|
Amorey (25), clarence (77), Ejay (37), energy101 (24), ixxi (24), JeanieA (52), Jet Black (16), kdecker (50), Marco Ribeiro (22), musicmaniac (77), NWTrojan (49), paul mourino (31), pcpiano (18), pearlsanddreams (45), pianofreak72 (37), Rogo64 (45), RPD (51), showpann (19), soulfairy (23), Tater_Salad (20) |
|
|
#1300103 - 11/05/09 05:09 PM
PHA vs. PHA II
|
Full Member
Registered: 09/24/09
Posts: 49
Loc: Slovenia
|
Hello! Does anyone know what exactly is the difference between PHA and PHA II? I mean, is it constructed in a different way, doesit have different parts, more sensors and so on?
Also, if anyone would happen to know, what's the difference between the two mentioned above and the PHA II alpha?
Thanks!
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#1300754 - 11/06/09 07:52 PM
Re: PHA vs. PHA II
[Re: Vid_w]
|
Full Member
Registered: 07/05/09
Posts: 50
Loc: Sydney, Australia
|
I don't know what the difference is between PHA and PHA II.
One difference between PHA II and PHA II Alpha is that the Alpha version doesn't have the escapement simulation. (i.e, that feeling of "throwing" the hammers) I tried both side by side and noticed a big difference, and much preferred the non-Alpha version.
Greg.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#1300901 - 11/07/09 02:12 AM
Re: PHA vs. PHA II
[Re: sullivang]
|
Full Member
Registered: 10/16/09
Posts: 22
|
The FP7 is PHA II but doesn't have that escapement feature
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#1301067 - 11/07/09 12:12 PM
Re: PHA vs. PHA II
[Re: JahjaMan]
|
Full Member
Registered: 09/24/09
Posts: 49
Loc: Slovenia
|
^Correct, the PHA/II by itself doesn't have the escapement feature...
The alpha feels much lighter than the normal PHAs, but I don't know why that is. I'm trying to find out just that with this topic.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#1301143 - 11/07/09 02:56 PM
Re: PHA vs. PHA II
[Re: Alden]
|
4000 Post Club Member
Registered: 03/02/05
Posts: 4017
Loc: San Francisco
|
Alden, your expertise is much appreciated.
Re the escapement feature, considering the lengths which manufacturers have gone to to minimize the feeling of escapement, this strikes me as being a feature without a benefit.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#1301147 - 11/07/09 03:07 PM
Re: PHA vs. PHA II
[Re: FogVilleLad]
|
Full Member
Registered: 04/16/09
Posts: 41
|
Re the escapement feature, considering the lengths which manufacturers have gone to to minimize the feeling of escapement, this strikes me as being a feature without a benefit.
I agree that the simulation of escapement adds nothing to playability of the piano, but for musicians who need to practise on a digital piano but perform on acoustic ones, the simulation will make the transition between the two types of instruments easier, as long as acoustic pianos cannot get rid of the feel of escapement.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#1301169 - 11/07/09 04:03 PM
Re: PHA vs. PHA II
[Re: Tony Lau]
|
Full Member
Registered: 07/05/09
Posts: 50
Loc: Sydney, Australia
|
I apologise for the mis-information - I had wrongly assumed from the Roland website that all PHA II (non-Alpha) actions had the escapement feature.
Greg.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#1301199 - 11/07/09 04:54 PM
Re: PHA vs. PHA II
[Re: sullivang]
|
Full Member
Registered: 09/24/09
Posts: 49
Loc: Slovenia
|
Alden: So there's no difference between the PHAs?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#1301220 - 11/07/09 05:47 PM
Re: PHA vs. PHA II
[Re: Alden]
|
500 Post Club Member
Registered: 09/06/07
Posts: 630
Loc: Hamamatsu, Japan
|
Alden, very interesting point.
Cheers, James x
_________________________
Employed by KAWAI Japan
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
46547 Members
37 Forums
95009 Topics
1304127 Posts
Max Online: 1930 @ 06/05/09 03:23 PM
|
|
|