Digital Piano for Jazz gigs

[Dana.]

Maybe it sounds seamless. But the touch dynamic response is too jumpy on the FP-4F and the RD-700NX. For example, with the default setting it can jump from from mp to ff to easily. It's not like a good concert piano's response. I have to play with a very restrained touch technique to manage dynamic control.

Oh, I see what you're saying. I agree. It's that crappy Ivory Feel-G action. I played a RD-64 last week and had to play extremely hard on it to get even a medium velocity, and it was the default setting.

[burningbusch]

I don't know about the newer RD actions. I have the RD300GX. You have 100 levels of variation in terms of touch response. These can be stored at the preset (registration) level and affect internal and/or external sounds. You get spoiled using it as a controller when very often much more expensive keyboard/controllers have very limited options for touch response.

 

Busch.

[ADino]

Well Roland, if it wasnt broke...know what I mean Vern?

[Aidan]

The one thing the OP doesn't mention is budget?

 

For light weight, it's difficult to beat the Casio Privias. I acquired a PX-350 really hoping that it would work for me. But when I got it, I found there was a very artificial quality about the midrange. The piano sounded great in the top and bottom ends but those two octaves either side of middle C (where, let's face it, you spend a hell of a lot of time as a pianist) were problematic.

 

It may be that with the more refined EQ options on the PX5-S one could ameliorate some of those problems. It's certainly worth investigating, as the keybed on the Casio is actually very nice, especially considering the price.

 

I've owned both the Yamaha CP5 and Nord Piano (now upgraded to a Stage 2). I loved the Yamaha's action but the piano samples are problematic in mono and for me are slightly 'sterile' and 'too perfect' after prolonged listening. The Nord's pianos are more visceral and remind me more of the real thing (about the best you can hope for with a DP, frankly).

 

The problem with all the Nord piano samples (as Dave F has already noted) is that they become quite thin in the top register. I'm not sure why. The action on the Nords is not bad but they really need to make the velocity curves more adjustable. I suspect this small step would go a long way to silencing most of the remaining criticisms about the NP and NS. The pianos are very useable in mono and the EPs are still better than 80% of the competition out there.

 

 

[Legatoboy]

I currently have an FP4 for sale in the Forum's classified and a Kurzweil SP4 and midi controller for DB's. I was thinking of going for a new FP-80. I'm not playing moderately loud band gigs anymore. I have a few jazz oriented solo gigs coming up and I liked the PHA_III action a lot at it's on the FP-80. Also whenever I played SN in the stores I liked it. That coupled with the new bass line accompaniment upgrade on the FP-80 I thought it would be a good move. I don't really need the SP4 which has a band mix grade piano,organ and rhodes and was a Swiss army knife gig ax for me on band gigs.

 

After this thread I'm second guessing myself.

 

The FP4 is without a doubt a good instrument and I used it for solo piano gigs before and it performed very well. The thing is for about 65% of my set I use the Auto accompaniment feature for bass and drums and on the FP4 it is not 100 accurate in terms of following the harmony on inversions and such... plus I have Pianoteq at home for recording and I really like it so far and the new PHA III of the FP80 would really help there....

 

Any other ideas on this... I really have thought about this move for some time and I thought it was the right one?

 

Thanks, lb

[SK]

lb, if you like the FP-80, I say go for it.

 

My old FP-4 still cuts gigs with no problems, but technology and time does march on. Like Jazz+ said, unfortunately some features/aspects get lost in the name of "progress"... but then other things definitely get better.

 

This is a long video... this fellow doesn't describe the FP-80's Acoustic Projection system and extra speakers (and seems to forget to remove his foot from the sustain pedal), but otherwise it's a good, thorough demo.

[video:youtube]

Edit: No one DP does it for me - there's always compromises.

 

My experience has been that Roland occasionally gets things right, and then other times screws up their advancements. So I'll accept some flaws (no choice) in a good piano sound over a popular brand (not naming it) which sounds too "sterile" or unnaturally perfect, or a couple other popular brands whose upper register is too 'plinky'. It's about tastes - everyone's different.

[LX88]

I am glad to hear some support regarding the RD300GX and FP-4.

 

Seriously, I have tried to "upgrade" during the past couple years and have elected not to.

 

I have found that the Superior Grand sample holds up well with most Yamahas and the newer "Supernatural " Rolands. Not to mention Nord , Kurzweil and Casio.

 

And it's a shame that Roland seems to have ditched the Rhodes that is in the 300GX. It's one of the best out there.

[LX88]

Another Rhodes that was ditched that I really like is the one in the Casio PX-310. I really like it through it's internal speakers. It's found as a variation of the 60's EP.

 

A friend of mine has one and I love playing it every time I am at his place.

[Legatoboy]

Just put this up on the Piano Forum. Just some recollections and perceptions. not saying they are right but thought it may help out to share . . .I read it back to myself and it seemed valid..

 

-------------------------------------------------------------

Rolands started developing the metallic twang effect problem after the RD-600, when they went up to the 700 series and SRX. That's also around the same time their actions got really good I thought, the original RD700 key balance was very good. People commented about the hollowness of the sample when they went from MKS-20 tech to JV, but JV was warm and never had a twang even if less dense that MK. I was watching a relatively recent live Procal Harum DVD with Gary Brooker using a RD600 (which I owned)and it still retained warmth ... it was the switch to SRX when it started. anybody else experience that... It was almost unbearable on the original VR760 piano unless you could keep the gain low in louder gigs that I wouldn't characterize as too loud either...

 

With the FP4/7 I thought things changed, the tone was fuller, richer like a Yamaha and full sampling made a big difference..and their actions just got better..and it behaved better level wise and was more 'locked down'.

 

I still like Yamahas though, Like where I truly think Ferris is at (truly), is that you can play them pretty robustly and their dynamics are always in the zone. Their 'locked down' bandwidth wise which is broader than Rolands I think, EQ better too. Have a lot of punch when kicked (and something else also?)...depends how you play. I find them very reliable DP's sonically.

 

Rolands FP/SN has more veneer and a balanced playability with a very hot articulated type of sample... depends on how you play, what you like ... a more elegant axe.

 

Yamahas have a tendency when not amplified right to sound boxy, so there you go...

 

I always rationalized the R twang phenomenon as a synth. 101 problem. 'Possible' higher partial distortion, maybe in the sample and maybe not on sone high vel. layer samples (real pianos can have that metallic component at ff and above) coupled with a very hot keybend sensor scheme pushing the filter envelope too hot or at to fast a rate (velocity issue). They are getting a heck of a lot right though in the balancing act and it responds well with their keybeds but it's not completely balanced somewhere with some notes.

 

 

[LarsHarner]

Hello, I am using my PX130 for open mics, songwriting events etc. I found the speakers to be better than those on the 150 and 350 (which I returned). Also, I found some of the sounds on the 350 I liked were really soft, and I did not find any inspiring EP's on the 350.

The 130 has just one- but it works for me personally.

 

I am considering using my Krome 61 for when I can get away with it but of course would need a seperate amp. No question I would lose some control using 61 vs 88.

 

My sleeper pick though- and this board gets NO love whatsoever is the brand new Korg SP280. I do realize it has NH action but the version is improved from the SP series.

 

The speakers are excellent and to me the piano sound is much more natural than the Casio. I use it at home on the Xstand. It is ~35-38 pounds I gather- heavier than the casio.

 

I think the Rhodes is a little better than the P105 which I had for a short while (had the P95 for 2 years but the speakers grew on me after awhile)

[Novice]

I currently have an FP4 for sale in the Forum's classified and a Kurzweil SP4

 

I'd like to hear more on the Kurzweil, is it the SP4-8?. How are the keys on it compared with say Korg's RH3 key action or Casio's 350? Are they as close to the feel of an acoustic?

 

Couldn't find a topic on search for the SP4-8.

[Legatoboy]

Novice,

 

The action on the SP4-8 is OK IMO. I played the RH3 on a floor model Krome 88 last week and I'd have to say it's maybe a step or 2 increments up from that in build quality and a bit more robust, not quit as smooth maybe, depends how you play! It's a TP100 Fatar I believe. The triple strike is not a solo piano gig sample by any means. The SP4-8 was a gig axe for my blues/roots/rock gigs the KB3 being the clincher cause I played a fair amount of Organ on those gigs and KB3 isn't bad. Leslie sim is good. I didn't have to bring an organ for every-day sort of gigs. For bigger gigs's I'd go with a separate organ on top tier. The action a slightly heavy and non-graded. I like heavy actions if the balance is right on the key fulcrum point. A Pleasant action but not in the Roland or Yamaha league.

 

Casio's piano sound is not my cup of tea so I don't check them out often. The SP4-8 piano I liked even with all the triple strike mumbo-jumbo because it held a space in the band mix well sonically and I could count on how it would react in different ambiances like a Yamaha DP. I haven't been playing blues gigs now for over a year and the SP4 solved some problems there. The FP-80 would replace my FP4 for solo gigs (with auto an accompaniment upgrade and SN) I'd get a PHA III Roland action that I really like for home recording Pianoteq.

 

I'd have to say the balance and key weight aspect of the SP4-8 is sort of in the ball park of an acoustic action, it is ungraded. Not as smooth as some actions though!

[LX88]

What Jazz + is saying about the experience of sitting close to near field internal speakers is worthy of consideration.

 

I have this with my Yamaha Nocturne.The speakers are somewhat full range.... there is no high frequency crossover and no high frequency driver.

 

Uh oh.... now I am getting into the topic of speakers.

 

Some of the new portables are actually quite loud,like the P-105. Wouldn't it be nice to have enough power not to require an amp and speakers?

 

And yes I have heard a few of the new Korgs that had speakers that were not too bad, though I don't remember which model.

 

And I have not heard the new Kawais, which are somewhat scarce.

 

Whether or not some of us choose a Casio, the fact is that they are doing good things by pushing price and weight in the right direction. Yamaha seems to directly compete with them in offering the P-105 and P-35 ( which I actually kind of like).

 

Let's hope they throw some competition at the PX 5S in the 1000 dollar range, with light weight, good EP's and a good acoustic sample.

[Ekewaka]

Built-in speakers are fine for personal practice and some few very low-volume gigs but for most stage work the audio spread will just dissipate and few will hear much of the piano. Also, if you push the volume through such speakers, most likely you get distortion or otherwise unsatisfactory sound.

 

I.e I don't miss at all that Casio PX-5S has no built-in speakers.

[Jazz+]

Built-in speakers are fine for personal practice and some few very low-volume gigs but for most stage work the audio spread will just dissipate and few will hear much of the piano. Also, if you push the volume through such speakers, most likely you get distortion or otherwise unsatisfactory sound.

 

I.e I don't miss at all that Casio PX-5S has no built-in speakers.

 

I disagree. Full volume is not a problem with the FP-4 on board speakers. And many well paid solo gigs are not louder than acoustic piano volume levels. Combining a little mono amp with the on-board stereo speaker gets as loud as a grand piano. Use only a mono amp and you lose all of the stereo perspective. So, with on-board stereo speakers you can retain a stereo near field for yourself regardless of how crappy the external mono amp might be.

[Ekewaka]

Few people will hear a stereo sound, just the player. And if you think you will be heard over people chatting at the tables, it will be self-deception unless it's a very small room.

[Jazz+]

I thought I said in combination with a little external amp for gigs (acoustic grand volume)...am I not being clear?

And what I hear effects my playing, this is extremely important.

I need a near field stereo projection for a stereo digital piano.

[Ekewaka]

I thought I said in combination with a little external amp for gigs (acoustic grand volume)...am I not being clear?

And what I hear effects my playing, this is extremely important.

I need a near field stereo projection for a stereo digital piano.

 

OK, I understand. I come from the sad school where we seldom if ever had proper monitoring so I learned to play with any decent incoming sound (rock bands.)

[voxpops]

Just bought a P-105 for occasional jazz gigs (needed LH bass). Until recently I was using an FP-4, which I really liked. The P-105 is a much less sophisticated machine, and is a bit clunky, operationally, but it has a really nice main piano sample that seems ideally suited to jazz. The compromises are many, but at the price and weight, it's a great little piano.

 

+ Excellent, well-rounded, warm and reasonably expressive (three-layer) main AP sample

+ Usable Rhodes

+ Splittable

+ Backup memory automatically remembers key user selections at shutdown

+ Built in speakers reproduce piano sounds quite well

+ Action connects well to sound

+ Reasonably smooth patch changes

+ Lightweight

+ 1/4-inch outputs

+ Music rest included

 

- Stretching and looping of samples quite obvious, with stretching over fairly wide spans in the bottom and top octaves

- Speakers distort with AP and bass together

- Limited repetition capability

- Could use one more velocity layer at the top end to increase dynamic response

- Entering split mode is a two-handed, double-click job; leaving split mode requires two button presses to return to original sound

- Included damper pedal is garbage (half-pedal function requires Yamaha FC3)

- Other pedals only possible with stand and bottom-bar triple-pedal unit

 

If you don't need much beyond the basics, in my opinion the P-105 punches above its weight and price-point. I think the P-105's main AP sample, despite the stretching, is smoother and more refined than the FP's, although in most other respects the FP-4 is in a class above. Funnily enough, although I've only had it a few hours, and have not gigged with it yet, I think that I will enjoy playing AP on it as much as on my Nord Piano - and that's saying something for a $500 board.

[Dave Ferris]

Funnily enough, although I've only had it a few hours, and have not gigged with it yet, I think that I will enjoy playing AP on it as much as on my Nord Piano .

 

 

[video:youtube]

 

Good, comprehensive review as always voxpops. My friend returned his P105, he said he preferred his older P9something. Can't remember if it was the 90 or 95. He's more a pop/rock player then a jazz guy though.

 

Haven't played the 105. Does it sound as good or better then the P155 or CP33 ? Does the 155 have the 3 layer sample while the CP33 doesn't ? I can't keep all the Yamaha specs straight on those models.

 

lb, if you like the FP-80, I say go for it.

This is a long video... this fellow doesn't describe the FP-80's Acoustic Projection system and extra speakers .

[video:youtube]

 

That's about the longest demo I've ever seen on a dp.. It is very thorough but like you said Steve, yeah he lays on that sustain pedal like there's no tomorrow..

 

I'd be curious myself to hear the FP-80 with the expanded speaker system. I could defintley see that extra sound source as very desirable for a jazz pianist in solo and trio contexts -especially if it's of good quality. For rock guys, not so much. The louder volume scenario usually makes internal speakers moot. But then the title of the thread is ______

 

I wonder if the Ab a +5 up from middle C still has the same problem (metallic distortion when accented) as the 700NX on the "Concert Grand" sample. Might not be as noticeable through speakers as phones.

 

Yeah Tony, that might be a good DP for you. If you get one let us know how it is...

 

Me, still scouring the LA CL for a CP5...no luck.

[Dave Ferris]

Me, still scouring the LA CL for a CP5...no luck.

 

Maybe I should take a road trip to Philly ...are the Cards playing there anytime soon ?

http://philadelphia.craigslist.org/msg/3706432297.html

[voxpops]

Haven't played the 105. Does it sound as good or better then the P155 or CP33 ? Does the 155 have the 3 layer sample while the CP33 doesn't ? I can't keep all the Yamaha specs straight on those models.

Dave, it's a long time since I've played a CP33, so can't really comment. But there was a P155 near the P105 in GC, and I tinkled a little on the 155 just to have a reference point (was only interested in lowest possible weight for this purchase, so didn't consider the 155). IMO, the new Pure CF sample in the 105 is clearer and more resonant than whatever's in the 155. However, the 155 has four layers, and the CP33 (IIRC) has three. The 155 has the (considerably) better GH action (as does the CP33), and better construction. However, I've never really liked the sound of the 155, as I think it has that Yamaha sterility. Pure CF seems less sterile.

 

I sold my FP-4 to cover the cost of the new RD-64 (no extra cash required!). I decided to give the RD a try for band gigs where 88 keys are not necessary. The alternative to the split purchase of P-105 and RD-64 would have been the new FP-50 (the FP-80 is too heavy and bulky for me for gigging). However, not having played Ivory-feel G before, I didn't want to be stuck with that for jazz gigs, if it turned out to be too sluggish - otherwise the FP-50 sounds like a nice board.

 

Someone else mentioned the Korg SP-280. Unfortunately, it lacks splits and bass (strange omission), and so was not in the running. However, the possibility of not needing to carry additional amplification for small gigs is appealing.

 

I was in two minds about selling the FP-4. In many ways, it was the ideal lightweight, but sturdy and reliable gigging machine. The action, disliked by some, I found to be fast and precise, but lacking some of the definition and control of PHAIII. The sounds are crisp, and amplify well. I can well understand why those that have the FP-4/RD-300GX are reluctant to part with them.

[resigned]

I believe it's now seven years that I have performed on my Kawai ES4 and it's still my fav stage piano for the contemporary jazz I play. Excellent action and a tone somewhat less brassy than a Yamaha (i own a CP300 for studio use) but still very full and natural sounding through the ranges. It also has a good built-in speaker system which I like both for practicing and for near-field monitoring onstage. And it's a beautiful instrument that Im proud of.

 

And btw: I play in stereo ALWAYS, and I use Motion Sound stereo amps (I own both the KP-100s and the KP-500sn). I don't care if the audience gets the stereo effect or not, I enjoy it and that's all that matters. The ES4 has audio inputs so I plug my iPad into it with my backing tracks and sheet music and get instant gratification.

 

The Kawai ES4 has been replaced by the ES7 which I have not played but it would be worth checking out. When I bought my ES4 I was looking for something a little different from the beaten path that looked as classy as it sounded... I wound up taking a road trip to Florida to a piano store where I played it for two hours before buying it. I've used it hundreds of times and it sounds and plays like new. I cant imagine replacing it anytime soon - it still does exactly what I bought it for. It's worth the effort to find an instrument that you enjoy as much seven years later as you did when it was new.

[LX88]

As far as playing in stereo, I had a sound person ( female) tell me last year on a major festival gig that it didn't matter if the player played a stereo keyboard on HER stage because the audience was going to hear it in mono anyway.

 

I was not allowed to bring a small mono amp onto HER stage to compensate stereo because it wasn't part of the stage plot.

 

I mean, these people really do think the music begins and ends with THEM.

Musicians... please get out of MY way.

 

Back to lightweight boards. Another one I wound up liking is the Yamaha P-35.

 

Not sure which sample this one is, but I didn't hear much wrong with it. My ear preferred it to a lot of expensive boards on the day I tried it.

 

I know I know...only 32 note polyphony, I don't know much else about it. It sounded good through phones though.

[Jazz+]

A big advantage with the Kawai ES4 speaker placement is that they aim the on-board speakers at you. The newer models like the PX-350 and FP-4F aim the speakers forward towards an audience intending to project a stereo sound, which they do very well ( but don't place it facing a wall or you'll easily get cancellation from the echo). The player is sitting behind the on-board stereo projection. Thus,the newer models sound muffled and muddy from where the player sits. Move at least 8 feat away from the forward projection keyboard speakers and they sound great.

 

Kawai on-board speaker projection.

 

http://www.kawai.de/grafik/es4-speaker.jpg

 

[loxley11]

Thanks for all the replies. I do realize there are many different opinions and tastes in the forum, and that there will never be a consensus on key issues like sound, action, etc. That said, I do think a majority opinion, or trends/statements that keep reappearing regarding certain products can be very useful. A few considerations after reading everyone's helpful responses:

 

One poster pointed out I didn't mention budget; I'm trying to keep it under $2000 new OR used, which I estimate would cover about 75% of current products.

 

I had always assumed onboard speakers were low-quality substitutes for a sound system best suited to living rooms; I hadn't considered their utility as a monitoring system, as Jazz+ and several others pointed out. I am used to being at the mercy of whoever's in control of the sound system, and frequently being barely able to hear myself (in a different alt-country band), which would not be acceptable in the jazz combo setting. That does change my opinion regarding them, although I'm not thrilled about the added weight, and I'd be looking primarily for those systems designed primarily as monitors, as the previous poster mentioned with the ES4.

 

One thing I have since realized to be critical is an easy access EQ - preferably a dedicated control on the front panel. Only a few models seem to have these. Just about every experience I have had playing weighted keyboards (various brands) was an outrageously booming and overly-sensitive bass that was unusable as-is (I partially blame this on the ubiquitous use of Roland KC amps, which I generally don't like, and feel are way too bass heavy with piano). The ability to adjust sensitivity curves would help this problem also.

 

My guess is that I will be most pleased with the darker Yamaha/Roland sound, as that is what I am accustomed to hearing. I realize the Nord Electro is a different beast, but I didn't care for its piano at all. Feel free to challenge my comparison of it with their other products.

 

I am interested to hear what people who are purchasing the PX-5 think of it. Also, any opinions about the SV-1 since no one has mentioned it?

 

[loxley11]

To recap: boards that are consistently reviewed well

Yamaha P-105, CP50, (P155/33?)

Roland FP4, 300GX

Casio PX5S?

Will try to investigate the KKK (Kawais/Korgs/Kurzweils)

[LX88]

Back to the RD 300 GX.... as far as EQing goes, it has a dedicated knob for bass and treble on the front panel.

 

When I am practicing through phones I often adjust the bass and treble depending on how I am feeling that day. This gives me a bit of advantage over some of the Yamahas, many of which only have bright mellow /type settings and generally nothing for bass levels.

[voxpops]

Also, any opinions about the SV-1 since no one has mentioned it?

I have the SV-1 73. I think it's a great instrument, but I wouldn't recommend it for gigs requiring predominantly AP sounds. If you play a lot of Rhodes/Wurli then fine - little better IMO - but for acoustic piano I find that the slightly truncated initial decay becomes off-putting, and the action/sound connection is not the best, although RH3 is not as bad as some people suggest (leaving aside issues such as unexpected note cut-off etc.). The underlying piano tone is, however, very pleasant, full and rounded, and the SV-1 does have easy EQ adjustment.

 

Having the option to choose between, Nord, Korg, Roland and Yamaha for gigs, I am disconcerted that the cheap P-105 is as good as it is for straight piano - it shouldn't be so! Of course, it has no knobs for EQ adjustment, but most amps/mixers give you some kind of control, and when I ran it through HS80m monitors, I found that it was already very well balanced.

 

A note with regard to Roland. I previously had the FP-4 and the FP-7F. While the 7F had a fuller and more dynamic sound, and the action connected supremely well, I found that for gigs I preferred the FP-4, as it was not as all-enveloping as the 7F. Sometimes, a thinner, crisper sound amplifies more easily. I'm eagerly awaiting the arrival of the RD-64 to see how that compares.

 

As for Nord, you're more likely to want to add a bit of bottom end than subtract it on acoustic piano patches. Also, I agree with Dave Ferris that, while the latest grand piano offerings from the library are wonderfully realistic in terms of tonal quality, they do thin out quite dramatically at the top end, and they don't play quite as smoothly as the Yamaha or Roland grands. I can't quite put my finger on why that should be, but, coupled with the quite obvious looping (although the attack samples seem longer than most) and the so-so action, it makes Nord a little less appealing than the equivalently priced Rolands, IMO. However, I'd much rather carry a 40lbs Nord to a gig than a 55lbs Roland.

[Mike Martin]

It hasn't been mentioned here yet, but how the instrument is amplified may effect your choice. Will it be used in mono or stereo?