Yamaha CP4 - first impressions

[Dana.]

The last time I played the CP4, I thought the keys required significant travel before the notes would sound. Anyone else experience this? I guess I like a shallower action. :idk I think I would rather play the new Kawais or RD800.

[Theo Verelst]

We were very impressed by what this guy was able to program on his CP4.

 

 

 

Some serious sounds, I just loaded the 128 - sys in and tried them all, though I didn't practice are play the songs from the demo video. In fact I think it's a great instrument that doesn't require that and now gives sounds in the style of the video that are actually very well playable and never boring.

 

There are setups with drums and various parts in them. I didn't hear any voices, but I didn't try all layers and splits when they were off in the performance at hand. It's interesting that the rom performance almost compare with the DX7 ROM sounds when compared with third party sounds (like these): stand up sounds with a certain type of distinction to them, but certainly not the other type of striking sounds and buttery playability, even on my system with some Lexicon added (I mean the difference in sounds contrast, not the actual sounds in the comparison, of course). I have the feeling with my own programming of the given parameters and strong changes in effects I've used there are yet quite a few more heavy styles of sounds possible with this machine.

 

T.

[sMatt]

The last time I played the CP4, I thought the keys required significant travel before the notes would sound. Anyone else experience this? I guess I like a shallower action. :idk I think I would rather play the new Kawais or RD800.

 

 

i've always found the CP4 action unwieldy. I much prefer the RD800 -- I find it a million times easier to play.

[Dave Ferris]

Spent some time with the RD800 at NAMM. Hadn't played it since maybe last May when I was impressed after about 90 minutes on it at the GC.

 

I already had the CP4, but was thinking of going with the Roland for home use and the occasional single where I do LH bass/vocals and need the drum tracks.

 

Sometimes it's good to give a lot of space to these things, come back to them later and see if any magic is still there after initial impressions.

 

Basically glad I waited on the 800, because I did not at all connect with it on this last time at NAMM (in a surprisingly quiet room, separate from all the other Roland electronic madness).

 

Ditto on the Nord Piano 2. After not hearing those piano samples since June, they sounded bright and harsh to me now. Funny what the ear can get used to.

 

Right now I'm liking the CP4, MP11 and Forte.

[Kawai James]

Dave, just out of interest, do you recall which headphones were being used at the Roland and Nord booth to demo the RD-800 and Nord Piano 2 respectively?

 

While I agree with your sentiment that how one's hearing perceives a sound can change considerably over time, I also believe that the brand and model of headphones used with each instrument may have been a factor.

 

Cheers,

James

x

[16251]

Spent some time with the RD800 at NAMM. Hadn't played it since maybe last May when I was impressed after about 90 minutes on it at the GC.

 

I already had the CP4, but was thinking of going with the Roland for home use and the occasional single where I do LH bass/vocals and need the drum tracks.

 

Sometimes it's good to give a lot of space to these things, come back to them later and see if any magic is still there after initial impressions.

 

Basically glad I waited on the 800, because I did not at all connect with it on this last time at NAMM (in a surprisingly quiet room, separate from all the other Roland electronic madness).

 

Ditto on the Nord Piano 2. After not hearing those piano samples since June, they sounded bright and harsh to me now. Funny what the ear can get used to.

 

Right now I'm liking the CP4, MP11 and Forte.

 

[AnotherScott]

Ditto on the Nord Piano 2. After not hearing those piano samples since June, they sounded bright and harsh to me now.

Are you sure you were listening to the same piano models that you used to use, that your favorites were loaded into the demo model?

[Joe Muscara]

You guys are mean. Let Dave have his moment of non-GAS and satisfaction with his current gear, willya???

[ITGITC]

You guys are mean. Let Dave have his moment of non-GAS and satisfaction with his current gear, willya???

 

No.

 

What's the fun in that?

 

James and Scott are just trying to keep him honest.

 

 

[Polkahero]

Do any CP4 users here find the CFX grand sample harsh? I think I actually prefer the CF and S6 samples although I haven't used it yet in a live band setting.

[Aidan]

Do any CP4 users here find the CFX grand sample harsh? I think I actually prefer the CF and S6 samples although I haven't used it yet in a live band setting.

 

I find it needs to be dialled back a bit with the vel depth and offset controls to give a more responsive character to it; the factory settings as delivered are a bit unsubtle.

 

That said, it is a big, big piano and I do find the CF and S6 tend to work better in band mixes, unless you're playing jazz and doing a lot of soloing, where I prefer the muscularity of the CFX.

[JeffLearman]

One workaround to this problem is to set the gain on the local sound to zero.

You can't control internal sound gain by external zone. The internal and the "controller" sections are totally separate.

 

I do use the trick to set the local volume for a given patch low, with a slider to bring it up if I want (and often a slider for the external sound). But you can't do 3 zones without programming it all externally, and turning local off (which is global, so you can't have some patches do that and others not.)

[JeffLearman]

Do any CP4 users here find the CFX grand sample harsh? I think I actually prefer the CF and S6 samples although I haven't used it yet in a live band setting.

It's my favorite, and I didn't find a need to tweak it much.

[drawback]

Do any CP4 users here find the CFX grand sample harsh? I think I actually prefer the CF and S6 samples although I haven't used it yet in a live band setting.

 

I find it needs to be dialled back a bit with the vel depth and offset controls to give a more responsive character to it; the factory settings as delivered are a bit unsubtle.

 

That said, it is a big, big piano and I do find the CF and S6 tend to work better in band mixes, unless you're playing jazz and doing a lot of soloing, where I prefer the muscularity of the CFX.

 

You might be happy with the CFX-Dark preset. It's somewhere between the CFX and CF to my ears. Best of both worlds, tone wise, with the range of the CFX.

[Marillo]

What I do find is that that the CFX, whilst superficially powerful and initially more alluring, is actually weaker in the higher register than the CF. Try them A/B and see what you think. I think the CFX gets lost in the upper regs with heavily chordal classical pieces such as Liszt etc.

 

I find the CF the more rounded and realistic of the two.

[Danny Linguini]

Do any CP4 users here find the CFX grand sample harsh? I think I actually prefer the CF and S6 samples although I haven't used it yet in a live band setting.

 

I find it needs to be dialled back a bit with the vel depth and offset controls to give a more responsive character to it; the factory settings as delivered are a bit unsubtle.

 

That said, it is a big, big piano and I do find the CF and S6 tend to work better in band mixes, unless you're playing jazz and doing a lot of soloing, where I prefer the muscularity of the CFX.

 

'Muscular' ... that's exactly the word that describes the piano sound I want. What really set me off on this quest was when I was traveling through Charlotte airport, and there was a fairly young guy pounding away on a marvelous grand in one of the concourses. I don't remember if it was a full concert grand, or even what brand it was, because I just didn't have enough time to check it out that closely (yeah, yeah, I should know a concert grand when I see one, but my memory is crap and I honestly just don't remember). But in passing through I thought, that is one powerful sounding instrument, and in an airport, even, though I'm sure the kid playing it with authority had some part in that as well - and I thought I wish I could get something close to that out of my stage board. Don't get me wrong, I'm not dissatisfied with the SP-4; it actually sounds pretty good and full through my PA. It just doesn't have that same 'muscularity', as you so aptly put it. I know it's out there, because I've heard it in other DP's, including the CP4. I'll know TOMORROW, because I've just been notified that mine is being delivered TOMORROW.

I. Can. Not. Wait.

[Polkahero]

So what's up with the "+" and "-" behind some of the sound patches? Thought I read somewhere it has to do with hammer hardness but want to make sure. The "+" sounds a little brighter than the "-" patch. Too many choices!

[Dave Ferris]

You guys are mean. Let Dave have his moment of non-GAS and satisfaction with his current gear, willya???

 

No.

 

What's the fun in that?

 

 

 

James and Scott are just trying to keep him honest.

 

 

 

I'll tell ya...after someone calling Moment's Notice at 140 = half note yesterday- that's all I needed to keep me honest..

 

Hi James. Pretty sure Roland was using their own brand of phones with the RD800. And can't remember what Nord had. They usually have good ones from what I recall.

 

And Scott- yes was listening to the Fazioli L and Bosendorfer L on both the E5 & NP2. Again as I've posted often- Nord pianos sound better out in front then they do playing them solo. I just think I've kinda moved on from where they're at right now.

[scales]

Sold my CP-4 and bought an NP-2. After years of playing Yamaha samples I was ready for a change. Love the CFX sample and miss it. For some reason after 15 minutes or so of practice I was experiencing a lot of fatigue in my wrist. I guess I'm one of the few that actually likes the feel of the fatar tp-40m. No fatigue! Go figure. I do agree with Dave about the brightness and harshness. But it's really easy to soften it up with the onboard eq. I've loaded the Fazioli XL. Killer sample and I must say there really is something special about sympathetic string resonance. Lovin it! Never got to try the Forte but couldn't justify the $$$ anyway. Purchased the NP-2 for $2300. Very satisfied. Love the metal chassis.

[Kawai James]

Hi James. Pretty sure Roland was using their own brand of phones with the RD800. And can't remember what Nord had. They usually have good ones from what I recall.

 

Thanks Dave.

 

Cheers,

James

x

[16251]

Sold my CP-4 and bought an NP-2. After years of playing Yamaha samples I was ready for a change. Love the CFX sample and miss it. For some reason after 15 minutes or so of practice I was experiencing a lot of fatigue in my wrist. I guess I'm one of the few that actually likes the feel of the fatar tp-40m. No fatigue! Go figure. I do agree with Dave about the brightness and harshness. But it's really easy to soften it up with the onboard eq. I've loaded the Fazioli XL. Killer sample and I must say there really is something special about sympathetic string resonance. Lovin it! Never got to try the Forte but couldn't justify the $$$ anyway. Purchased the NP-2 for $2300. Very satisfied. Love the metal chassis.

Curious what of music do you play?

[scales]

A good variety. My main objective is composition. Hopefully by the year's end I'll have some recordings for you guys. It's taking forever. Wish I didn't have to work.

[JeffLearman]

So what's up with the "+" and "-" behind some of the sound patches? Thought I read somewhere it has to do with hammer hardness but want to make sure. The "+" sounds a little brighter than the "-" patch. Too many choices!

BadMister explained this on the YamahaSynth forum. If I understood it correctly, each sample is mapped to three consecutive notes. The default is to map it to the unison note and the one above and below. The + setting maps the sample to the unison and the next two higher notes, and the - setting maps it to the unison and the next two lower notes.

 

A totally useless feature IMHO, but some folks like the way these variations sound. The + is (artificially) crisper, the - is, well, mushier IMHO. Not that big a difference between them, and most noticeable when you cross a sample boundary. IMHO, the sample boundaries are more noticeable using the + or - settings. Did I say IMHO enough?

[JeffLearman]

I'll tell ya...after someone calling Moment's Notice at 140 = half note yesterday- that's all I needed to keep me honest..

I hope they gave you more than a moment's notice. Regardless, I bet you gave them a Moment's Notice. ;-)

[Polkahero]

So what's up with the "+" and "-" behind some of the sound patches? Thought I read somewhere it has to do with hammer hardness but want to make sure. The "+" sounds a little brighter than the "-" patch. Too many choices!

BadMister explained this on the YamahaSynth forum. If I understood it correctly, each sample is mapped to three consecutive notes. The default is to map it to the unison note and the one above and below. The + setting maps the sample to the unison and the next two higher notes, and the - setting maps it to the unison and the next two lower notes.

 

A totally useless feature IMHO, but some folks like the way these variations sound. The + is (artificially) crisper, the - is, well, mushier IMHO. Not that big a difference between them, and most noticeable when you cross a sample boundary. IMHO, the sample boundaries are more noticeable using the + or - settings. Did I say IMHO enough?

 

Thanks for the explanation!

[AnotherScott]

So what's up with the "+" and "-" behind some of the sound patches? Thought I read somewhere it has to do with hammer hardness but want to make sure. The "+" sounds a little brighter than the "-" patch. Too many choices!

BadMister explained this on the YamahaSynth forum. If I understood it correctly, each sample is mapped to three consecutive notes. The default is to map it to the unison note and the one above and below. The + setting maps the sample to the unison and the next two higher notes, and the - setting maps it to the unison and the next two lower notes.

I don't think that is correct. For one thing, that would mean that only one out of three notes would sound any different when comparing, say, the default map to the + map. And one third of the keys would sound identical in all three variations. Instead, I think *all* notes are shifted from where they are in the default assignment, which leads to the + version (all notes stretched up 1/2 step from default location) sounding brighter and the - version (all notes pitch shifted down) sounding duller. The easiest example to imagine is a piano with all 88 notes sampled. Normal, the C sample is used for C. In +, the B sample is stretched up and used for C. In -, the C# sample is pitch shifted down and used for C. But even without all 88 notes being sampled, "real" and "stretched" notes can be shifted up or down the same way.

 

 

[Polkahero]

So are the non + and - sounds in the CP4 sampled at every note then? Guess I've never really understood sample stretching before.

[AnotherScott]

So are the non + and - sounds in the CP4 sampled at every note then?

I do not believe that is the case. I used the sampled-every-note example to simplify the concept, but the same thing can be done with stretched samples.

 

Guess I've never really understood sample stretching before.

Play a C on your keyboard. Use the pitch bend wheel to bend it up to a C#. That sound can be used to generate the C# sound, if the manufacturer wants to conserve memory usage by not including a separate sample for the C#. That's sample stretching. (And the stretching can be done both up and down from the original pitch.) The more you stretch (the farther you pitch bend), the less natural the sound becomes, so the less stretching (the more genuinely different sampled notes), the better.

[Polkahero]

Makes sense, got it, thanks! So looping that I hear about probably involves the sustain of the note, correct? Bigger sample libraries record the sustain longer whereas smaller sample libraries record only a second or two and then loop the sound for sustain?

[AnotherScott]

right.