C1, if you do not like the sound, it's your own fault!

OK, then it'll be my fault. I'll take all the blame.

 

The V-Piano has almost endless adjustments, but the best basic piano sound possible is the important thing.

 

For those who think this is 'out there' - people who grew up with piano 'know' what a piano is supposed to do and developed a love for it - just as others here have a love for organ, Rhodes, synths, etc. There are long threads about the best clonewheel, the pros/cons of the best Rhodes patch, IOW, 'getting it right'. That's the purpose of the forum. Like other keyboard players, piano guys want to get it right too.

[Mogut]

With the adjustments possible on the C1, if you do not like the sound, it's your own fault!

 

The "piano sample bellyacher's army" are here to stay. Just let them have at it, with their midrange this, and midrange that.

[ProfD]

It'll be interesting to see what you think after you try it - nobody would be more thrilled than I if it's a quantum leap and sounds like a real acoustic.

 

LOL I'm putting money on you type guys never being happy with any DP's piano patches, no matter how authentic.

 

With the adjustments possible on the C1, if you do not like the sound, it's your own fault!

 

The "piano sample bellyacher's army" is here to stay. Just let them have at it, with their midrange this, and midrange that.

While I find some of your posts comical, these are way off base.

 

It only makes sense that a pianist would have certain expectations of a digital piano. A pianist would be most qualified in helping manufacturers get it right too.

 

Nobody complains when every other muso articulates what they want/need in a B3, Rhodes or synth. I'd like to think that on some level manufactures listen to folks on a forum too.

 

There is nothing wrong with disagreeing with someone who *knows* what a piano should sound like. But, to insult and undermine that knowledge deprives the greater community.

 

In a virtual world, it is harder to know personalities. Our written word is all other folks have as a guide. You might want to reconsider your approach mayne.

[Mogut]

While I find some of your posts comical, these are way off base.

 

It only makes sense that a pianist would have certain expectations of a digital piano. A pianist would be most qualified in helping manufacturers get it right too.

 

 

Oh boy... The ever snobby "a pianist would know" reference finally made it to this thread Guess that means I'm out.

 

It's just funny how quickly posters feel they are owed something they literally learned existed only 48hrs ago.

[ProfD]

While I find some of your posts comical, these are way off base.

 

It only makes sense that a pianist would have certain expectations of a digital piano. A pianist would be most qualified in helping manufacturers get it right too.

 

Oh boy... The ever snobby "a pianist would know" reference finally made it to this thread Guess that means I'm out.

 

It's just funny how quickly posters feel they are owed something they literally only knew existed 48hrs ago.

Interesting. While the box contains a variety of sounds, DP doesn't stand for digtal keyboard. It is a piano emulator first and foremost. ROMplers are the swiss army knives of KBs.

 

Anyway, I didn't write that a pianist is an authority on how the piano in an old or new DP should sound. Only that their opinion carries merit. Especially if they have been playing acoustic piano for years.

 

It is only natural that a pianist would have expectations of a digital piano. Race car drivers know what they want in a high performance machine.

 

All of us can listen to these demos and have an initial opinion based on our knowledge and experience.

 

SK wasn't judging or bashing the 48 hour old DP. His comments were based on what he heard. Still, he added that he'd have to play one in person and would be thrilled with a connection. I don't see that as belly-aching. YMMV.

[timwat]

Greg, I'm not sure where the acerbic nature of responses crept in, but in re-reading SK's posts I can't see where he's bellyaching, or why you would dismiss what seemed like an insightful comment about a piano's midrange...or the umbrage taken at PD's emphasis. I didn't read that he was pointing a finger at anyone, but admittedly maybe I'm reading the posts wrong.

 

Having followed the reharms SK has posted here for some time, I greatly respect his playing and believe he would qualify as an authority on piano tone and timbre. But that's just me.

 

[SK]

Thanks, ProfD and Tim.

 

Mogut, I don't know how you took offense to anything I said. Since I don't post here to engage in insults anyway, I think I'll just use this as my standard eloquent response in these kind of situations: :grin:

[video:youtube]

 

[SK]

'Situation appropriate' response edited in above. Sort of "sampling vs. modeling, Yamaha vs. Roland."

 

OT over... carry on, nothing to see here.

[ProfD]

I think I'll just use this as my standard eloquent response in these kind of situations

Too funny.

 

Yet, your real opinion of these sampled/modelled KBs is appreciated as well.

[SMcD]

Erm, what's the difference between all these?

[Mogut]

Erm, what's the difference between all these?

 

Typically, in a keyboard series, you would find the flagship model to include ALL the features, and the lower models to have less features as you go down the line. This is not necessarily the case with these. Clearly the CP1 has the most modeling capacities as illustrated in the block diagram, along with the FM engine. Things like the bigger display, the full pedal unit, the logo, and the 2 extra piano samples, are also desirable features over the 5 and the 50. But based on the feature comparison chart in the second post, I'm surprised to see the price differences set the way they are. Seems they are banking on the modeling features to be the big $ draw. Although there are some interesting trade offs between the CP1 and the CP5. I'm really surprised to see the CP1 not have the mic input like the 5 does.

 

In this series, nothing about the CP50 appeals to me.

 

But I just can't wrap my head around a box with a circuit/processor board and piano keys costing $5000.

[Joe Muscara]

But I just can't wrap my head around a box with a circuit/processor board and piano keys costing $5000.

When they think about it, most people can't wrap their heads around a big pile of steel and plastic and rubber costing tens if not hundreds of thousands of dollars, yet the primary technology is over a hundred years old.

[Dana.]

But I just can't wrap my head around a box with a circuit/processor board and piano keys costing $5000.

So get the CP5 (which is hardly a compromise) and be done with it.

[David Loving]

I know my wife can't get the concept. Yet, I really want to go for the C1. Problem is, with a bow to SK, it has been so long since I have been around quality Yamaha grands that I wouldn't know which way to dial in what! Sounds like a hard reset and back to playing scales...