Jump to content


Please note: You can easily log in to MPN using your Facebook account!

2023: CP4 instead of CP88?


Recommended Posts

Yeah I was surprised it had aftertouch, I haven't played many weighted boards with it...I think the NS3 might be the only other one I knowingly played with it, I don't remember having an issue with that one (the Numa X also had a very surprising lack of modulation you could assign to it, so it's really questionable why they even bothered). Well actually my buddy in high school had an S90ES, I remember always liking to play that thing, but I'd have had no clue what aftertouch was at that time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



5 hours ago, zephonic said:

Be that as it may, I never had a problem with the action on Motif/Montage 8, Fantom 8, or Kronos 88. Or S90ES/XS.

 

But to me aftertouch feels counter-intuitive on a weighted action. 

Those are all pretty decent weighted action keyboards.  In some designs for sure and after touch strip can make it feel or behave differently than models without it.  If my main concern was digital piano as a piano replacement, I agree, skip the after touch. 

Yamaha CP88, Casio PX-560

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I've been thinking about it and I'm going between CP4 and Kawai right now. As I said earlier, I loved how expressive the ES920 was, but there are some performance features that are sadly missing. Those are rectified by the MP7SE of course, but that's an extra 12ish pounds...I'm not the weakest dude around but there really is something to be said about performance convenience when you're your own roadie. As keyboard players we probably have at least 100 lbs of equipment to move for any gig, so anything that can reduce that is a major plus.

 

So the CP4 has these performance features at the same weight as the ES920, as well as multiple simultaneous effects and more tweakability. 

 

I know I've stated that my primary concern is the interface, but I wanted to check in again on the claims that the CP4 keybed is lighter than the CP88. Is this accurate? If so, how noticeably? And for those who do indeed prefer the CP4's sound quality, what is it that tips them in its favor? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, CHarrell said:

 

 

I know I've stated that my primary concern is the interface, but I wanted to check in again on the claims that the CP4 keybed is lighter than the CP88. Is this accurate?  

36 vs 41 lbs i think

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, D. Gauss said:

36 vs 41 lbs i think

 

Yes, the keyboards themselves are about that weight, I'm curious about the keybed action. They're both NW-GH, but I've seen multiple reports that the CP88 is heavier than the 4 (which in turn was heavier than the 5, but that was their NW-Stage).

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had a CP4 for years. I loved the action, the CFX samples, and all of the electric piano sounds. The latter actually included some physical modeling parameters like hammer attack that were pretty fun. You do a lot of menu diving, and then scroll wheel turning. If you are only dealing with a single parameter live, not that bad. If you expect to change multiple parameters on the fly, forget it. I have a YC61 now, and it’s a world easier to tweak effects.
 

Pluses:

+ pianos sounded great

+ great action, especially for Rhodes sounds

+ insanely light

 

Negatives:

- parameters were all menu diving on a tiny screen

- body is mostly plastic, hence the weight savings

- no escapement

- limited resonance modeling 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, CHarrell said:

 

Yes, the keyboards themselves are about that weight, I'm curious about the keybed action. They're both NW-GH, but I've seen multiple reports that the CP88 is heavier than the 4 (which in turn was heavier than the 5, but that was their NW-Stage).

 

     I was never impressed with the plastic construction of the CP 4-40 series, however it was not my primary concern.  The action was.  Since I do the bulk of my practice on a VPC 1,  as far as  the action of both the CP 4, and the YC88 goes, I don't find that  to be an issue since both are far lighter.  The YC 88 action does seem to be much more responsive.  With regard to  the piano patches ,  I find that when I sit down at anything, it takes a while for me to acclimatise my mind/touch, to a new  piano sound, more than with other patches.  This includes any piano VI, that I choose to use.  That being said,  I have not really spent much time on any thing other than the YC 88  action /sounds since I got it.  I like it a lot.   I played both the CP 4 and the YC 88 for a couple of days and quite frankly,  I have no regrets about  selling the CP 4.  

  • Like 1

"I  cried when I wrote this song
Sue me if I play too long"

Walter Becker Donald Fagan 1977 Deacon Blues

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks so much for those insights, you two. *sigh* I have a feeling if I'd get the CP4, I'd just wish I'd be playing the 88. I need to do some thinking, but I'm probably gonna bump up my budget...what's the phrase, you either buy cheap or you buy twice? (...or...ya know.....three times..........)

 

So now here's a fun issue. Now that I'm thinking of getting a "current" board: it's been almost two years since the last CP update (and was a while before the other one)...Yamaha is frustratingly tight-lipped about this, but I wonder with all the overlap between the CP and YC, if the CP is unofficially dead. I've been on Ideascale for years and at this point it's basically a bunch of CP owners begging Yamaha for any kind of status update, let alone an actual keyboard update. And now, with the latest update, YC has now introduced a mechanical keyboard that even the CP88 doesn't have. Fodder for a 1.6 update? Sure, but there's just no guarantee at this point...either they're doing a mega update, or they abandoned ship on the CP88 entirely. 

 

So now, if I can find one used, I'm tempted to do a @Michael Wright type solution and get a YC88, with a more promising future, along with a cheap but decent nothing-weighing 61 second board for the organ

 

I briefly owned the YC88 before its 1.2 update, which is when they really seemed to take things up a notch. Obviously, there are way more sonic possibilities than the CP, but there were some niggles I had with the interface. One of them was the effects, where you had to flip through the list of 30ish to get to the one you wanted. There's the shortcut effect-type buttons where you press EXIT and the switch to toggle through them, but those are so far apart that it was invariably a two-handed effort. This can be an issue when you're, you know, using two hands to play (the CK has this issue as well but it's somewhat mitigated by the effects types actually being listed on the panel with a knob to quickly scroll through). 

 

I've been looking through the update release notes, but did they ever address that? Or has anyone found a good workaround to that solution?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have posted a bunch of times about this. Every few months I end up writing the same thing again on a new post.

 

I love the CP4. I do hundreds of gigs on it a year.

 

I have three CP4s. I get them repaired when they need it. One day they will be irreparable. I'm riding them until the wheels fall off in the meantime.

 

The CP88 while technically a successor to the CP4, is far from being "the same thing but newer and better". It has those toggle switches. It lost many of the extra sounds on the CP4. Yes it has better rhodes and wurlis, there's no doubt about that. But it's a little....jankier overall in terms of durability.

 

But the main thing I love about the CP4 is the piano sound and how it responds to the action. I can use the same piano patch to play a jazz set as I can do play Old time Rock and Roll. If I'm on a solo gig and play it in stereo I am so happy that I find that the fact that I'm playing a digital instrument almost entirely disappears as a road block to my inspiration. The same tone that is beautiful on its own in an intimate wedding ceremony setting where I'm playing Mendelssohn will fold wonderfully into a band sound. Jazz trio, 10 piece pop band, piano string trio, whatever.

 

I also love the physical 5 band EQ to the right of the controls. I use it all the time for cutting lows or giving myself a little boost of high mids during a piano montuno.

 

The interface isn't that hard at all. You have really worked yourself up about that. Man all these boards are so easy to use compared to anything 25 years ago that I don't think you can have any complaints. It is not a board where you constantly adjust your tone as you play, that is true. Although you can do that. It takes 2 seconds to add some reverb to a patch as you are playing, or like I said to EQ something, or to kick on your layered strings.

 

So go check it out.

  • Like 6

Kawai C-60 Grand Piano : Hammond A-100 : Hammond SK2 : Yamaha CP4 : Yamaha Montage 7 : Moog Sub 37

 

My latest album: Funky organ, huge horn section

https://bobbycressey.bandcamp.com/album/cali-native

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Bobadohshe said:

I also love the physical 5 band EQ to the right of the controls. I use it all the time for cutting lows or giving myself a little boost of high mids during a piano montuno.

 

The interface isn't that hard at all. You have really worked yourself up about that. Man all these boards are so easy to use compared to anything 25 years ago that I don't think you can have any complaints. It is not a board where you constantly adjust your tone as you play, that is true. Although you can do that. It takes 2 seconds to add some reverb to a patch as you are playing, or like I said to EQ something, or to kick on your layered strings.

 

So go check it out.

 

Yes, Yamaha knew what they were doing when they carried over the 5 band EQ from the P200/250/CP300 to the CP4.  It's SO nice having that available.

 

The CP4 is probably the only board I've ever owned without ever opening the user manual.  It's so simple to use, everything being intuitive.

 

I'm keeping mine mint.  If you can find NOS in the box, buy one as a collector.   Maybe someday Yamaha will issue a CP4/LE (Limited Edition) like HP did with the HP15C.

  • Like 1

J a z z  P i a n o 8 8

--

Yamaha C7D

Montage8 | CP300 | CP4 | SK1-73 | OB6 | Seven

K8.2 | 3300 | CPSv.3

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Bobadohshe said:

I have posted a bunch of times about this. Every few months I end up writing the same thing again on a new post.

 

I love the CP4. I do hundreds of gigs on it a year.

 

I have three CP4s. I get them repaired when they need it. One day they will be irreparable. I'm riding them until the wheels fall off in the meantime.

 

The CP88 while technically a successor to the CP4, is far from being "the same thing but newer and better". It has those toggle switches. It lost many of the extra sounds on the CP4. Yes it has better rhodes and wurlis, there's no doubt about that. But it's a little....jankier overall in terms of durability.

 

But the main thing I love about the CP4 is the piano sound and how it responds to the action. I can use the same piano patch to play a jazz set as I can do play Old time Rock and Roll. If I'm on a solo gig and play it in stereo I am so happy that I find that the fact that I'm playing a digital instrument almost entirely disappears as a road block to my inspiration. The same tone that is beautiful on its own in an intimate wedding ceremony setting where I'm playing Mendelssohn will fold wonderfully into a band sound. Jazz trio, 10 piece pop band, piano string trio, whatever.

 

I also love the physical 5 band EQ to the right of the controls. I use it all the time for cutting lows or giving myself a little boost of high mids during a piano montuno.

 

The interface isn't that hard at all. You have really worked yourself up about that. Man all these boards are so easy to use compared to anything 25 years ago that I don't think you can have any complaints. It is not a board where you constantly adjust your tone as you play, that is true. Although you can do that. It takes 2 seconds to add some reverb to a patch as you are playing, or like I said to EQ something, or to kick on your layered strings.

 

So go check it out.

 

Wow, how reassuring, thank you. Man I must seem like a ping pong ball with this. 😅 With the interface, would you say it's really quick to say: you have an EP with a chorus sound but you wanna change it to a phaser. Would you press n hold the insert effect A/B button to pull up the effect, then scroll to the effect you want based on category, then alter the parameters to your taste by cursoring your way to it (ex phaser rate), then scroll wheeling it? In practice, how fast and easy is that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, I reviewed some pics from Hermeto and Jovino's concert from a few weeks ago, they were not playing the CP4: I don't know what exactly, but it's a lot beefier! Possibly a CP300? One of my old roommates got one for like $200 a little bit over 10 years ago...the thing I remember most about it, besides getting a taste of programming by dicking around with tremolo settings etc., is lugging that damn goliath up a long flight of stairs for a weekly gig at a restaurant. 😂

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a CP300.   The giveaway is the built in speakers, LCD display style, and the zone control set of faders on the left (which the P250 did not have).   There is a huge amount of real estate on top to stack a small board as the front panel controls are tightly grouped very close to the keys.

 

It is a beast at 71 lb and takes two people to move, but it's the best stage piano I've ever played when you combine the sounds, action and hand to ear satisfaction (including the CP4).  In its flight case it's almost impossible to lift - fortunately it has wheels :).

 

Regarding the CP4 ease of use, it is true that you need to menu dive to choose effects and adjust adjust them other than for the reverb (can't remember about the chorus).   But I think most people set up performances for their instruments with specific effects settings for what they need.   

  • Like 1

J a z z  P i a n o 8 8

--

Yamaha C7D

Montage8 | CP300 | CP4 | SK1-73 | OB6 | Seven

K8.2 | 3300 | CPSv.3

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, JazzPiano88 said:

Regarding the CP4 ease of use, it is true that you need to menu dive to choose effects and adjust adjust them other than for the reverb (can't remember about the chorus).   But I think most people set up performances for their instruments with specific effects settings for what they need.   

 

Would you say that's quick, though? Really, even "ergonomic" boards like the MP7SE operate this way, where you press a button to get you to the effects screen, then you choose your effect, then dial in the parameters. Granted, MP7SE does have lil rotary encoders you can use to immediately change any of the four parameters displayed on screen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, CHarrell said:

 

Would you say that's quick, though? Really, even "ergonomic" boards like the MP7SE operate this way, where you press a button to get you to the effects screen, then you choose your effect, then dial in the parameters. Granted, MP7SE does have lil rotary encoders you can use to immediately change any of the four parameters displayed on screen.

 

Probably not as quick as it could be, but if this was that big pain point, Yamaha would have done something like discontinue the CP4.   Ooops 🥸.

 

Seriously though, I think it's 5 seconds vs 10 seconds to change a parameter.    I remember setting the CP4 to phaser many times and never thinking it was a big deal.  Where they really shine is he ease of layering and splitting and saving to edits to performances.    While menu diving is a chore, at least it's intuitive.

  • Like 1

J a z z  P i a n o 8 8

--

Yamaha C7D

Montage8 | CP300 | CP4 | SK1-73 | OB6 | Seven

K8.2 | 3300 | CPSv.3

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dave Ferris said:

I used the CP300 till age 60, then got the "lighter" CP5 at 52 lbs.. I had some kind of older discontinued Yamaha soft bag that worked well for it. I would say 90% of the time I was able to handle it myself but I remember a couple of museum gigs where there were steps and no ramp or elevator and I needed help. But yeah for the time the CP300 was the best thing going until arguably the CP5 came along. And then many people still preferred the CP300. This lo-fi recording came out fairly well on the CP300.

https://soundcloud.com/dave-ferris/bouncin-w-bud

 

Slick, Dave!

 

I have a lot of nostalgia for the CP300, it was the first keyboard I played where you could really tweak the sound in any capacity...I'd make an EP/strings layer with tremolo and felt like such a badass 😂

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dave Ferris said:

I used the CP300 till age 60, then got the "lighter" CP5 at 52 lbs.. I had some kind of older discontinued Yamaha soft bag that worked well for it. I would say 90% of the time I was able to handle it myself but I remember a couple of museum gigs where there were steps and no ramp or elevator and I needed help. But yeah for the time the CP300 was the best thing going until arguably the CP5 came along. And then many people still preferred the CP300. This lo-fi recording came out fairly well on the CP300.

https://soundcloud.com/dave-ferris/bouncin-w-bud


Beautiful playing and great recording, Dave!  

While you mention lo-fi recording, and the solo piano sound may not hold up against better samples/models in later models, I would argue that the character of this recording is what still makes it hold up in a live band context with more sonic activity  than a Jazz combo with a jazz pianist soloist. Think Blues or piano pop (Billy/Elton).  C7 vs Steinway as I kind of internalize it.  
 

it’s the same reason for me why the supposedly wonderful Revenscroft sample sounds so great standalone but doesn’t play at all well live in a band. 
 

The CP300 was a sample based machine and they went to adaptive modeling subsequently, I think something was lost.  Some combination of the two seems ideal, in my mind.  I just still love how the CP300 still sits with a band.  

J a z z  P i a n o 8 8

--

Yamaha C7D

Montage8 | CP300 | CP4 | SK1-73 | OB6 | Seven

K8.2 | 3300 | CPSv.3

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love my CP4, and would never consider replacing it with the CP88. 
 

The CP4 fingers-sound generation connection is the closest I’ve ever felt to an acoustic piano. There’s something about the “SCM” modeled AP’s and EP’s that works for me, whether I’m playing Bach, Debussy or rock. 
 

I also have a YC61, so I understand the differences between these two generations of Yamaha stage keyboard. The YC61 interface makes sense to me for organ, sampler and synth sounds. I don’t need that immediacy for my weighted 88 key. The sounds I use are dialed in on my CP4, and I select them and play. Playing the YC sounds through the CP4 action doesn’t change the perception that the CP4 is a way better “piano.”
 

The CP4 interface allows for fairly deep editing of all kinds of parameters that make perfect sense in an electric and acoustic piano. I’ve set them and that’s it. As the AP’s and EP’s are modeled rather than purely sampled, there is very direct editing of parameters such as the Rhodes pickup position and the key-off sound. This isn’t possible in a board that relies on Yamaha’s AWM2 sampled sounds. 
 

The YC61 has great sounds, but as a classically-trained pianist, I find the keys-sound connection of the CP4 is on a completely different level. Even my PHD-degreed piano teacher, who is fundamentally against using anything other than a real acoustic piano, tells me that my playing through the CP4 sounds like a professionally-recorded artist sitting at a 9’ grand. Why would I change that?

  • Like 2

An acoustically decent home studio full of hand-picked gear that I love to play and record with!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, DovJ said:

The CP4 fingers-sound generation connection is the closest I’ve ever felt to an acoustic piano. There’s something about the “SCM” modeled AP’s and EP’s that works for me, whether I’m playing Bach, Debussy or rock

 

So exactly what on the pianos are modelled here? Is this their precursor to VRM? And is it really noticeable (in a positive way hopefully) compared to straight AWM2?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CHarrell said:

 

So exactly what on the pianos are modelled here? Is this their precursor to VRM? And is it really noticeable (in a positive way hopefully) compared to straight AWM2?


i don’t think Yamaha has ever published any details on the method, but the consensus is that they are modeling and generating the frequency components (spectrum) of the short time Fourier Transform of the piano.   The advantage being that all sampling artifacts associated with playing back the sound at various velocities and pitches are eliminated.   
 

Just as an aside for comparison, Yamaha went to great lengths to create a AWM2 sample set for Chick Corea’s Rhodes EP MKII on the montage.  It’s scary accurate and really fun to play.   The spectral component modeling could never achieve this because the sampling actually captures all of the voicing and dynamic adjustments that Chick has dialed in on his specific instrument and you can hear how he has colored the tone across the range of keys.  
 

On acoustic piano patches I think I slightly prefer the SCM to AWM2 on solo piano but not by a great deal.  It is noticeable and very much a matter of taste and context in which you’re playing as I sort of described in my cp300 description. 
 

Get the CP4.  :) 

  • Like 1

J a z z  P i a n o 8 8

--

Yamaha C7D

Montage8 | CP300 | CP4 | SK1-73 | OB6 | Seven

K8.2 | 3300 | CPSv.3

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, JazzPiano88 said:

don’t think Yamaha has ever published any details on the method, but the consensus is that they are modeling and generating the frequency components (spectrum) of the short time Fourier Transform of the piano.   The advantage being that all sampling artifacts associated with playing back the sound at various velocities and pitches are eliminated.

 

Ah is this part of what Blake Angelos would refer to in promo videos when he talked about "damper sensing" technology? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, JazzPiano88 said:

The CP300 was a sample based machine and they went to adaptive modeling subsequently, I think something was lost.

Only a handful of models subsequent to the CP300 used the modeling (SCM)... CP1/5/50 and CP4/40.  AFAIK, all the other post CP300 models are sample-based (though some have VRM which models the resonances). But also...

 

9 hours ago, DovJ said:

The CP4 fingers-sound generation connection is the closest I’ve ever felt to an acoustic piano. There’s something about the “SCM” modeled AP’s and EP’s that works for me

I know that the CP1/5 have the SCM APs/EPs. I know the CP4 has SCM EPs, I am not certain as about the APs... They at least lack the adjustable hammer stiffness parameter of the CP1/CP5, which was the only piano parameter that clearly required modeling. Though it's certainly possible that they still used the SCM pianos, and just removed that user tweakability. I wonder if anyone has A/B'd the CF Grand and/or S6 pianos of the CP4 vs. CP5, to see if any of those CP4 Voices actually do seem identical to the CP5 implementation of that piano, throughout its dynamic range and envelope decay.

 

(All these models do have the modeled adjustable hammer strike position parameter on the EPs, though.... that modeled parameter did not disappear in the transition from CP5 to CP4, though you still can't tweak the EPs' hammer hardness quality on the CP4, while you could on the CP5.)

 

3 hours ago, JazzPiano88 said:

Just as an aside for comparison, Yamaha went to great lengths to create a AWM2 sample set for Chick Corea’s Rhodes EP MKII on the montage.  It’s scary accurate and really fun to play.   The spectral component modeling could never achieve this because the sampling actually captures all of the voicing and dynamic adjustments that Chick has dialed in on his specific instrument

There's no inherent reason that could not be modeled. In fact, AWM2 cannot capture all the results of his adjustments, because it only captures a few representative points in the velocity spectrum of a given note, whereas in theory, with modeling, it would be theoretically possible to emulate the full range (i.e. up to the 127 MIDI velocities, without having to sample 127 velocity layers).

 

But getting back to the CP300, that sound was resurrected in the CP88 (it was added in the 1.3 update, it's the CFIII), so if that's the sound you want, you can get it in a current model.

  • Like 2

Maybe this is the best place for a shameless plug! Our now not-so-new new video at https://youtu.be/3ZRC3b4p4EI is a 40 minute adaptation of T. S. Eliot's "Prufrock" - check it out! And hopefully I'll have something new here this year. ;-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, AnotherScott said:

There's no inherent reason that could not be modeled. In fact, AWM2 cannot capture all the results of his adjustments, because it only captures a few representative points in the velocity spectrum of a given note, whereas in theory, with modeling, it would be theoretically possible to emulate the full range (i.e. up to the 127 MIDI velocities, without having to sample 127 velocity layers).

 

I was wondering the same.

 

12 minutes ago, AnotherScott said:

But getting back to the CP300, that sound was resurrected in the CP88 (it was added in the 1.3 update, it's the CFIII), so if that's the sound you want, you can get it in a current model.

 

Heh, I never realized that's where that piano was from. They brought that from the CP300 to the CP4, then, I assume? (And probably most of their contemporary boards as a trickle down)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, CHarrell said:

Heh, I never realized that's where that piano was from. They brought that from the CP300 to the CP4, then, I assume? (And probably most of their contemporary boards as a trickle down)

 

I don't know. The CP4 did have a CF piano in it, but it is not specifically identified as a CFIII as far as I've seen, so it could be a different CF. I believe Yamaha has made grands called CF, CFIII, and CFIIIS, which are not identical. (And in 2010, they introduced the CFX as well, but samples of that have presumably been clearly denoted as same.)

Maybe this is the best place for a shameless plug! Our now not-so-new new video at https://youtu.be/3ZRC3b4p4EI is a 40 minute adaptation of T. S. Eliot's "Prufrock" - check it out! And hopefully I'll have something new here this year. ;-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, AnotherScott said:

Only a handful of models subsequent to the CP300 used the modeling (SCM)... CP1/5/50 and CP4/40.  AFAIK, all the other post CP300 models are sample-based (though some have VRM which models the resonances). But also...

 

I know that the CP1/5 have the SCM APs/EPs. I know the CP4 has SCM EPs, I am not certain as about the APs... They at least lack the adjustable hammer stiffness parameter of the CP1/CP5, which was the only piano parameter that clearly required modeling. Though it's certainly possible that they still used the SCM pianos, and just removed that user tweakability. I wonder if anyone has A/B'd the CF Grand and/or S6 pianos of the CP4 vs. CP5, to see if any of those CP4 Voices actually do seem identical to the CP5 implementation of that piano, throughout its dynamic range and envelope decay.

 

(All these models do have the modeled adjustable hammer strike position parameter on the EPs, though.... that modeled parameter did not disappear in the transition from CP5 to CP4, though you still can't tweak the EPs' hammer hardness quality on the CP4, while you could on the CP5.)

 

There's no inherent reason that could not be modeled. In fact, AWM2 cannot capture all the results of his adjustments, because it only captures a few representative points in the velocity spectrum of a given note, whereas in theory, with modeling, it would be theoretically possible to emulate the full range (i.e. up to the 127 MIDI velocities, without having to sample 127 velocity layers).

 

But getting back to the CP300, that sound was resurrected in the CP88 (it was added in the 1.3 update, it's the CFIII), so if that's the sound you want, you can get it in a current model.

 

The Yamaha site shows the CP4/40 and CP5/50 as SCM+AWM2 and CP1 as SCM.   Makes it hard to tell which sounds use which method without some detective work you mention.  

 

Good point about SCM should be able to capture the Chick Corea Rhodes.

 

Looks like I need to check out the CP88 to see if I like the action and hand-to-ear connection.   Thanks!

J a z z  P i a n o 8 8

--

Yamaha C7D

Montage8 | CP300 | CP4 | SK1-73 | OB6 | Seven

K8.2 | 3300 | CPSv.3

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Athan Bilias (Yamaha) once posted the following information on the Piano World Forum (9/12/2013):

 

Spectral Component Modeling

Frankly we can understand how people are confused by the Spectral Component Modeling system because it is not one individual technology, but a system.

It's easiest to understand by breaking down the words.

Full Spectral Component Modeling (all three words) is used ONLY on the tine and reed models. Full Spectral Modeling means that those EP sounds DO NOT have velocity layers and we challenge anyone to to find them because they simply don't exist. There are continuous spectral changes across the entire range of velocities which are not based on sample switching, but windowed spectral data.

Component Modeling is used through out the CP 4 and 40 Stage series and as the words imply means that certain components of the sound are modeled. For example another part of the component modeling of the EPs is the ability to adjust the tine position. This technology is similar to the FDSP technology found in the EX5 years ago. So this is Component Modeling of the tine pickup position.

The acoustic pianos and other sounds feature component modeling where aspects of the sound are modeled. Some of these component aspects (for example Note Off or Sound Board Resonance), Roland sometimes refers to as Behavior Modeling and are available in other Yamaha product that feature Advanced Articulation. Others are more DSP oriented and unique to SCM systems, for example there are mic preamp models so you can change the character of the piano by changing which mic preamp model is applied and what the actual EQ settings for the Mic Preamp are. Again this is modeling a component of the sound, but not necessarily modeling the whole sound itself.

At this time we are not using full Spectral Component Modeling on the acoustic pianos or other sounds for technical reasons.

Finally the Virtual Circuit Modeling is pure modeling in that it is mathematical models of resistors and capacitors that are then put together in virtual circuits that emulate vintage stomp box effects. These were developed by Toshi Kunimoto ( Dr. K) who developed the world' s first true physically modeled instrument the VL1 and the Tine position algorithms in FSDP.

It's the combination of all these components that come together and make up the Spectral Component Modeling system.

"Does the CP1/5/50 handle velocity layers differently to the CP300/33?..yes."

Yes, the acoustic pianos have many, many more layers and the EPs use Spectral Component Modeling so there are no velocity splits at all, but continuously changing Spectral windows.

"Are there underlying Multi-velocity samples ?.. yes "

On the acoustic pianos, yes, on the EPs no.
 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...