Yamaha CK61 and CK88

[Charleston]

Maybe the cutaways on the sides of back aid in speaker projection? If not, is it all coming from the bottom? 

I'm really interested in the speaker quality. 

I like the sound of my P-125 built-in speakers. Curious to know how the CK compares.

[Paul Woodward]

2 hours ago, Charleston said:

Maybe the cutaways on the sides of back aid in speaker projection? If not, is it all coming from the bottom? 

I'm really interested in the speaker quality. 

I like the sound of my P-125 built-in speakers. Curious to know how the CK compares.

If you watch the Anderson’s video, they demo the speaker quality.

[danskeys]

2 hours ago, Charleston said:

Maybe the cutaways on the sides of back aid in speaker projection? If not, is it all coming from the bottom? 

I'm really interested in the speaker quality. 

I like the sound of my P-125 built-in speakers. Curious to know how the CK compares.

I have the P121 (same as the 125 but 73 note.)  The speakers are shockingly good. (And it also has the USB audio interface which is really useful.  I use Numa Player on iPad with it to expand the sounds of the P121.)  From the specs, the CK speakers are not as good.  As an aside, I demoed an RD-88 while on vacation for a week recently, and was stunned at how bad the speakers sounded.  My guess is that the CK will be somewhere in between the P121/125 and the RD-88.

[Charleston]

23 minutes ago, Paul Woodward said:

If you watch the Anderson’s video, they demo the speaker quality.

Yeah I watched that.

It made the CK speakers sound horrible, so I'm hoping that was due to the lavalier mics or whatever.

[AnotherScott]

1 hour ago, Paul Woodward said:

If you watch the Anderson’s video, they demo the speaker quality.

 

Well, it's more of a "watch our reactions" video. ;-) But yes, that section starts at 9:30. It's really hard to get a sense of the speakers in a youtube video. As Charleston alluded to, the microphones used and their placement relative to the speakers and any compression/EQ on them can alter the sound, then you have some more processing/compression for the youtube streaming video, and then of course, you may be listening back on your own computer speakers, which can add their own coloration and limitations. And then, as he also mentioned, directionality comes into play, so there's also a variable of how it sounds to the player vs. how it sounds to an audience member opposite the player. All of which means that my own question of whether the speakers are loud and full sounding enough to play a wedding ceremony or a solo cocktail hour is something I don't think we'll know until some of us get to experience it in the flesh.

 

55 minutes ago, danskeys said:

I have the P121 (same as the 125 but 73 note.)...From the specs, the CK speakers are not as good.

 

Yes, that's disappointing. The P-121 has 2-way speakers, and based on the specs so far, it looks the CK has "full range" speakers.  Though if they are "facing down," the loss of high-end in a full-range speaker is almost moot anyway, since you would lose a lot of high end in that config anyway.

[pjd]

On 3/18/2023 at 11:50 PM, Mighty Motif Max said:

I see it as the CK is a keyboard aim'd at the decent student, DIY tune maker, basic cocktail party, bedroom jam, keyboard, more features than previous keyboards aimed at that market can do.

 

Interesting board! My thought is that this is the perfect board for something like a campus ministry that has to be very mobile, has limited funds, and basically wants good pianos with a decent action, good pads with filter control, and occasionally some EP's, organs, and various other sounds (usually a good string section). Front-panel EQ is a great bonus.

 

Got to agree -- pretty decent and competitive for $1,000. Yamaha needed a keyboard at the $1,000 mark, again, and got it in CK61.

 

Scott did a terrific YC vs. CK pro/con -- thanks!

 

My concerns about external control and effect editing aside, if I didn't have Casio CT-S1000V in hand, I would probably consider the CK61 as a lightweight second board. (My other car is a Lambo? 🙂 ) But, I feel like I'm in a committed relationship. I just won't throw a keyboard over for a shiny new toy. Love the one you're with and learn it in depth.

 

The CT-S1000V or CT-S500 allow more sound/effect editing. Can't say anything about CK speakers until I hear them, but speakers in a keyboard at this price point are pretty much "courtesy speakers." A player is still going to rely on external powered speakers, PA, whatever even in a small venue.

 

I think Yamaha will sell a bunch of these. Hope to see some of the CK sounds migrate to YC Mk2 someday.

 

All the best -- pj

 

[cphollis]

I'm thinking of getting the 61 for an upcoming RV trip.  It's small enough to stow at 36".   I think it would be extra fun for a campfire jam, crappy organs and all

[ElmerJFudd]

 

[UnderGroundGr]

I see that CK drawbars has all 9 positions(0-8) like the classic drawbars instead of the 6 positions of Reface YC...

[AnotherScott]

1 hour ago, UnderGroundGr said:

I see that CK drawbars has all 9 positions(0-8) like the classic drawbars instead of the 6 positions of Reface YC...

 

Good catch! I never knew the Reface sliders didn't support all 9 values. I see in the MIDI implementation, though, they actually support 7 (0-6), not 6.

[LX888]

 How good could the piano sample  in this be expected to be? Is the CFX anywhere near what a CP4 would be ?

 

I would consider the 61 key version if I could use it with an 88 controller. I tried that with an MX 49 awhile back but many of the sounds were not up to par. If pianos and EP's are anywhere near the CP4 or P 515 I might be interested.

 

The MX seemed like a somehow compromised version of theMotif...so is that what is going on here? And...are these out yet? Has anybody heard one.

 

It would be nice to have a portable with CP4 or P515 level pianos. If it is not at least at that level I would not be interested. I assume anything organ from Yamaha would be a compromise anyway. They need an expert like Tony Monaco or somebody to do a reality check.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hopefully these will be hitting stores soon so we will see.

[ElmerJFudd]

1 hour ago, LX888 said:

 How good could the piano sample  in this be expected to be? Is the CFX anywhere near what a CP4 would be ?

 

I would consider the 61 key version if I could use it with an 88 controller. I tried that with an MX 49 awhile back but many of the sounds were not up to par. If pianos and EP's are anywhere near the CP4 or P 515 I might be interested.

 

The MX seemed like a somehow compromised version of theMotif...so is that what is going on here? And...are these out yet? Has anybody heard one.

 

It would be nice to have a portable with CP4 or P515 level pianos. If it is not at least at that level I would not be interested. I assume anything organ from Yamaha would be a compromise anyway. They need an expert like Tony Monaco or somebody to do a reality check.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hopefully these will be hitting stores soon so we will see.

From what we’ve heard so far the featured CFX and Rhodes patches sound quite good.  There isn’t much point in them releasing a $1-1.4k instrument with weak piano and Rhodes as you can get very good sample sets on sub $1k boards now. Heck you can get a better piano than they used to provide us from an app.  
 

That said, the CP4 is a very nice instrument.  Quality build, better action, and features string resonance.  

[1203]

From what i‘ve heard on the videos the Rhodes sounds exactly like the „Rd78“ sample from the CP/YC series and this is a good Rhodes for my taste. So my guess is, that the CFX also is more similar to that in the CP/YC as the older one in the CP4 or P515. 

[HSS]

18 hours ago, AnotherScott said:

 

Yes, that's disappointing. The P-121 has 2-way speakers, and based on the specs so far, it looks the CK has "full range" speakers.  Though if they are "facing down," the loss of high-end in a full-range speaker is almost moot anyway, since you would lose a lot of high end in that config anyway.

I have a P121 and IMO its speakers are pretty robust as far as onboard speaker systems are concerned. I've done a couple solo gigs with just my P121 in a small quiet coffee house and they were sufficient, albeit just barely.  It's too bad that the same speaker system couldn't have been loaded into the CK61 /88.  FWIW... I also wish the CK's had some onboard basic drum patterns like the P121 /125 and the MX61 / 88.   Having whined about these minor things, the CK's still seem to me to be a pretty good deal at their price point.

[UnderGroundGr]

5 hours ago, AnotherScott said:

 

Good catch! I never knew the Reface sliders didn't support all 9 values. I see in the MIDI implementation, though, they actually support 7 (0-6), not 6.

You are right, I count wrong the drawbars of my reface...😀

[AnotherScott]

4 hours ago, LX888 said:

 How good could the piano sample  in this be expected to be? Is the CFX anywhere near what a CP4 would be ?

 

I expect/hope the CFX is the same as in the CP73/88 and YC61/73/88. It actually has more CFX variations than those do. However it doe not have as many non-CFX pianos as those do.

 

4 hours ago, LX888 said:

I would consider the 61 key version if I could use it with an 88 controller.

 

You can. You can trigger any of its sound externally, independent of sound you may prefer to trigger from its own keys internally.

 

4 hours ago, LX888 said:

The MX seemed like a somehow compromised version of theMotif...so is that what is going on here?

 

The MX is very much a scaled-down ("compromised") version of a Motif XS. But in terms of sonic differences, the ones I am aware of are that the Motif XS permitted two insert effects per sound (the MX only supports one), and the alternate articulations are missing (I'm talking about the aspects of the sounds you could get via the assignable function buttons, which, themselves, are absent on the MX).

 

4 hours ago, LX888 said:

And...are these out yet?

 

They are scheduled to be available to the public on April 6.

[U.Honey]

8 hours ago, ElmerJFudd said:

 

 

19 minute overview, and he doesn't play a single note! I guess that's fine. Some make reviews that say "No talking, just playing". Maybe he should add to the title "No playing, just talking" 😀

[ElmerJFudd]

Just now, U.Honey said:

 

19 minute overview, and he doesn't play a single note! I guess that's fine. Some make reviews that say "No talking, just playing". Maybe he should add to the title "No playing, just talking" 😀

Haha.  I figured it would be  useful to share someone talking about layout and function.  😂

[LX888]

Thank you for answering questions about the CFX sample everyone. Let's hope it does share the same sample as the CP88.

 

If the pianos are good then I would use this as a sort of sound module with the option of a battery powered portable...like a portable Casio on steroids. I can do most of my practicing on a 61  down an octave.

 

It will be interesting to see what the organ really does. Do I expect accurate CV?....not from Yamaha. Hopefully there will be  decent chorale sound and decent percussion... that shouldn't be too hard. They were capable of delivering fairly accurate drawbar tones s far back as the P 250.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[pjd]

3 hours ago, AnotherScott said:

The MX is very much a scaled-down ("compromised") version of a Motif XS. But in terms of sonic differences, the ones I am aware of are that the Motif XS permitted two insert effects per sound (the MX only supports one), and the alternate articulations are missing (I'm talking about the aspects of the sounds you could get via the assignable function buttons, which, themselves, are absent on the MX).

 

If memory serves me right, the MX has a relatively small subset of the Motif XS/MOX arpeggios. The MX does not have Megavoices and any of the arpeggio patterns which rely on Megavoices. The MX waveform ROM is significantly smaller and dropping Megavoice was a way to save ROM space.

 

Probably not a big difference to people who just want to bang away on the danged thing. 😀 I carefully weighed MX vs. MOX at the time, and chose MOX. The extra features and on-board sound editing swung me to MOX. I still have it and it sits in its retirement home having earned its rest. 😘

 

All the best -- pj

 

[AnotherScott]

13 minutes ago, pjd said:

If memory serves me right, the MX has a relatively small subset of the Motif XS/MOX arpeggios. The MX does not have Megavoices and any of the arpeggio patterns which rely on Megavoices. The MX waveform ROM is significantly smaller and dropping Megavoice was a way to save ROM space

That's probably right. I was just talking about the keyboard playable stuff. And yes, the wave rom is much smaller, so from a straight keyboard-playability perspective, that "megavoice" stuff (along with the alternate "AF" articulations I mentioned) is a logical place to have cut the wave data from.

[Mighty Motif Max]

I'm pretty sure there's also less sample data for everything in general, beyond the articulations and such. Pianos and EP's for example have less velocity layers from what I can tell.

[AnotherScott]

10 minutes ago, Mighty Motif Max said:

I'm pretty sure there's also less sample data for everything in general, beyond the articulations and such. Pianos and EP's for example have less velocity layers from what I can tell.

It's an interesting possibility. I wouldn't expect it, just because it's a whole lot of effort to go through, to reprogram each sound I mean, you can't just delete a velocity layer from an EP, you'd have to then also remap the existing layers. But it's not impossible. If anyone owns both an MX and one of the boards that has the "full" Motif XS wave set (i.e. Motif XS, MO-X, but also included as a subset of Motif XF, MO-XF, Montage, MODX, MODX+), one could compare the waveform lists. Those lists are published in the data list for all those boards except the MX itself, but if you got even downloaded even just the demo of the John Melas MX tools, you could presumably see if the waves of the MX are identical. My MX is packed away. Anyone else care to volunteer?

 

[LarsHarner2]

On 3/21/2023 at 1:52 PM, Charleston said:

Maybe the cutaways on the sides of back aid in speaker projection? If not, is it all coming from the bottom? 

I'm really interested in the speaker quality. 

I like the sound of my P-125 built-in speakers. Curious to know how the CK compares.

I like my P-125 speakers as well- they project well and to me have more bass than other competing brands. I looked at the P-125 specs; and it seems  there are 4 speakers total with 7 watts amplification on both sides. It seems the CK has 2 speakers and 6 watts amplification on both sides but who knows what the difference is as of yet as this is a few years later than the P-125.

The selling point to me is a 12 pound board with any speakers whatsoever. I have a coupon from a retailer and am going to see if they take it 

[Mighty Motif Max]

38 minutes ago, AnotherScott said:

It's an interesting possibility. I wouldn't expect it, just because it's a whole lot of effort to go through, to reprogram each sound I mean, you can't just delete a velocity layer from an EP, you'd have to then also remap the existing layers. But it's not impossible. If anyone owns both an MX and one of the boards that has the "full" Motif XS wave set (i.e. Motif XS, MO-X, but also included as a subset of Motif XF, MO-XF, Montage, MODX, MODX+), one could compare the waveform lists. Those lists are published in the data list for all those boards except the MX itself, but if you got even downloaded even just the demo of the John Melas MX tools, you could presumably see if the waves of the MX are identical. My MX is packed away. Anyone else care to volunteer?

 

I own a MX61, Motif XF8, and MODX. There are sound differences well beyond what FX can fix. This is most notable in the acoustic instruments. For example, there are actually some sounds on the MX that are different enough that I've had a hard time duplicating them on either other Yamaha board I have - the Dist. Wurli patch and the Ambient Pad patch are prime examples of this.

 

I don't have the time to go through those lists as we are in the process of hiring a new university president here so I am extremely busy currently. But that should confirm this I believe.

[AnotherScott]

1 minute ago, Mighty Motif Max said:

I own a MX61, Motif XF8, and MODX. There are sound differences well beyond what FX can fix. This is most notable in the acoustic instruments. For example, there are actually some sounds on the MX that are different enough that I've had a hard time duplicating them on either other Yamaha board I have - the Dist. Wurli patch and the Ambient Pad patch are prime examples of this.

That's interesting. If your MODX is a MODX8, then one other test you could do some time, when they're near each other, that might be less tedious than comparing data lists, is to see if you can better duplicate the MX patch on one of those boards if you triggered them over MIDI from the MX. Sometimes what makes a sound difficult to duplicate on some other board that is supposed to have the "same" sounds can be due to how the velocities are triggered from a particular action.

[Mighty Motif Max]

4 minutes ago, AnotherScott said:

That's interesting. If your MODX is a MODX8, then one other test you could do some time, when they're near each other, that might be less tedious than comparing data lists, is to see if you can better duplicate the MX patch on one of those boards if you triggered them over MIDI from the MX. Sometimes what makes a sound difficult to duplicate on some other board that is supposed to have the "same" sounds can be due to how the velocities are triggered from a particular action.

Read my signature. It's a MODX7. I did this a while ago with the Motif but couldn't get the same tonality. But yeah, when I have time I can definitely do that lol.

[LarsHarner2]

Just ordered the 61 version for $850. Perhaps it was a good sign last week when I couldn't order a Liano and I am picking this over the Numa COmpact 2x. 

 

I am wondering if the speakers amplify less with batteries? This will be really helpful when I am at an outside event.

[FuzzyPants]

 

[ElmerJFudd]

3 hours ago, FuzzyPants said:

 

 

Ok, this bloke seems to be their CK guy.   

You get to hear some full/fuller draw bars in this example.  I'd definitely take the tweakable organ engine over the few organ presets we get on most stage pianos.  

No one seems excited about showing us what the drive sounds like on organ.  Although, it sounds pretty good on Rhodes.  

The Leslie sounds more like tremolo, even in stereo.  Which is unfortunate.  

 

 

HHah