Yamaha CP4 - first impressions

[burningbusch]

 

Oddly, the EPs are modeled, but as Busch points out, there are clear divisions between samples. I complained about an aspect of the samples at yamahasynth.com and Bad Mister (very politely) jumped all over me for assuming they're samples, when they're modeled. LOL. I can't get it right!

 

I've heard Roland claim SN sounds don't use loops. Problem is you can hear static loops clearly in ac. guitar, clav and other sounds. I don't know, if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck...

 

Here's how Korg describes the EP-1:

 

MDS is a brand-new technology from Korg. To create the EP-1 models, we first sample the instrument at many different dynamic levels and pitches. Next, we separate the main pitched sound from the hammer and key release noises, so that you have separate control over each. Finally, we use proprietary techniques to transform all of these elements into an MDS sound.

The result delivers natural control over both the velocity and time dimensions. Velocity becomes a continuous transition from soft to loud and sweet to strong, without the telltale velocity-switching of traditional sample playback. Time becomes flexible, so that you can control the decay and release in a natural way, without resorting to volume or filter envelopes.

 

Busch.

 

[Kawai James]

I visited the Japan Gakki Fair (musical instrument fair) on Saturday and enjoyed strolling around the various booths, chatting to company representatives, and of course playing a great selection on keys.

 

If I find time, I'll try to post some words and pictures in a separate thread, as I did on the PianoWorld forum from the previous event a few years ago.

 

However, while we're discussing the CP4, I had a chance to play this board for a little while. There were no headphones attached, just a pair of small monitors, so it was difficult to pick out the details in the acoustic piano patches. However, I really, enjoyed playing the Rhodes '71 and '73 presets - especially the notes in the upper treble range. Very tasty!

 

I also sat down at the CP1 shortly afterwards, but was unable to 'find' the same Rhodes sound due to the unintuitive UI. I actually preferred the action on the CP4 too, although that may have simply been because it was less beaten-up than than the more mature CP1 Yamaha uses for such exhibitions.

 

Cheers,

James

x

 

ps. Great to see some love for the MP7 in this thread too - seriously powerful and flexible for the money.

[Dana.]

Let's talk for a minute about tone instead of detail...

 

The Rhodes that Korg sampled to use as the base for this newfangled technology doesn't have the most pleasing tone -- to me, anyway. Everything sounds exaggerated. Same with the SV-1. Do they use the same source Rhodes? I don't know. Did Korg really sample a Mark I, II, and V for Kronos? Again, I don't know. At least with Nord, you know they did, and they sound like the models they're supposed to and not a Mark I that was tweaked to sound like a II or V.

 

By way of comparison, and despite their shortcomings, the Motif Rhodes offer great tone and diversity. Yamaha seems to be the only company who understands how a Dyno Rhodes should sound. Korg does not. And the Motif Rhodes (still) sound really good live. But the CP4 Rhodes are a step backward, tone-wise. Learjeff is right that they're all voiced similarly for, IMO, an undesirably crispy sound. Why does Yamaha think this is the way forward? Here's hoping whatever succeeds the Motif won't forsake tone.

 

It's great to have all the tweakable parameters, but I shouldn't have to tweak extensively in an attempt to make a poor sound tolerable. The tone should already be spot-on, then the parameters are there to alter the details to taste.

[timwat]

Yamaha seems to be the only company who understands how a Dyno Rhodes should sound.

 

At least for me, I don't think I'd concur there, Dana. And that's simply because I have an original Dyno'd Mark 1 sitting upstairs. I don't think anyone has gotten it close to right - or, at least close to the unit I have. I'm not holding mine up as an exemplary example (it's old and could use some TLC, but still sounds pretty true), but neither Kronos, CP4, SV1, Motif or anything I've played gets it passable, at least to my ears. Just one person's opinion.

 

Personally, I've finally got some usable Eps on the Kronos, but as you say, it's taken some tweaking that makes you go "why?". The CP4 Rhodes, at first, was nice as it isn't as juiced as some of the Kronos presets out of the box, but over time it has become "less filling" as the old beer commercial says. I'm going to need to dive in and tweak, but just haven't had time, and of course am also asking myself, "why do I need to....".

 

Because I seldom play solo EP on any of these boards, I'm more concerned about expression in a band context - does it give me the dynamic range to be expressive, controllable bark when I spank it, warmth when I caress it, just enough bell to help make a line sing, that kind of thing.

 

[Dana.]

Tim,

 

Can you think of a song that has a Rhodes sound like yours?

 

Do you feel like the nuances you describe are audible in the contexts you play? As I recall, you were playing in funk band?

[timwat]

Dana,

 

Still do play in a 10-piece funk band, but nowadays that's only about 20% of my gig life. The other 80% is jazz and R&B, lots of work with female vocalists.

 

Good question about a song with a Rhodes similar to my Dyno'd...I can't think of one. The bell is similar to the sound on Jarreau's Breaking Away release, but mine has more dirt and bark and a different underlying mid-range character (and I'm not sure if the Rhodes used on that record was actually Dyno'd....).

 

With the female singers (typically, drums, bass and me), EP subtleties are more exposed than the big funk band, as you might guess. They all love the pronounced bell of the Kronos EPs, but I often feel the CP4 provides more playing subtleties, at least to my hands.

[mvanmanen]

I have gone back-and-forth to our local Long & McQuade playing the CP4 for the last couple weeks. Initially I loved it! The piano is great for jazz and I really do like the rhodes patches. But, the more I play it, the less excited I am as I seem to get quite a clunk when the keybed bottoms out. It also does not have that much character. Hard for me to explain...

 

Anyways, I tried a MP6 and prefer the action. The rhodes is not as nice as the CP4 to my ears. And unfortunately, our local Kawai dealer will not bring in any MP7s in until he clears out old stock unless I want to do a "special order" with of course no return policy

 

I really wish more stores sold Kawai. What gives? Any advice?

[Dana.]

Good question about a song with a Rhodes similar to my Dyno'd...I can't think of one. The bell is similar to the sound on Jarreau's Breaking Away release, but mine has more dirt and bark and a different underlying mid-range character (and I'm not sure if the Rhodes used on that record was actually Dyno'd....).

How about this? It sounds like a Dyno to me.

 

[video:youtube]

 

For reference:

 

[video:youtube]

 

[video:youtube]

 

 

With the female singers (typically, drums, bass and me), EP subtleties are more exposed than the big funk band, as you might guess. They all love the pronounced bell of the Kronos EPs, but I often feel the CP4 provides more playing subtleties, at least to my hands.

Do you find yourself having to hold back a bit when playing the Kronos so that the bell characteristic doesn't jump out too much?

[JeffLearman]

What the CP4 Rhodes all nail is dynamics. They're super lively -- better than my actual Rhodes. That may sound like heresy, but IMHO there are a lot of improvements one can make on the real deal. Eliminating the -50dB hiss, for example!

 

To me, dynos always seem like too much of a good thing. Back in the day, it was one answer to the never-ending quest for a new sound, but only until it wasn't new any more. It has its uses. I've never played one, though; I bet I'd enjoy it!

[burningbusch]

Let's talk for a minute about tone instead of detail...

 

The Rhodes that Korg sampled to use as the base for this newfangled technology doesn't have the most pleasing tone -- to me, anyway. Everything sounds exaggerated. Same with the SV-1. Do they use the same source Rhodes? I don't know. Did Korg really sample a Mark I, II, and V for Kronos? Again, I don't know. At least with Nord, you know they did, and they sound like the models they're supposed to and not a Mark I that was tweaked to sound like a II or V.

 

By way of comparison, and despite their shortcomings, the Motif Rhodes offer great tone and diversity. Yamaha seems to be the only company who understands how a Dyno Rhodes should sound. Korg does not. And the Motif Rhodes (still) sound really good live. But the CP4 Rhodes are a step backward, tone-wise. Learjeff is right that they're all voiced similarly for, IMO, an undesirably crispy sound. Why does Yamaha think this is the way forward? Here's hoping whatever succeeds the Motif won't forsake tone.

 

It's great to have all the tweakable parameters, but I shouldn't have to tweak extensively in an attempt to make a poor sound tolerable. The tone should already be spot-on, then the parameters are there to alter the details to taste.

 

Hate to explode longstanding myths but there is no reason post 1975-Mark I, Mark II or Mark V couldn't/should't sound identical. They all have Schaller tines, Neoprene tips, modular action. There is no MarkI, Mark II, Mark V sound.

 

Busch.

[Dana.]

Perhaps my point wasn't clear enough. It's like when there's an upright patch that's obviously a tweaked grand sample, or a Dyno patch that obviously wasn't sampled from a Dyno. To the best of my knowledge, Nord owns a variety of Rhodes, and the samples they release, be it Mark I, II or V, were made with those specific instruments. Does Korg do that or are their II and V sounds actually a I that they've tweaked? :idk

[Al Coda]

 

To me, dynos always seem like too much of a good thing.

 

I agree ! - and I prefer these over any Dyno any day ...

 

sparkle top 1966 ...

 

[video:youtube]

 

Mk I 1971,- go to 0:35min ...

 

[video:youtube]

 

A.C.

 

[Jazz+]

 

Joe Sample always had a nice Rhodes suitcase sound:

 

Go to 1:50

 

[video:youtube]

[video:youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnZT-mgtvyk

[jerrythek]

Let's talk for a minute about tone instead of detail...

 

The Rhodes that Korg sampled to use as the base for this newfangled technology doesn't have the most pleasing tone -- to me, anyway. Everything sounds exaggerated. Same with the SV-1. Do they use the same source Rhodes? I don't know. Did Korg really sample a Mark I, II, and V for Kronos? Again, I don't know. At least with Nord, you know they did, and they sound like the models they're supposed to and not a Mark I that was tweaked to sound like a II or V.

 

I can assure you that Korg did sample the instruments they say they did. I'm not defending the tone's quality or anything, I didn't do the sessions myself so I have nothing personally invested in them. But they are a truthful company, and wouldn't resort to such manipulation.

 

Korg Italy did all of their own sampling for the keyboards in the SV-1... I did the session that added the Lowrey Organ.

 

I don't think (but I could be wrong), but I don't think any of those sessions have been used for the Kronos.

 

Jerry

[Dana.]

Jerry,

 

Thanks for the clarifying.

[burningbusch]

Let's talk for a minute about tone instead of detail...

 

The Rhodes that Korg sampled to use as the base for this newfangled technology doesn't have the most pleasing tone -- to me, anyway. Everything sounds exaggerated. Same with the SV-1. Do they use the same source Rhodes? I don't know. Did Korg really sample a Mark I, II, and V for Kronos? Again, I don't know. At least with Nord, you know they did, and they sound like the models they're supposed to and not a Mark I that was tweaked to sound like a II or V.

 

By way of comparison, and despite their shortcomings, the Motif Rhodes offer great tone and diversity. Yamaha seems to be the only company who understands how a Dyno Rhodes should sound. Korg does not. And the Motif Rhodes (still) sound really good live. But the CP4 Rhodes are a step backward, tone-wise. Learjeff is right that they're all voiced similarly for, IMO, an undesirably crispy sound. Why does Yamaha think this is the way forward? Here's hoping whatever succeeds the Motif won't forsake tone.

 

It's great to have all the tweakable parameters, but I shouldn't have to tweak extensively in an attempt to make a poor sound tolerable. The tone should already be spot-on, then the parameters are there to alter the details to taste.

 

The "tone" of the Motif Rhodes is as dated as the Kurzweil triple strike. I thought it was great in 2004, now it's instantly identifiable. I stupidly used it on some recordings back then and regret it to this day.

 

Here's one example

Luna Park

 

The CP Rhodes are vastly improved. Tone-wise they're fine, I wouldn't call them crispy, but they have a strong mid-range which is used to accentuate the bark and bring out expressiveness (I know all the Rhodes tone tricks), at the expense of the good bass. They do sound more like a Rhodes than the Motif, certainly, and you can actually play phases and comp with them.

 

Here's a compare I posted a while back between the Motif Rhodes (first) followed by the CP-1. The Motif sounds wretched in comparison. With only three tonal levels the phrases are butchered as is the comping.

Motif Rhodes vs. CP-1

 

The Motif Rhodes, actually all of the Motif electro-mechanical sounds, should be in everyones rear view mirror. Definitely time to move on.

 

Busch.

 

[burningbusch]

Mk I 1971,- go to 0:35min ...

 

[video:youtube]

 

A.C.

 

Thanks for posting. That is such a great Rhodes sound. I'm going to us it as a benchmark for the voicing I'm doing on one of my sampled Rhodes. Just beautiful.

 

Busch.

[Dana.]

Definitely time to move on.

That certainly applies to the discussion here.

[EscapeRocks]

Kind of steering back towards CP4 impressions.

 

My first Yamaha dig piano was a CP33. Great feel. Great sound.

 

Then my gig got more complicated and I wanted/needed a 88 key workstation board. I went to the MOX8 for awhile, and now I use a Roland FA08.

 

That being said, I have spent a LOT of time with a CP4 at my local store.

 

If I went back to using a simple 88 note board for pianos, and didn't need complicated workstation capability, I'd own the CP4 right now.

 

I know it's all subjective, but to me the CP4 is the best digital piano I have played. The way the keys feel to me, the way I am able to sculpt the sound, so to speak, with the way I play, and the sound is simply fantastic.

 

Dana, I believe it was you who once asked me to rank the piano feel on the boards I've owned or played:

 

CP4

FA08

PX-5S

MOX8

 

Regarding the Casio, it has a wonderful keybed given the weight and price point, so I hesitate to put it on this list.

 

Anyhow, those are my subjective feelings on this topic.

 

 

[Al Coda]

Mk I 1971,- go to 0:35min ...

 

 

A.C.

 

Thanks for posting. That is such a great Rhodes sound. I'm going to us it as a benchmark for the voicing I'm doing on one of my sampled Rhodes. Just beautiful.

Busch.

 

Cool !

Well, I owned a 1971 Fender Rhodes mkI.

It was a Stage model though, but sounded AWESOME w/ the right amp and speakers.

And the right amp and speakers were the Fender Dual Showman Reverb amp w/ 2 cream tolex pre-CBS Fender 2x10" cabs, Alnico Jensen inside.

I really, really regret I don´t have this rig anymore,- it was just only the best Rhodes sound I´ve ever had,- until 2006 ...

I came into a small studio and they had a well maintained 1973 mkI suitcase which also sounded awesome when recorded w/ mics.

 

OTOH, when we´re listening to (Fender) Rhodes sounds on records,- recording directly from the harp and/or using DI from main output and /or mics and/or any combination, all that offered so many possibilities manipulating the tone.

I remember playing Rhodes pianos in studios which sounded s##t thru the in the studio available amps and the DI path, when connected to the MCI or Harrison consoles they had, using the channel strip EQ and outboard compressor(s), made it a new instrument.

The DBX 160, a Valley People Dynamite and later the Valley People 440 were great for the Rhodes even the Dynamite was pumping soon and had to be carefully adjusted.

 

According to the DynoMy sound, I always thought we already had that outboard wise but not inside the piano itself and one of the most important factors was the DynoMy/Songbird Tri-Stereo-Chorus.

Once I had my pickups as close to the tines as possible and the bars adjusted to the desired harmonics, I was able to get the DynoMy Rhodes tones using a TC1140 parametric EQ preamp,- but the chorus was another story.

Later, I came close using 3 Roland SDE 2000 12Bit mono digital delays w/ different delay times, LFO speeds, MOD depth and panning.

That was great !

These old delays sound very warm.

BOSS CE-300 and Roland Dimension D were also great, I owned both, but Tri-Stereo-Chorus is still the holy grail.

 

A.C.

[Al Coda]

[Here's a compare I posted a while back between the Motif Rhodes (first) followed by the CP-1. The Motif sounds wretched in comparison. With only three tonal levels the phrases are butchered as is the comping.

Motif Rhodes vs. CP-1

 

Oh yeah, that´s very obvious !

 

B.t.w., I don´t own the Yammi CP-4 but when I listen to the Rhodes demos of the CP-4, there´s not any being on par w/ a real 1971 mkI.

Maybe there are better patches but I didn´t find any demo in the web.

It´s probably also a worthless search because the real thing keeps the real thing and the "clones" deliver a "snapshot" of the real thing always.

But I think that´s right for the money though ...

 

A.C.

[mvanmanen]

I own 1971, 1975, and 1981 stage models. My 1971 is voiced very similarly to AC's recording. Awesome!

 

My question. Can I get closer to this with the MP7 compared to the CP4? My sense from playing the CP4 is it will never be on par as above but I can at least get the general flavor. I cannot try before buying a MP7 because these kind of Kawai products are primarily special order where I live.

 

(I hope this is still enough on topic for this thread)

[voxpops]

My question. Can I get closer to this with the MP7 compared to the CP4?

That's a difficult question to answer as it's a while since I tinkered with the CP4. The MP7's "B" Rhodes patch has a similar tine-to-the-fore quality (and will benefit from changing the amp model to "S. Case"), but the "A" patch is slightly more tonally similar. Neither of them can match the gorgeous clarity and the dynamic gradations of the original in the YouTube clip.

 

The phaser in the MP7 is very good indeed, and you'll be able to dial in something not a million miles away from the Small Stone phaser.

 

The CP4 has better dynamics to play with, but I can't recall whether it could match that bell quality - I suspect not. To me, just going off YouTube, the Kurzweil Forte comes closer than either the MP or the CP.

[Al Coda]

I own 1971, 1975, and 1981 stage models. My 1971 is voiced very similarly to AC's recording. Awesome!

 

That wasn´t my recording, I just found it in the web and it cleary reminded me on the sound my Fender Rhodes had.

 

My question. Can I get closer to this with the MP7 compared to the CP4? My sense from playing the CP4 is it will never be on par as above but I can at least get the general flavor. I cannot try before buying a MP7 because these kind of Kawai products are primarily special order where I live.

 

(I hope this is still enough on topic for this thread)

 

:-)

 

In fact, I´m wondering that about the MP-7 too.

I´d really like to find out, but actually being f##ked up mobility wise more than ever before, makes it impossible to investigate in shops.

I really favourize the Kawai MP-7, but the FX bussing is (like w/ most other designs) far behind a Kurzweil.

On a Kurzweil PC3, I like the freedom creating your own FX chains regardless of "slots" being available for a single sound.

You have one "insertFX" slot, but (in program mode) you can build your "chain of FX for that slot" until you run out of DSP.

So, even there´s triple strike sample switching etc. and other limits,- some crazy stuff works only w/ KURZ, - and you´re not limited to use it as a ROMpler when using VA and manipulate algos too.

 

There´s great build quality and top notch user UI w/ Kawai and I like their acoustic piano sound, but it´s still a ROMpler and you can only use 1 amp-sim in slot 1 and such.

 

But now, we´re close to Winter NAMM 2014,- so I wonder what comes next,- also from CASIO b.t.w. ...

Maybe because of the success of the PX5S, they come up w/ more surprises you can buy quickly,- PX5SmkII in black w/ expression pedal input and some more improvements eventually,- or a Kawai MP-8/12,- who knows ?

 

A.C.

 

[1203]

The CP4 has very good phaser effects in it, both MXR and SmallStone. Together with the preamp effect it suits very well to the 1975 Rhodes model of the CP4.

[timwat]

How about this? It sounds like a Dyno to me.

 

For reference:

 

[video:youtube]

 

 

Mine sounds a lot like this, but more grit and bark underneath.

 

Do you find yourself having to hold back a bit when playing the Kronos so that the bell characteristic doesn't jump out too much?

 

Absolutely. The dynamics on the CP4 are more playable to me. But that's really personal. Peter Horvath has played my Kronos and CP4 side-by-side, and preferred the playability of the Kronos for both Rhodes and acoustic piano. Very subjective stuff.

 

[Doerfler]

 

Thanks for posting. That is such a great Rhodes sound.(snip) Just beautiful.

 

Busch.

+1 here. just finished listening. THX A.C.

[Al Coda]

The CP4 has very good phaser effects in it, both MXR and SmallStone. Together with the preamp effect it suits very well to the 1975 Rhodes model of the CP4.

 

Well, when the FX are good, you can feed ´em w/ almost everything and it sounds o.k..

That´s my experience since my trusty Roland/Rhodes MK80 came w/ it´s lame digital model (yes it´s modelled) of a Rhodes but also it´s internal ANALOG FX board !

So, the phaser and chorus as well as tremolo FX are really good and w/ the modulation FX I get lots of the fusion sounds out of the instrument and it doesn´t suffer from velocity jumps.

 

So, when we talk about Rhodes emulations today, it all depends on the pure tone without running thru FX IMO.

 

Nonetheless, I think the Rhodes models in the CP-4 are very good.

Not perfect but very good.

 

Emulating a Rhodes that way you´re able to manipulate the resulting sound to your taste the way it was possible when tweaking the real thing is possibly as sensitive than bringing a organ clone tone, the CV and leslie sim to perfection.

Not easy at all I think.

 

A.C.

[JeffLearman]

Great recordings and I agree (both Jazz+ and Al Coda).

 

Got a chance to really check out the damper resonance in the CP4. I sure do like it. :-) It's a technically pretty simple effect and sure does add a lot of realism.

 

I'm sampling my CP4, for utility use in my DAW so I won't have to wire it up and rerender if I do some MIDI edits. I did that with my MR76 and used it a lot! I'll have a much better reason to re-render using the CP4, though, since I won't have damper resonance.

 

Too bad I can't find the filter kernel for damper resonance on a CFX piano, because it'd be an easy thing to do an approximation of. Anyone got a CFX and good mic setup? Just hit record, and whack the frame with a hammer! I'll do the rest.

[mvanmanen]

Spent some time again at the local store trying to decide between the CP4 they had in stock and the unknown MP7 that I could special order...took a break and spent some time playing through the grand pianos. Wow. The Yamaha C7 grand they had was lovely. I just could not stop playing it. I know it is an unfair comparison but wow. The real thing really does blow the digital board away....recognizing I have also played some crappy pianos over the years.