New Studiologic Numa X Piano

[Docbop]

Sweetwater always has great sounding demos of gear.

 

[video:youtube]

[thomsurf]

Numa X vs. Nord

 

[Reezekeys]

Both sound good, the Numa seems to have a little more "presence" or "body" to the sound. Hard to come up with the right adjectives. I like it more than the Nord listening to this particular video.

[Docbop]

The NS3 you can load lots of other sounds so always a big plus. The StudioLogic is WAY less money and that is always good too. I have a StudioLogic SL88 Grand controller which has a great hammer keybed and the new Numa X GT has an slightly improved version of the same keybed so I hope I can find one to check out one day.

[Fleer]

SoundOnSound as a fine review in.

[ElmerJFudd]

https://www.soundonsound.com/reviews/studiologic-numa-x-piano-gt

 

David Gale seems to think the addition of escapement makes the updated TP-40"s key motion more effort to play and feels it is more piano like. Studio Logic has also invested in some extensive acoustic piano sample libraries to go with the new action. There"s 220 patches, they are using some sort of compression method to keep files smaller. Polyphony is very high. The storage is only half full and they intend to add to it over time. I"m not sure if they are allowing user samples.

 

I hope to see one in a shop at some point to give it a try.

[mauriziodececco]

My impression on the video is that the sound quality is very good for both, and that the real point is the playing experience (brain-hands-sound connection).

Use of modelling and the new keybeds sound promising, but somebody needs really to try it .

 

I asked around in Paris, and for the moment no mayor shop is going to have it, apparently the Numa compact series gave them the image of a low end player here :-<

 

Maurizio

[Docbop]

I wish he had done a comparison with both in a group situation that might change peoples results. The StudioLogic seems to have a lot of overtones and harmonic fullness that would be good in a solo situation. The NS3 to me has more note clarity, a bit more edge. That would work well for live and or processing the sound.

[Kurt W]

+1

[ElmerJFudd]

If Fatar has a digital piano action that is competitive with Yamaha and Kawai now, that"s a big deal. Because it also means Nord and Kurzweil may have access to it. But videos and review articles just can"t substitute for getting one"s hands on it. Time will tell.

 

What do we know about key release samples, pedal noise, pedal resonance, sympathetic resonance? Are any of these featured on the GT?

[thomsurf]

I recieved my Numa X from Thomann in Germany a few days ago. I"ve been playing it intensely trying to figure out what think about it. First impression was wow this thing is well built! I had not expected that⦠Is has a sturdy metal casing and sits super steady on my stand.

 

The overall playing experience is very different from the Roland RD800 I"ve playing for many years. Not nescessarily a bad thing⦠wouldn"t call the Numa X an upgrade - just a different approach.

 

The Fatar TP110 action is quite nice. But my fingers are really sore because the keys bottom out really hard. I"m used to Rolands PHA 4 which feels very 'cushiony" compared to this. I also feel that it"s a little bit harder to find that special connection between sound and action. But then again - this is a lightweight 88 key DP so I guess you"ll have to accept some trade offs.

 

The 4 main piano sounds are quite good and all of them has their own unique character. I did edit them quite a bit though.

[ElmerJFudd]

Thanks for reporting right back! No, I wouldn"t imagine the TP-110 is going to be miraculous, although it would be nice! But how it compares to TP-100 and other more compact lighter weight actions like Yamaha GHS, Kawai RHC, yet to be seen.

[Dockeys]

I"ve a Numa x 73 coming later this week. I"m hoping the action will be good enough for gigging. If not I might go back to the Cp73 but the Numa is nearly 2kilos lighter and significantly cheaper for a similar form factor. Will report back once it arrives.

[CyberGene]

I had a SL73 with the TP100 action and that action was so heavy to play I couldn't get used to it and sold it. It was heavy, sluggish and with a very high back-pressure pushing against my fingers all the time. It was very difficult to play piano and Rhodes stuff on it. The keys felt much heavier and sluggish compared to the grand piano action in my N1X for example and that action isn't known to be very light either.

 

I almost ordered the Numa Piano X 73 a few weeks ago but I was worried the TP110 wouldn't be an improvement, so I put the order on hold. I'd be interested if there has been any improvement though. I asked Studiologic on their Facebook page but they didn't answer and I'm not sure whether they don't want to answer (because nothing changed in terms of weight distribution) or just don't bother replying on Facebook, although they seem to reply to other people.

[Dockeys]

Yeah I played the SL88 studio which I think has the tp100 action and it was ok. Probably usable if I had it for a few weeks. I"m hoping the tp110 is an improvement but I"m not too optimistic. Past experience has shown me if you want good action then you have to compromise on either sounds, weight or features or all.

[Adan]

I'm in the camp that believes sound authenticity is secondary to finger-to-ear connection. For those campers, videos aren't super helpful. Return policies are!

 

Up till now the TP100 has, for the most part, been found in fairly expensive keyboards. I'm thinking of Nord, Crumar, Viscount, and Dexibell. Putting aside the TP100-equipped Studiologic SL controller, playing the TP100 meant buying a pretty expensive keyboard and tolerating a very compromise-y action for lighter weight. The TP110 in the Numa might change that equation somewhat. Even if it's only an incremental improvement (10%? ha) over the TP100, it's also a more economical keyboard purchase at less than half the price of any of those others. That might expand the range of players who find the compromise acceptable.

 

But again, for many players, how it feels under your hands is paramount.

[CyberGene]

I"ve never tried a Kurzweil (Medeli sourced) action but they sound like another alternative for creating a very lightweight board. GHS and PHA-4S are also worth mentioning. In the last few weeks I"ve been considering Numa X Piano 73, RD88, CP73 and PC4 but I"ve only tried the CP73 (and liked it), others are not available for testing where I live. My main consideration is double-light, meaning a lightweight board with very light feeling (but still hammer) action. I"ll wait for more reviews of the Numa.

[AnotherScott]

My main consideration is double-light, meaning a lightweight board with very light feeling (but still hammer) action.

 

This is why I continue to often gig with an old Casio 88. The ones that pre-date the PX-130/PX-330 which introduced the triple sensor but became more sluggish feeling. The later ones got better than those, but still never as good as the earlier ones, IMO.

[drawback]

I had a SL73 with the TP100 action and that action was so heavy to play I couldn't get used to it and sold it. It was heavy, sluggish and with a very high back-pressure pushing against my fingers all the time. It was very difficult to play piano and Rhodes stuff on it.

 

My experience also. I doubt I'll have the chance to play a NumaX â Studiologic products are very rarely in Canadian retail outlets.

 

I'm in the camp that believes sound authenticity is secondary to finger-to-ear connection. For those campers, videos aren't super helpful. Return policies are!

 

Up till now the TP100 has, for the most part, been found in fairly expensive keyboards. I'm thinking of Nord, Crumar, Viscount, and Dexibell. Putting aside the TP100-equipped Studiologic SL controller, playing the TP100 meant buying a pretty expensive keyboard and tolerating a very compromise-y action for lighter weight. The TP110 in the Numa might change that equation somewhat. Even if it's only an incremental improvement (10%? ha) over the TP100, it's also a more economical keyboard purchase at less than half the price of any of those others. That might expand the range of players who find the compromise acceptable.

 

But again, for many players, how it feels under your hands is paramount.

 

+1

[CyberGene]

My main consideration is double-light, meaning a lightweight board with very light feeling (but still hammer) action.

 

This is why I continue to often gig with an old Casio 88. The ones that pre-date the PX-130/PX-330 which introduced the triple sensor but became more sluggish feeling. The later ones got better than those, but still never as good as the earlier ones, IMO.

 

I used to have a Casio CDP-100 (if I'm not mistaken about the exact model) which at the time was not only the cheapest possible digital piano with hammer action but also the lightest one (as total board weight). And yes, I remember having it for a while together with my RD-700SX (whose action IMO had the perfect weighted feel for all type of sounds between pianos, Rhodes and synths but the entire board was ridiculously heavy) and the action in that cheap Casio was not very different feeling than the Roland. The sounds were total cr*p though but they worked for non-pretentious gigs and later on I switched to VST-s.

[JFP]

Hi Thomsurf, I cannot decide between de GT with Tp400W , but much heavier (!) or the improved (?) TP110. I played both the TP400W - in my Dexibell S9 and the TP100 in the Numa Studio, but I sort of hated the TP100 , especially because it was exhausting to play and the keys had a sort of 'push up' against your fingers. Was if it was pushing back. The TP400W is very nice , but if the TP110 is indeed improved to the point where it it is not so odd in sluggishness and pushing the key back up , I would rather have a lightweight board (Numa X instead of GT). How would you judge the keys after some more playing the last days on the TP110 ? Is the bounce and sluggishness en back push al history now . Some things that plaged the TP110 ...

[thomsurf]

Hi JFP.

I don"t recall if I"ve tried the TP100, but I gotta say that after having played the TP110 some more now, I"ve really come to like it.

My soreness is gone so that"s nice. Wouldn"t say that I"m experiencing any bounce back or sluggishness. My biggest complain is probably the way the keys (especially the black ones) react when you strike them far 'back". Like it"s harder to control your touch. Do you know what I mean?

[CyberGene]

but I sort of hated the TP100 , especially because it was exhausting to play and the keys had a sort of 'push up' against your fingers. Was if it was pushing back.

 

Exactly what I've described a few posts earlier, which I described as "high back-pressure pushing against my fingers all the time". I'm not a native English speaker but it's apparent we describe exactly the same issue. If TP110 is at least a partial improvement upon that, then I will be interested in a Numa X 73/88.

[JFP]

Hi JFP.

I don"t recall if I"ve tried the TP100, but I gotta say that after having played the TP110 some more now, I"ve really come to like it.

My soreness is gone so that"s nice. Wouldn"t say that I"m experiencing any bounce back or sluggishness. My biggest complain is probably the way the keys (especially the black ones) react when you strike them far 'back". Like it"s harder to control your touch. Do you know what I mean?

 

That's probably because of the short pivoting point. black keys suffer more from that , because they are even shorter , hence harder to control (heavier)

[Al Coda]

Questions to the users already owning/ playing the Numa X GT, 88 or 73:

 

All model´s cases have same depth,- so the pivot point should be the same w/ TP400W and TP110 actions.

 

All models specs report:

 

Triple switch detection system

 

Aftertouch

 

Touch: Soft, Medium, Hard, Fixed (programmable)

 

Keyboard Sensitivity Control

 

Black/White keys Balance

 

 

What´s "keyboard sensitivity" control ?

Do all these features work well ?

What´s up when playing fast repetitions,- is the Studiologic triple sensor system a real improvement over other non-triple-sensor actions ?

 

When striking any or only black keys "far back" is an issue also w/ the more expensive TP400W action,- it possibly makes no sense to spend the money when the TP110 actions are significantly better than former TP100.

Lower price and less weight are tempting still.

I also don´t like cushioned actions when the key landing felts are too soft and I am used to play actions which bottom out harder.

 

I cannot test myself because of the actual unavailability in my area and I don´t want to preorder before I´m sure not to buy a lemon.

 

 

A.C.

[AnotherScott]

All model´s cases have same depth,- so the pivot point should be the same w/ TP400W and TP110 actions.

I would not assume the key lengths are identical just because the chassis depth is. It could simply have been more cost-effective to design them to be able to use the same control surface panels, the same end panels, etc.

[JFP]

As AnotherScott , the casing is no clear indication about the actual dimension, mechanics en pivot lengths of the keybed . In my experience and understanding the black keys on digital piano actions have a shorted pivot pint on the black keys. And TP110 has a shorter key lenght than TP400W. I know the Tp100 and TP400W quite well , and the TP400 is much easier to play , with no pushback resistance and better to play into the keys (further behind) as well. I don't know the Tp400W version that is used in the Num GT, but I guess it won't be that much different from the one in the Dexibell S9. TP100 really sucked in my opinion , that's why I wonder how much it has been changed and improved now. Not in marketing speak , but real world comparison. Of all the Fatar keybeds I know , either 2 or 3 sensor , the repetition is not great compared to the competitions. IMHO Kawai still rules in that respect. Roland comes in second. With Casio (HAII) en Fatar keypads the 3rd sensor is placed way up too hight and makes hardly any sense. You have to lift up the key too much for a new repetition , which misses the point. On a real acoustic grand or fast digital keybed you can play again from a low point of the key release , which is what makes it fast en enjoyable. Even the Korg RHIII , which is a 2 sensor keybed , has faster repetition than a 2 sensor Casio of Fatar. I had Korg kronos and Tp100 (2 sensor) and TP40W (Sl88 grand) side bij side. T400 is not much different in that respect , but because it is faster as whole in key release than the TP100 and TP40W, it still feels easier than these two. I really liked the Decibel S9 T400W , though bottoming out was a bit shallow in comparison to Kawai etc.

[AnotherScott]

IMHO Kawai still rules in that respect. Roland comes in second. With Casio (HAII) en Fatar keypads the 3rd sensor is placed way up too hight and makes hardly any sense. You have to lift up the key too much for a new repetition , which misses the point. On a real acoustic grand or fast digital keybed you can play again from a low point of the key release , which is what makes it fast en enjoyable. Even the Korg RHIII , which is a 2 sensor keybed , has faster repetition than a 2 sensor Casio of Fatar.

I basically agree, but to fine tune a couple of points...

 

Yes, while being able to repeat a note from a lower point in a key's travel is a typical benefit of a 3rd sensor, indeed you can also accomplish that by lower sensor placement in a 2-sensor board, which is what Korg does on the RH3 (which btw is best typed that way and not RHIII which is actually the nomenclature for a Kawai action). It doesn't so much let you repeat things more quickly per se, but rather to more easily repeat things softly, or do trills. (Something like the intro to Billy Joel's "Angry Young Man", as fast as it is, if you can play it at all, is playable on a 2-sensor board because you have to release the key high between strikes anyway, to get the velocity.) But one thing a 3-sensor board can do that the RH3 cannot do is--without having the sustain pedal depressed--allow you to restrike a note without lifting it high enough to silence it first. So you can do a "legato" key repetition (with no pedal) on a 3-sensor board, but not a 2-sensor board.

 

Casio's 3rd sensor (e.g. in PX-5S) is indeed higher than ideal. But the third sensor in the 3-sensor Fatar TP100--at least in some boards--doesn't seem to provide this function at all. On my Dexibell P3 it is impossible to retrigger a note without lifting it high enough to silence it first. Check the video below, and my comment beneath it (from "SLHKeyboards"). On the SL88 Studio shown, the actual physical mechanism in the key necessary to hit the middle sensor doesn't appear to exist! (And the audio demonstrations in the video do not provide evidence of any such 3-sensor behavior.) The replies to my comment mention the third sensor having some impact on velocity handling. I don't know whether or not that's true, but one thing it doesn't do... that it CANNOT do in the design shown in that video... is allow you to retrigger a key from lower in its travel. Whether that applies to other triple sensor Fatars, or which ones, I cannot say.

 

[video:youtube]

[Al Coda]

TP110 has a shorter key lenght than TP400W. I know the Tp100 and TP400W quite well , and the TP400 is much easier to play , with no pushback resistance and better to play into the keys (further behind) as well.

 

...

 

Of all the Fatar keybeds I know , either 2 or 3 sensor , the repetition is not great compared to the competitions. IMHO Kawai still rules in that respect. Roland comes in second. With Casio (HAII) en Fatar keypads the 3rd sensor is placed way up too hight and makes hardly any sense. You have to lift up the key too much for a new repetition , which misses the point. On a real acoustic grand or fast digital keybed you can play again from a low point of the key release , which is what makes it fast en enjoyable. Even the Korg RHIII , which is a 2 sensor keybed , has faster repetition than a 2 sensor Casio of Fatar. I had Korg kronos and Tp100 (2 sensor) and TP40W (Sl88 grand) side bij side. T400 is not much different in that respect , but because it is faster as whole in key release than the TP100 and TP40W, it still feels easier than these two. I really liked the Decibel S9 T400W , though bottoming out was a bit shallow in comparison to Kawai etc.

 

Excellent info,- thank you !

I´ll try the GT version when available here.

Like you, I had the impression Kawai offers the best triple sensor implementation up to now.

 

 

A.C.

[JFP]

Isn't that what I meant ? That on the TP100LR triple sensor and the TP40W (and to a lesser extend the Tp400W) it is virtually impossible to really have any benefits from the 3rd sensor in the form of fast repetitions / trills etc from the 'low key" ?! At least that's how I feel about it. 3rd sensor does not add the functionality / behaviour you experience from for example the Kawai RHII versus RHIII ( repeating note right from the bottom was impossible on my old Kawai Mp6 , but very easy on the ES7/8 and now 920. Also on the GFII / III the 3rd sensor makes repeating notes and trills a breeze . Something that cannot be said about Casio PX560 / 330 hammer actions and PX5S and all the fatal based keybeds. Even the - otherwise very nice S9 keybed - failed in that respect. Odd at least...