Yamaha CK61 and CK88

[wineandkeyz]

18 hours ago, ImproKeys said:

That’s what I do. I was referring to the question wether it is a good idea to only connect a subwoofer to the CK. 

 

Ah, gotcha. Should have read back a few more posts.

[Paul Woodward]

15 hours ago, drawback said:

Please put in a request that they be dimmable too!

Two second job to sign up, worth having a platform for your own ideas to be shared....

[Paul Woodward]

I love the CK61, it has so many positives, but this line from Yamaha's blurb doesn't sit right with me:

"CK combines the sounds of the Yamaha CP Stage Piano with the organ and synth focused YC Stage Keyboard to give you a totally new sonic palette"

 

Those of us who have played CP pianos and YC organs know that the organs are a little diluted if usable, but I played the board live last night and, for the life of me, I couldnt get the pianos, electric or acoustic, to sound quite 'right'.

Maybe it was playing from a non weighted controller that contributed to the sound, but I recall the YC ep's and pianos being buttery smooth and warm through the same audio setup.

I know there are compromises when making a machine half the price but I really dont feel the pianos and eps, even the same ones from the YC, sound anywhere near as 'full'.

[Artomas]

14 hours ago, Paul Woodward said:

I love the CK61, it has so many positives, but this line from Yamaha's blurb doesn't sit right with me:

"CK combines the sounds of the Yamaha CP Stage Piano with the organ and synth focused YC Stage Keyboard to give you a totally new sonic palette"

 

Those of us who have played CP pianos and YC organs know that the organs are a little diluted if usable, but I played the board live last night and, for the life of me, I couldnt get the pianos, electric or acoustic, to sound quite 'right'.

Maybe it was playing from a non weighted controller that contributed to the sound, but I recall the YC ep's and pianos being buttery smooth and warm through the same audio setup.

I know there are compromises when making a machine half the price but I really dont feel the pianos and eps, even the same ones from the YC, sound anywhere near as 'full'.

Well... the organs on the YC are different from the CK... the B3 is different, and in the YC, some of the other organs are FM, which isn't possible in the CK, whose organs were transplanted from the Reface YC. But the part of the statement that compares the YC and CK is vague - is the word "sounds" supposed to carry over from earlier in the sentence, or is the statement saying they both share the same "organ and synth focus"? It's a weird sentence 

 

However, it seemingly clearly states that the pianos and EPs that are shared by the CP and CK should be the same (there are some unique pianos, too, but it really seems to say that the shared ones are identical). And, by the commutative property of CP and YC pianos, that means that the YC and CK shared pianos and EPs should be identical samples, as well. I have a CK88, and have tried a couple YCs, but I didn't do a detailed listening of the identically named pianos on both, back and forth, thru the same monitoring. I really should've, and if they still have the YC, and get another CK, next time I go, I will try that test.

 

Maybe the output gain stage is better on the YC, or maybe the headphones amp, if that's where you tapped the keyboards? Maybe the fx were different or set differently? Maybe the velocity curves between the 2 keyboards were different enough that the YC was triggering a louder velocity layer, which might sound fuller, with more overtones, despite you playing with similar dynamics on each board.

 

I've actually been layering the pianos, including a very overdriven mono CFX buried very low, but when I take it away, the fullness of the sound is gone. However, I was needing a piano that cuts thru, so my particular combo wouldn't suit you (I layered the overdriven mono piano with an upright and the "live" piano - not your first choices for fullness, however). If you make a layered combo for fullness, you could use chorus and lots of damper resonance on one for width and air, and on another piano try the layer effect EQ and a layer effect short reverb, for added body. Also use a little bit of global reverb. And if you want to try something weird, turn on the global delay (between the layer fx and the reverb) with the time at 2 and the depth way up at like 120. Try both cross delay, and analog, types, in case one sound less annoying to you. Then, turn down the depth until it's no longer annoying. I really wish there was more resolution at the short end of the delay times (I forget what the time knob is called... it might be another name... but I mean the knob that sets the time between delay taps). 2 is a good time for consonance, but by 6, I already getting really metallic. This isn't really an appropriate hack if you want perfect fidelity - it adds artificial fullness, and additional stereo shenanigans if you picked cross delay as the delay type.

 

Also, the CK seems to have 3 different settings that govern velocity curves, touch response, and per-layer offsets. If you compare the CK61 with a YC61, make sure that all 3 of those settings are the same (if possible) in both boards.

 

I didn't organize my thoughts on that very well, but those are my ideas on the topic. I'm curious whether the pianos and EPs are really the same, too, or else what the differences are. I'm still really happy with the CK. I think I'd layer the sounds no matter how full they start out... it's habitual, especially when it's one of the chief sound design tools available on a particular board. So, I wasn't layering them because I thought they sounded thin. For reference, this keyboard was upgrading from a Yamaha P-115. The basic CFX piano seems pretty similar between both, to me.

[Paul Woodward]

I am buying a mint, boxed YC61 fairly locally today for less than the cost of a CK61. I'm going for it given how cheap it is so I can A/B the sounds. I should be able to pass the YC on for at least the same money if I was somehow imagining it to sound better and stick with the CK, I have my old sets on a memory stick. He says the keybed is smooth and quiet so maybe he got a good batch (or is deaf, or hasnt played it much 😉 ).  

Likewise, if I realise the YC really does sound better, I shouldn't lose too much on the CK making it a cost effective upgrade back to a pro level board. 

 

Can't justify keeping both, but I would miss the wave trigger function and the extra split point (on the very odd occasion I use them). Im very cautious about the YC keybed as we didnt 'get on' last time....will update as I get 'em if anyone is interested.

[AnotherScott]

8 hours ago, Paul Woodward said:

will update as I get 'em if anyone is interested.

 

Yup, I'd be curious to see someone's direct comparison of YC61 to CK61, particularly in terms of pianos and feel.

[Paul Woodward]

1 hour ago, AnotherScott said:

 

Yup, I'd be curious to see someone's direct comparison of YC61 to CK61, particularly in terms of pianos and feel.

Then it's your lucky day sir....

[Paul Woodward]

So, that was an interesting first hour. 

I A/B'd those piano sounds that are common to both with no effects or EQ and they are close in the CFX but the YC somehow just sounds that bit better. Hard to explain but it's there. Same with the EPs, and those sounds unique to the YC really do sound fantastic. 

Goes without saying that the organs are way better in the YC. 

Overall, playing them side by side, the YC has it on sound quality, but the CK is still a great machine. It's like a meal in a high class restaurant and one at a great pizza parlour, sometimes you just want pizza... 

What I didn't like was trying to navigate the YC interface after the CK, it was unnecessarily difficult while the CK nails it. 

I also copied the Master Keyboard settings from the CK sets, but the YC isn't changing the sounds on the connected ipad...might just be some setting I'm overlooking.

Shouldnt underestimate how big the CK can sound with three sounds layered for those big synth sounds, but I have the ipad as well so it's just getting greedy there. 

There is almost double the number of sounds in the CK, but many are close to the sound of others, so you are not really getting double the choice. It would be good to get a few more in the YC in a future update, string sections and brass stand out as lacking choice. 

So, now I have a dilemma, essentially these boards are usually miles apart in cost (YC is at least double the CK) which is often cited as a reason to choose one or the other, yet I have paid the same for them, in fact the YC was cheaper. 

So, if these both cost exactly the same, which would you choose? 

 

[drawback]

If you’re controlling the YC from another keybed (ie A800), keep the YC. If you’re planning on a standalone, it’s the CK. 🙃
 

 

[Paul Woodward]

19 minutes ago, drawback said:

If you’re controlling the YC from another keybed (ie A800), keep the YC. If you’re planning on a standalone, it’s the CK. 🙃
 

 

May I ask why you think the CK is a better standalone? Perhaps my last YC was a dud, the keybed on this one feels much better. Organ swipes are easier/smoother too.

[pjd]

Hi Paul --

 

Thanks for making the comparison. I would never dare to be so bold... 🙂

 

The "closed system" nature of the CK and Stage CP/YC makes it difficult to compare EP waveforms and programming. With Montage/MODX and Montage M, we have the waveform lists and we can menu dive into the Performances.

 

Montage/MODX have the following EPs:

    Voice      Vel levels
    ---------- ----------
    EP1            3       Soft/Med/Hard
    EP2            2       Soft/Hard
    EP3            2       Soft/Hard
    EP4            5       p/mp/mf/f/ff
    Rd Soft        5       p/mp/mf/f/ff
    Rd Hard        4       mp/mf/f/ff
    Rd73           5       p/mp/mf/f/ff
    Rd78           5       p/mp/mf/f/ff
    Wr1            3       Soft/Med/Hard
    Wr2            4       p/mf/f/ff
    Wr3            5       p/mp/mf/f/ff

Montage M has:

    Voice      Vel levels
    ---------- ----------
    67Rd           9    
    73Rd Studio    8    
    74Rd Stage     10    
    78Rd Studio    10    
    Wr Warm        12    
    Wr Wide        10    

Maybe Montage M got the newer EPs added to the Stage YC/CP? Maybe CK got recycled EPs from Montage/MODX? If so, then there would be some qualitative differences.

 

Just speculatin' -- pj
 

[Paul Woodward]

28 minutes ago, pjd said:

Hi Paul --

 

Thanks for making the comparison. I would never dare to be so bold... 🙂

 

The "closed system" nature of the CK and Stage CP/YC makes it difficult to compare EP waveforms and programming. With Montage/MODX and Montage M, we have the waveform lists and we can menu dive into the Performances.

 

Montage/MODX have the following EPs:

    Voice      Vel levels
    ---------- ----------
    EP1            3       Soft/Med/Hard
    EP2            2       Soft/Hard
    EP3            2       Soft/Hard
    EP4            5       p/mp/mf/f/ff
    Rd Soft        5       p/mp/mf/f/ff
    Rd Hard        4       mp/mf/f/ff
    Rd73           5       p/mp/mf/f/ff
    Rd78           5       p/mp/mf/f/ff
    Wr1            3       Soft/Med/Hard
    Wr2            4       p/mf/f/ff
    Wr3            5       p/mp/mf/f/ff

Montage M has:

    Voice      Vel levels
    ---------- ----------
    67Rd           9    
    73Rd Studio    8    
    74Rd Stage     10    
    78Rd Studio    10    
    Wr Warm        12    
    Wr Wide        10    

Maybe Montage M got the newer EPs added to the Stage YC/CP? Maybe CK got recycled EPs from Montage/MODX? If so, then there would be some qualitative differences.

 

Just speculatin' -- pj
 

Ironically, they say you get what you pay for,  but in my case, the YC was the cheaper board so that argument is out of the window…

[drawback]

38 minutes ago, Paul Woodward said:

May I ask why you think the CK is a better standalone? Perhaps my last YC was a dud, the keybed on this one feels much better. Organ swipes are easier/smoother too.

Perhaps my YC was a dud too, but I couldn’t bear playing on those keys. I haven’t seen any since to compare. The YC obviously has the better sound set (more choice of pianos, better organ), but I’m satisfied with what I’ve been able to design on the CK for AP & EP, and organ is covered by B-3X. Come to think, I’d probably use B-3X with the YC, so for me, the CK is my clear choice. If you believe the YC keybed is workable, that’s great. I couldn’t do it without a different keybed. 

[Paul Woodward]

1 hour ago, drawback said:

Perhaps my YC was a dud too, but I couldn’t bear playing on those keys. I haven’t seen any since to compare. The YC obviously has the better sound set (more choice of pianos, better organ), but I’m satisfied with what I’ve been able to design on the CK for AP & EP, and organ is covered by B-3X. Come to think, I’d probably use B-3X with the YC, so for me, the CK is my clear choice. If you believe the YC keybed is workable, that’s great. I couldn’t do it without a different keybed. 

Its much better than I remember and at the end of the day, its my top board if I had a quality gig with the Korg Grandstage. I have decided to keep the YC. I can live without the extras the CK offers in favour of the sounds on the YC...

[AnotherScott]

5 hours ago, Paul Woodward said:

I A/B'd those piano sounds that are common to both with no effects or EQ and they are close in the CFX but the YC somehow just sounds that bit better. Hard to explain but it's there. Same with the EPs, and those sounds unique to the YC really do sound fantastic. 

 

Do you have a sense as to how different (or not) the actions feel, apart from the difference in shape (waterfall vs. non)?

 

Especially if there are differences beyond the shape, it's possible that altering the velocity curve settings of the CK (either the simple global ones, or the more finely tuned ones that are specific to each Live Set) might get the two boards to sound more similar. Often when two boards that are supposed to have the same sounds on't sound the same, it can be because one action is hitting higher velocity samples more easily, giving that sound a bit more punch/presence.

 

 

3 hours ago, pjd said:

Montage/MODX have the following EPs:

    Voice      Vel levels
    ---------- ----------
    EP1            3       Soft/Med/Hard
    EP2            2       Soft/Hard
    EP3            2       Soft/Hard
    EP4            5       p/mp/mf/f/ff
    Rd Soft        5       p/mp/mf/f/ff
    Rd Hard        4       mp/mf/f/ff
    Rd73           5       p/mp/mf/f/ff
    Rd78           5       p/mp/mf/f/ff
    Wr1            3       Soft/Med/Hard
    Wr2            4       p/mf/f/ff
    Wr3            5       p/mp/mf/f/ff

Montage M has:

    Voice      Vel levels
    ---------- ----------
    67Rd           9    
    73Rd Studio    8    
    74Rd Stage     10    
    78Rd Studio    10    
    Wr Warm        12    
    Wr Wide        10    

Maybe Montage M got the newer EPs added to the Stage YC/CP? Maybe CK got recycled EPs from Montage/MODX?

 

Assuming there tends to be some consistency to their nomenclature, we might assume where sounds are more or less likely to be identical.

 

YC EPs:

 

78Rd - same-named EP is also in CK

75Rd Funky

73Rd

67Rd Dark

67Rd Bright

73Rd Studio - same-named EP is also in CK and Montage M

74Rd Stage - same-named EP is also in Montage M

Wr Warm - same-named EP is also in CK and Montage M

Wr Bright - same-named EP is also in CK

Wr Wide - same-named EP is also in Montage M

 

CK has no additional EPs not listed there.

 

Montage M has two EPs not identically named to any YC (or CK) EP: 67Rd and 78Rd Studio.

[Artomas]

For me, I wanted piano keys. I probably could've gotten a display model YC73 for $23-2400. I got a much more recently displayed CK88 for $1200. If I could've found a used YC73, in great shape, for $1200... I probably would've bought that. I really like the UI and fx paradigm on the CK, though, much more than on the YC. I wish it had more variety of weirder fx. I really liked the modeled and FM organs on the YC better than the CK's samples. I really like having a couple of knobs for the filter, and a quick and easy way of deciding which layers get controlled by those knobs at that moment. I don't remember if the YC had an easy filter section like that (the YC would've cost me so much more, so I didn't get too deep with it. Plus, the user interface on the YC wasn't quite as intuitive as the CK, so I had to focus on my immediate goals more than free exploration).

 

So... I wanted piano keys and portability, and the YC/CP88 weighed too much for my preference... so it was between CK88 and YC73, which weigh about the same, and have very similar keys... That's another thing - I like this keybed for what it is, but I felt like $23/2400 (it was marked at $2599!) is a lot of money for them to ask for a keyboard with that keybed. But if they were the same price... that's a tough one. For me, with my kinda unusual needs, it would depend on how easy it is to work with fx and filter on the YC. If that checked out fine, then I'd take the YC for the slightly better sound quality (apparently) and better build quality. Since the YC would've cost double what I paid for the CK, my choice was easy, and for my purpose, it's been great.

 

Well, you asked which we'd choose. It's not necessarily a slam dunk.

[Paul Woodward]

5 hours ago, AnotherScott said:

 

Do you have a sense as to how different (or not) the actions feel, apart from the difference in shape (waterfall vs. non)?

 

Especially if there are differences beyond the shape, it's possible that altering the velocity curve settings of the CK (either the simple global ones, or the more finely tuned ones that are specific to each Live Set) might get the two boards to sound more similar. Often when two boards that are supposed to have the same sounds on't sound the same, it can be because one action is hitting higher velocity samples more easily, giving that sound a bit more punch/presence.

 

 

 

Assuming there tends to be some consistency to their nomenclature, we might assume where sounds are more or less likely to be identical.

 

YC EPs:

 

78Rd - same-named EP is also in CK

75Rd Funky

73Rd

67Rd Dark

67Rd Bright

73Rd Studio - same-named EP is also in CK and Montage M

74Rd Stage - same-named EP is also in Montage M

Wr Warm - same-named EP is also in CK and Montage M

Wr Bright - same-named EP is also in CK

Wr Wide - same-named EP is also in Montage M

 

CK has no additional EPs not listed there.

 

Montage M has two EPs not identically named to any YC (or CK) EP: 67Rd and 78Rd Studio.

I set both boards to the same touch, flattened EQ, turned off all effects and the CK plays, dare I say it, like a VR-09; little nuance there and the sounds reach full volume with less force making them sound a bit 'plasticky' . Perhaps it's a little string resonance or better amps, but if you played them both blindfolded, you would pick the YC. This YC board is quiet and smooth and much more responsive than the CK. I can only assume the last one I had was a dud. 

I don't think Yamaha used the best pianos to transfer over even if the CFX is their main sound. 

Also, on a lazy note, Soundmondo has hundreds of live sets, CK has few, but it is still early in its life. 

[Paul Woodward]

5 hours ago, Artomas said:

Well, you asked which we'd choose. It's not necessarily a slam dunk.

Indeed I did, and thanks for your input. These were always top boards above a piano for me so the 61 size was always the only choice.

Again though, cost seems a major factor in your decision. To put it in context, a new CK61 can be had in the UK for £750 if you shop around. 

A brand new condition, boxed YC still on original firmware cost me £700 yesterday.

I guess I was asking, if both of those were available to you at the same price point, would the CK be the better board of the two? I think we can discount portability as there is just over a kg difference on the 61.

 

[Paul Woodward]

For a balanced view, here are my thoughts on the two as a live performance instrument

Features the CK has over YC:

More sounds (but not all are great) 

Wave trigger function

Clear simple interface, easier to see on stage

Neat on screen displays when editing

Two split points/three zones

Stack any three sounds

Direct access to volume sliders (BUT, these are easy to move by accident and when transporting) 

Built in speakers

Bluetooth audio in

Lightweight with battery power

Light, synth style keybed (subjective)

Proper pitch and mod wheels

Half the price of a Y

 

Areas where the YC has better features:

Higher quality sounds in nearly all sections

Seamless sound transitions

Better organ selection and simulation. Full stop. 

FM engine

Waterfall keybed with better response (also subjective) 

Proper drawbars with leds

Better rotary sims and editable

More effects? 

Rotary knobs with led indicators

Better EQ

Lots of little info screens. 

Updates to firmware with additional sounds

Better/metal/roadworthy construction (but a tad heavier)

Little bit smaller

More robust connectors/sockets

Proper power cable

 

Did I miss anything?

For the record, I have decided to keep the YC and sell the CK on... 

[Paul Woodward]

Also just thinking about the roadmap for the YC. You might think each firmware would offer less as they struggle for ways to improve each iteration, but 1.3 was very generous in terms of content and improvements. If they added even more sounds in to 1.4 it would be catching up with the CK. They have added 45 sounds since launch with 40 of those in the last firmware!

Still hoping that the full clav they sampled makes it into the YC...

 

Version 1.10 released Jan 2021

Improved operability

Added 2 acoustic pianos, 2 electric pianos and 8 live sets

 

Version 1.20 released Feb 2022

New rotary effect, new FM organ types and parameters, new settings including EQ’s and touch sensitivity

Added 1 organ sound and 16 new live sets

 

Version 1.30 released April 2023

New parameters for rotary speed, pan, vibrato/chorus effects, and simultaneous changing of parameters

Added 4 pianos, 1 ep, 34 other sounds (40 total) and 32 new live sets

 

At this rate, the next one could be expected May/June 2024....I wonder if it will even be in their current lineup by then 😉 

[Artomas]

2 hours ago, Paul Woodward said:

Indeed I did, and thanks for your input. These were always top boards above a piano for me so the 61 size was always the only choice.

Again though, cost seems a major factor in your decision. To put it in context, a new CK61 can be had in the UK for £750 if you shop around. 

A brand new condition, boxed YC still on original firmware cost me £700 yesterday.

I guess I was asking, if both of those were available to you at the same price point, would the CK be the better board of the two? I think we can discount portability as there is just over a kg difference on the 61.

 

Well, I mean, if I'd found a YC for half price, I'd probably get that too. I didn't like the user interface, but even that aspect looked classier on the YC... just more annoying to use. But other than the user interface, the YC is "better" - that's why it would've cost me literally double the price. The deal you got would be highly unlikely around here - someone just sold a K2661 for like $200, on Craigslist, and then the buyer had it back up for $1500 the next day, then dropped it to $850, and then it disappeared. Weird situation. But something newish like a YC will only very rarely be advertised much below market value here.

 

As far as what I'd actually do... I wouldn't buy either 61-key. I didn't like the keys. AFAICT, the waterfall keys may as well have been the same mechanism as the CK61 keys, just with a different shaped front. For my playing, it required too much force to overcome their inertia, compared to the resistance during the remainder of the key travel, so I had difficulty playing soft notes while getting the notes to reliably trigger. Then again, I've had people tell me the YC73 and CK88 had totally different types of keys (in addition to the grading difference) so IDK. They said the YC73 had individual keys, and the CK88's were ganged live-hinge keys. I have a feeling they're both the same mechanism.

 

If the YC61 keyboard is easier for you to play, and it has sounds you prefer, and is built better, and you even prefer the UI, and it was cheaper for you? Then yeah, keep that one. I'm not sure how helpful all this will be for others, because the smokin' deal was part of this equation.

[Paul Woodward]

20 minutes ago, Artomas said:

As far as what I'd actually do... I wouldn't buy either 61-key. I didn't like the keys. AFAICT, the waterfall keys may as well have been the same mechanism as the CK61 keys, just with a different shaped front. For my playing, it required too much force to overcome their inertia, compared to the resistance during the remainder of the key travel, so I had difficulty playing soft notes while getting the notes to reliably trigger. Then again, I've had people tell me the YC73 and CK88 had totally different types of keys (in addition to the grading difference) so IDK. They said the YC73 had individual keys, and the CK88's were ganged live-hinge keys. I have a feeling they're both the same mechanism.

 

If the YC61 keyboard is easier for you to play, and it has sounds you prefer, and is built better, and you even prefer the UI, and it was cheaper for you? Then yeah, keep that one. I'm not sure how helpful all this will be for others, because the smokin' deal was part of this equation.

I just seem to have a knack of falling on good deals. A £100 JDXi, almost free A800 and now this...a fair few years ago I bought a CP4 for a bargain £800. The guy drove 80 miles to deliver it and said, you might as well have the stand and some monitors as well. I expected some cheap, nasty stuff but he brought the K&M Omega and some Fostex huge monitors. Maybe its the irish in me....

 

As for the keybed action, I had exactly the same 'resistance' on my YC so I sold it on. Having played the CK and now this YC, the keybed is pleasant and responsive so no idea if I am remembering it that way or I had a dud. Either way, an A/B of the two today and I prefer the (this) YC. They are ganged live hinges, though you might be surprised how many 'pro' boards use them....

[Adan]

Battery power was key to my choice of the CK.  I think it's the best battery powered all purpose keyboard available today.  The VR09 maybe has better organ, but not necessarily.  The CK outfeatures the VR by a wide margin.  I think the VR is still a nice choice in this (small) category, it has held up very well over time.

 

Putting aside the battery aspect, if I could get a YC for the same price as the CK would I do it? Sure.  The YC probably has more processing power and so should sound better, and other reasons . . .

 

If I owned a CK and could get the YC at the same price, then the question is really what the difference between the outlay for the YC minus the amount I could expect to get for the CK on the used market.  That's not a zero-sum equation.  In American dollars I'd expect to be paying about $300 for the upgrade when all is said and done. Given that I'd be using B3X for organ with either board, it's not a no-brainer.

[Paul Woodward]

20 hours ago, pjd said:

Hi Paul --

 

Thanks for making the comparison. I would never dare to be so bold... 🙂

 

The "closed system" nature of the CK and Stage CP/YC makes it difficult to compare EP waveforms and programming. With Montage/MODX and Montage M, we have the waveform lists and we can menu dive into the Performances.

 

Montage/MODX have the following EPs:

    Voice      Vel levels
    ---------- ----------
    EP1            3       Soft/Med/Hard
    EP2            2       Soft/Hard
    EP3            2       Soft/Hard
    EP4            5       p/mp/mf/f/ff
    Rd Soft        5       p/mp/mf/f/ff
    Rd Hard        4       mp/mf/f/ff
    Rd73           5       p/mp/mf/f/ff
    Rd78           5       p/mp/mf/f/ff
    Wr1            3       Soft/Med/Hard
    Wr2            4       p/mf/f/ff
    Wr3            5       p/mp/mf/f/ff

Montage M has:

    Voice      Vel levels
    ---------- ----------
    67Rd           9    
    73Rd Studio    8    
    74Rd Stage     10    
    78Rd Studio    10    
    Wr Warm        12    
    Wr Wide        10    

Maybe Montage M got the newer EPs added to the Stage YC/CP? Maybe CK got recycled EPs from Montage/MODX? If so, then there would be some qualitative differences.

 

Just speculatin' -- pj
 

Out of curiosity, does the new Montage have a decent Clav, or at least more than two settings for it? Yamaha were quite proud when announcing they had fully sampled a Clavinet earlier this year, I’m wondering where it will show up first.

[AnotherScott]

12 hours ago, Paul Woodward said:

I set both boards to the same touch, flattened EQ, turned off all effects and the CK plays, dare I say it, like a VR-09; little nuance there and the sounds reach full volume with less force making them sound a bit 'plasticky' .

 

Ah! I was thinking maybe it wasn't getting to the higher velocities easily enough, but it sounds more like the opposite problem! Though again, a velocity adjustment might tame that. 

 

12 hours ago, Paul Woodward said:

Perhaps it's a little string resonance or better amps, but if you played them both blindfolded, you would pick the YC.

 

If you play them both with the power off, do they feel pretty much the same (waterfall shape aside), or do they feel different even then?

 

8 hours ago, Adan said:

The VR09 maybe has better organ, but not necessarily.  The CK outfeatures the VR by a wide margin.  I think the VR is still a nice choice in this (small) category, it has held up very well over time.

 

I haven't played the VR09 in a long time, but I do remember liking it more... and if it's pretty much the same as the organ in the Fantom-0, then yeah, I'd take it over the one in the CK. And it's more tweakable, too. So I'd say the VR has the organ and VA synth advantages (especially with the outboard editor), and some sounds might be better (I remember really liking the VR's harmonica for example). But the CK clearly wins in other areas, including interface, overall flexibility, MIDI functionality, and also some sounds (much better Rhodes, for example).

 

As for Paul's question about YC vs CK in general... The YC is certainly a sonically better board for pianos/EPs/organ at least, whether due to sound quality, variety, tweakability, or some combination of the above. And sure, it's nice to have the solid build and internal power supply, and I wish they'd bring to the CK the panning function they finally brought to the YC. But in the end, personally, I'd take the CK. It's an easier, more direct, more fun board to operate. For me, at least in this case, interface trumps sound quality. I like the lower weight, too.

[Paul Woodward]

1 hour ago, AnotherScott said:

If you play them both with the power off, do they feel pretty much the same (waterfall shape aside), or do they feel different even then?

 

The YC is certainly a sonically better board for pianos/EPs/organ at least, whether due to sound quality, variety, tweakability, or some combination of the above. And sure, it's nice to have the solid build and internal power supply, and I wish they'd bring to the CK the panning function they finally brought to the YC. But in the end, personally, I'd take the CK. It's an easier, more direct, more fun board to operate. For me, at least in this case, interface trumps sound quality. I like the lower weight, too.

For me a kilo makes no real difference and sonically the YC is better as is build quality, and I hate wall warts.

To answer your question, the YC keybed feels less ‘cheap’ and can support more nuanced play…and I would never have said that with the last one I owned. I A/B’d the CK and A800 keybed and they felt more similar, albeit I prefer the Roland. Glides and smears (or whatever you call them) are much easier on the YC, I actually clipped the side of a key on the CK performing the same move with my palm.

Details aside I replicated certain live sets and played both instruments for an hour, then I found I was having more fun on the YC, and enjoying it better. I turned off the CK and played the YC for another hour enjoying the sounds, nuances and the much better organ/rotary.

I put the CK in the case and today, the sliders had moved, reminded me why I prefer rotary dials. Haven’t played the CK since so that speaks volumes to me. CK is now up for sale, would happily keep it if I needed two ‘sounding’ boards, but perhaps I wouldn’t have two so similar sonically. 
Also, let’s be honest here, if the YC was twice the price of the CK, it wouldn’t have got a look in 😉

[Mighty Motif Max]

Have you thought about midi’ing the YC to the CK and comparing the pianos/ep’s that way? That would take the CK’s keybed out of the equation.

[Fleer]

9 hours ago, AnotherScott said:

 

Ah! I was thinking maybe it wasn't getting to the higher velocities easily enough, but it sounds more like the opposite problem! Though again, a velocity adjustment might tame that. 

 

 

If you play them both with the power off, do they feel pretty much the same (waterfall shape aside), or do they feel different even then?

 

 

I haven't played the VR09 in a long time, but I do remember liking it more... and if it's pretty much the same as the organ in the Fantom-0, then yeah, I'd take it over the one in the CK. And it's more tweakable, too. So I'd say the VR has the organ and VA synth advantages (especially with the outboard editor), and some sounds might be better (I remember really liking the VR's harmonica for example). But the CK clearly wins in other areas, including interface, overall flexibility, MIDI functionality, and also some sounds (much better Rhodes, for example).

 

As for Paul's question about YC vs CK in general... The YC is certainly a sonically better board for pianos/EPs/organ at least, whether due to sound quality, variety, tweakability, or some combination of the above. And sure, it's nice to have the solid build and internal power supply, and I wish they'd bring to the CK the panning function they finally brought to the YC. But in the end, personally, I'd take the CK. It's an easier, more direct, more fun board to operate. For me, at least in this case, interface trumps sound quality. I like the lower weight, too.

Same here. I tried the YC61. Didn’t like the keys. And they got worse over time. Liked the organ, though, but the rest couldn’t convince me. Price was good at launch, even new, not that much more than a CK61 now. Then I got the CK. Wonderful sound and controls, plus speakers, plus battery power. Bye bye YC it was.  

[Paul Woodward]

Selling a CK61 has flagged up just what an enigma it is... 

'is it a home keyboard?' - no, it's a professional stage piano, just a cheaper version of the YC61

'why you selling?' - I got the YC 

'what's the difference?' - err, the sample range and quality maybe? 

'what does it lose from the YC?' - err, not a lot other than the range of pianos, and the organ sounds. 

'so it has no organs?' - well, yes but not modelled..... Long pause... 

'so the YC has more features?' - well, the CK has most of the pro features of the YC plus more sounds, speakers, Bluetooth, battery power, more split points...long pause again. 

'sounds like the CK is better, why is it cheaper than the YC? - err, it's plastic... 

 

And have they bought it? No. 

I do prefer the YC, but it's hard explaining build quality, preamps,waterfall keys and nuanced playing to someone thinking it's an expensive home keyboard. Well, it is priced as such. 

Hell, I almost convinced myself to keep it at one point. 

 

[Gorbo]

Hey Paul Woodward,

 

If you don't mind and you still have both boards, could you measure the width of an individual key, the width of an octave, or the width from one end of the keybed to the other, and compare between the two boards?

 

I've had the CK61 but returned it because I felt the keys were quite a bit narrower than other synth/piano keybeds I'm used to... Since then I've read that maybe Yamaha has always used slightly narrow keys and that's what I was feeling. I know the YC61 has a different keybed with the waterfall keys, but wondering if it has the same somewhat narrow key/octave width or if the keys are wider than the CK61.

 

Thanks!