I'm an adult beginner with a mid-level clavinova (graded hammer 3 action). My only limited music background is as an intermediate level classical guitar player. I have been playing a little over a year and (thanks to advice form this forum) getting my first teacher next wk.

My initial plan was to continue to improve over the next few years to an intermediate level on the clavinova. At that point, I would get a "real" acoustic piano.

Several of my friends who are relatively accomplished pianists (conservatory education, etc) insist that I should move to an acoustic NOW. They state that the feel and action cannot be replicated by even a top notch digital. They feel that even a "starter-level" acoustic would be better for me in the long run.

Your thoughts?
Can one progress in classical piano to a "reasonable" intermediate level while only playing on a good digital? (My piano goals are modest and realistic)

Fortunately, finances do allow for a good quality used piano. However, if a digital piano is adequate, I would rather not spend the funds.

Thanks in advance for everyone's input. My previous posts have been met with very thoughtful and helpful advice. I really value the opinions on this forum.

I would have to say that today in 2010 most people will never buy an acoustic piano.


At some point if your goal is to play concerts on a big concert grand piano then you will need to practice on a big concert grand piano. But even then, you would want a digital piano also for off-hours practice with headphones so as not to disturb others.

At this concert-level of play even an upright acoustic piano is not the same as large grand. It would take years to reach this level

Also the GH3 action in your digital is actually better than what's inside many older used upright piano. In some cases much better.

I can only give you my experience. I consider myself an intermediate player. I decided to get more serious this winter and just began lessons.

About 2 months ago, I bought my first real piano. My main keyboard has been a Roland FP-7 and I used a Yamaha PF-500 before that.

I couldn't be happier with my piano. There is no comparison to my keyboards. The sound, the richness, the feeling is just incomparable to my digital pianos. I did buy a good piano (used, though as I didn't want to buy lesser brand for the same amount of money I could buy a nice used piano for). I think this piano will be with me for the rest of my life and I'm relatively young, in my 30's (I will probably rebuild it one day--if I can play that much, but it doesn't need rebuilding now and it was built in the late 60's).

Although I still play the digitals for practice and to take a break from the richness and power of the real piano sound, I would never want to give up my real piano. The acoustic piano lets me hear how pieces "should" sound and I expect it will only get better as I continue my lessons.

My vote is for getting the real thing if your so inclined. It's not that you can't learn on a digital because I've played mine for years, but there is definitely an added dimension that an acoustic piano adds. By the way, my goal is also to learn classical which is another reason that I chose to finally get an acoustic.

Just my point of view.

It has nothing to do with your prowess as a pianist ! One word: SOUND

NO digital piano comes close to an acoustic. A digital piano is a keyboard, a computer and a sound system all wrapped up in a box resembling a piano.

I trained my ear for 7 years as a salesman in a stereo store; I was responsible for evaluating and buying the systems we would sell. I went to all the shows and listened to systems ranging from 100 to 50,000$. None ever truly reproduced the warmth and harmonic richness of live instruments.

Can You learn to play to a high level on a digital? yes, totally.

Will You ever relish in beautiful vibrations and be moved by its sound as You would with an acoustic ? NEVER !

Cheers

If your initial plan always envisioned buying a real piano (it sounds like that in your starting post) and you can afford it right now, you should go and get one. An acoustic instrument will not drop in value as much as digitals do and the acoustic technology is very mature, so buying an acoustic now is not at a disadvantage to buying it later (much different with digitals). You have to keep in mind though, that an acoustic piano has consequential costs for regular tuning.

I agree to the former posts that you should get the acoustic not for the sake of learning (you can do that on your CLP) but for the sake of sound and psychology (it is just more fun to play the "real thing" - for some people at least).

p.s.: I find the discussion digital vs. acoustic always a bit tiring - yes a digital as a substitute for an acoustic is a compromise, but on the other hand keyboards and DPs are instruments in their own right and have specific use cases where an acoustic piano just wouldn't work.

I most definitely agree with this statement.

Anyways, when you can play better than this guy you can think about buying a new piano (joking hehe):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=piq1KaEprYE

He plays on a Clavinova CLP-340, he used to have a bunch more videos up with different Nocturnes but accidentally deleted most of them he says. I'm not sure which model you have, but I doubt if you need to replace it, it's likely better than any acoustic that you could get *in a similar price range*. Be happy with it!

Some people are just acoustic purists and will try and get you to buy any old acoustic (regardless of whether it's actually any good or not) simply because it's "real" and the digital is "not real". Just don't be swayed into downgrading from what you already have. When trying out instruments don't judge them on "real" or "not real", judge them on the way they sound and how the keys feel.



This is the kind of statement that I really have to call bull-poopy on, no offense intended to you or your friends. It's just a very close-minded view and in most cases a starter-level acoustic would be inferior to a Clavinova or similar quality digital piano. Their teachers probably ingrained the same idea into their heads (perhaps when digitals were actually inferior to a starter-level acoustic) and it just stuck, so it could be that they're just passing the same outdated information on to other people now.

Edit:
Just another example (skip to about 1:00 minute into the video):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-FgYwY5F5P4

On a Yamaha P-155 that time, the action on it is just GH (not quite as good as your GH3, in theory) and it doesn't seem to hold him back any. I have a P-155 and I play like crud on it, but going by what I've seen of some other people (like the two links I shared), it's obviously my own lack of skill holding me back, not my lack of an acoustic.

In the end though, I love a good grand piano (or even a nice upright), just as much as the next guy. I just don't like seeing people saying that you need to buy an acoustic because your digital is "holding you back" etc., especially when they think that any acoustic regardless of how poor it is would be an improvement over any digital. As long as you have a good digital and not just a couple-hundred dollar keyboard then such claims are a little unfounded IMO. If you have tried both options out and you personally feel the digital just isn't "doing it for you" then yes, you should buy an acoustic, just don't do it only because someone told you to.

The only thing I think you'll really be missing out on by having a digital over an acoustic in this price range is the vibrations. On an acoustic you feel vibrations in your hands and feet when you play, it's a very nice feeling. It feels powerful and alive. I personally do miss this feeling when playing on my digital.

A top notch digital today such as the Yamaha Avant-Grand can replicate the feel and action of an acoustic because it uses the actual acoustic grand action. It even emulates the vibrating feel created by the sound that transmits to the keyboard and pedals. So your friends are wrong there.

I won't get into a debate about how their sound compare to acoustic sounds because opinions vary. I personally found their sound very good. These new DPs are pretty expensive anyway, so I'm not trying to recommend them to you or anything. I just want chime in to say that your friends are wrong here. Top notch DPs like these ARE viable alternative to acoustics finally, in my opinion. Not just feel/action wise, but sound wise and even price wise.

Personally, I think you should be able to stick with your Clavinova for a while longer before you'd have to switch. Get an acoustic now only because you want to, not because your friends say so. If they're already accomplished pianists, they're old school and are already biased. But I think they're wrong in saying that ANY acoustic (including cheap uprights) would be better than even the best digital. If I were you and already have a Clavinova DP, I would never get an acoustic upright. The next step has to be an acoustic grand at least. Or wait a few more years and there will be better DPs at better prices that will sound and feel even more realistic than today.

When you play an instrument, then you use the tactile feedback to help you play the instrument. It's like when you hold something heavy or light, or stir a thick or very liquid substance with a spoon. The sensations in your hand guide what you do. A digital that merely replicates a vibration so that it feels like a real piano doesn't guide you in any real way.

If an accomplished pianist likes acoustics, then it is not because of some "school" of memorized ideas, but because of experience with what a piano can do.

I have a digital. It has an impressive sound. But it does not behave like a real piano. I cannot hear the sound spread out along the soundboard, because there is no soundboard. I cannot feel the hammers flying toward the strings, because there are no hammers. There is nothing to play with. I cannot hear sympathetic vibrations from other strings, because there are no strings. I can get louds, softs, and sustain. I want to do trills but the digital doesn't sound unless I'm almost keybedding, and again, there is no "play" of a hammer and escapement, because there is no hammer and escapement. If I sound frustrated it is because I am. This thing is hampering me at every turn. The worse is that I can feel my senses getting dull. There is so little that I can actually do with the music. I want to learn to play the piano, and all I am managing to do is play notes and do a few things with them.

I disagree. The vibration of the Avant-Grand is not a "mere replication". It is based on the sound produced as you play. If you turn the volume to "off" while playing, but leave the Tactile Response System option ON, you don't hear the actual sound anymore (due to volume off), but you still feel and hear a low volume buzzy sound of what you play, created by the transducers that generates the vibration. So it's not any random or "mere" vibration replication here. The vibration is based on the actual sound generated, fed into the transducers (which is another form of speakers, but with more powerful amps), and transmitted to your keyboard and pedals to your hands and feet.

Based on this method of replication, higher notes will vibrate less, while booming lower notes will vibrate more, just like the real thing. And since the input to the vibration is based on the sound created by how you play, if you play a low key note very soft, you won't feel much vibration. But if you play a low key very loud, you'll feel a lot more vibration created by the booming sound. So you will feel your "spoon" heavy or light, and you will feel your "liquid" thick or thin just fine, to use your analogy.

The Avant-Grand not only has 2 transducers connected to the keyboard that transmit this vibration to the keyboard, it also has 2 additional transducers behind the music stand that simulate the effect of the soundboard resonance as well. These later transducers for the soundboard resonance are not there for the "feel" like the earlier 2 transducers, however. They're there to replicate how the soundboard resonance alters the spatial acoustic of the sound at the sweet spot near the player's ears.

So you can hardly say that it's a "mere" replication. A lot of engineering went into this to make sure the effect is as authentic as possible.


An accomplished pianist likes acoustics because that's all they know, acoustics, and they don't know digitals well enough. So I don't have any problem if they stick to their advice on acoustics. But I have a problem when they are not experts on digitals, yet give people inaccurate advice about digitals based on generalizations that are outdated because they haven't kept up with the rapid pace of how digital piano technology has been advancing.


On the Avant-Grand N3, the sound is sampled in 4 locations spread out across the sound board (left front, middle front, right front, and end) of a Yamaha CFIIIS, then speakers are strategically laid out horizontally along the area of the "virtual" soundboard at the same spots where the mics were placed for the sampling. So you WILL hear the sound spread out along the "virtual" soundboard because the 4 channels of speakers are located at the proper places to recreate this "spread".


Oh, there are hammers in the Avant-Grand alright, all 88 of them, weighted carefully to simulate the actual varying weights of the 88 different hammers due to different hammer sizes. There are no strings to hit and be stopped, but Yamaha designed "shank stoppers" in great details to stop the hammer shanks at the appropriate location to simulate hitting the string. So you will feel the hammers flying toward and stopped by the shank stoppers, which act as the virtual strings.


Many newer DPs, not just the Avant-Grand, model sympathetic resonance of the entire string bed pretty well when the sustain pedal is pressed. Maybe your DP is old technology or too cheap to have had sympathetic resonance modelled in.

And speaking of sustain pedal, many newer DPs support half pedaling, and you will hear different sympathetic resonance played out depending on how much the pedal is depressed. The Avant-Grand specifically is even designed such that pedal pressure gradient of the sustain pedal is same as how the resistance of an acoustic sustain pedal feels at different points of travel, from top to bottom.


The Avant-Grand, again, using real authentic grand action, has double escapement and the whole nine yards. So you can do trills just fine on it without having to resort to key bedding.

Beside having double escapement, the keys use gray-shutter optical sensors that can represent the velocity of the keys' movements up to 1024 increments, not just the 128 increments allowed by MIDI. I'm not even sure if anybody's motor skill is fine enough to hit a note at more than 128 different forces each time. But in case somebody can and still complains, well, try to create 1028 different key velocities with your fingers next.

On another note, the upright version of the Avant-Grand, the N2, has the same acoustic grand action as its cousin, the N3 grand. You can't even find acoustic grand action on most acoustic uprights today, except for only a few high end uprights with newly designed special escapement mechanism.

And because they use real grand acoustic action, they will need to be regulated once in a while just like an acoustic does. They just don't need to be tuned and voiced.


You ought to go try out the Avant-Grand then. Like I said, opinions vary on how it sounds against acoustics, but I've never heard of anybody, even acoustic enthusiasts, debate that its keyboard action is inferior to any other acoustic grand action.

I'd like an accoustic grand, but sadly space, cost and my practice hours mean that won't happen any time soon. I don't feel like my digital limits me in any way though, because at the end of the day I'm not planning on playing concerts using an accoustic. I'm playing for myself and family/friends on my digital. We used to have an upright, but I would rather stick with my digital than get another upright at the moment. A grand on the other hand, if I had the room for one I'd certainly consider, but I'd keep the digital for practicing without disturbing others :P

I'm sure anyone who has sufficient skill to play well on a digital and has been taught to play using appropriate technique will be able to transition to an accoustic in a short period of time. I'd imagine it's little different to moving between different accoustic's or inferior to superior accoustics.

That said, I've started using PianoTeq with my digital as despite the key feel been a nice replication of an accoustic I prefer the way PianoTeq sounds. My DP supports half-pedelling but if you hook a pedal direct to PianoTeq (or you're lucky enough to have a DP that supports it) you can get continuous pedelling too.

I think you should consider, what is it you want to play. Not what it is you should play or others think you should play. If you're planning on reaching the highest level of playing, then I guess it makes sense to get an accoustic as you're going to be expected to play on accoustics often, otherwise decide which you're likely to get more usage out of and enjoy playing the most

Get an acoustic. Your friends are right.
Yes digital can emulate an acoustic pretty well, but there's nothing like the real thing!
That said, it takes time finding a good upright (or grand if one has the budget and space) - Yamahas are good, Petrov's too.
Good luck, you won't regret choosing acoustic.

scbeginner,

I think you should be wary of accepting as gospel the views of people here (mine included) - we all give opinions based on our own biases and experience (which might be extensive or fairly limited). Those who normally play DPs tend to be ardent advocates of them, similarly those who normally play acoustic pianos. In any event, what it right for other people might not be right for you. (I do think that a decent acoustic piano is of real benefit though.)

I would get a few lessons under your belt and then assess whether you would benefit from getting an acoustic piano after having played your teacher's acoustic and after discussing it with them. (If your teacher doesn't have an acoustic piano I would immediately start looking for another teacher.)

Also, if you do decide to get an acoustic piano, take your time over finding one you really like.

I'm actually in a similar position having recently returned to the piano after about 40 years, during which time I have been playing the classical guitar. My teacher's piano (a Schimmel baby grand) has a very different touch to my DP and I find that a bit of a problem. Anyway, I intend to look round for an acoustic piano within the next three months, even though I am certainly not at the 'intermediate' level.

Excellent comments on the Avant Grand. I'm in hot pursuit of the N2. I played and have studied them both (N3,N2) extensively. The N2's action is amazing, and to me, the extra $5k for the N3 isn't worth it. (plus it wouldn't fit in my project studio anyway). Thanks again for your Avant Grand insight.

I like Keystring's "spoon" analogy, and although I love my acoustic (and partly for that reason), I'll admit up front that I've never played an Avant-Grand or other really good DP.

However, I can't resist giving Volusiano a hard time regarding his (her?) post. Volusiano, you argue very passionately that the DP is not a "mere replication," but then you spend the rest of your post proving that it is, indeed, a replication!

Quotes from your post that are intended to prove it's not a "mere replication":



Volusiano, I don't deny your claim that the Avant-Grand is a fantastically sophisticated and wonderful instrument. It seems, from your obviously knowledgeable post, that it is great. As I say, I've never played one, and I'm entirely open to the possibility that if I did, I'd love it.

However, to try to claim that it's not a replication seems a bit ludicrous to me. Well, in fairness, your comments about the action do make that point effectively... it sounds like the action itself is indeed not a replication... but all of the other stuff surely is. It may be a very, very good replication, but it is undeniably just that, a replication.

Legal Beagle, I have to laugh at your comments because maybe I'm wrong, but you sound like a lawyer zeroing in on the technicality of a word (replication), and also because your name Legal Beagle makes me think maybe you're a lawyer.

Nobody is arguing the point that DPs, ANY DPs, are replication/simulation/emulation of acoustics. That's already a known fact. It's so pointless to zoom in and beat that horse to death.

The key operative word here is not "replication". It's "mere". The implication of the comment is that the replication of the vibration is thoughtlessly thrown in, just for a marketing claim perhaps, but not a true effort to make the replication authentic. So my contention is to explain why it's not just an insignificant gimmick, but a very thoughtful engineering design to incorporate a clever and effective, yet simple approach to replicate the vibration. When you place not just 1, but 2 transducers, each driven by its own 80W amplifier, just to duplicate the vibrating feel, it's not just a "mere" replication (notice again I emphasize on "mere", not on replication).

A digital piano can, at best, only sound as good as very good CD recording of an acoustic piano. The weak link with digital pianos is always the speakers. The digital piano will only sound as good as your budget for speakers will allow.

Rather then argue if a digital piano can ever sound good why not listen to three recordings made with a digital piano and then comment on the sound.

Chopin
Shumann
Roch

I have both an acoustic piano, an upright and a Yamaha CP-33 digital keyboard so I get the best of both worlds. I freely switch between the two, I know there are those who once they have an acoustic will not play a digital but I'm not that way. For me both have their good and bad points.

An acoustic piano will always have it's own personality and that is a good feature but it makes it a lot harder to buy a good acoustic piano. A piano that will not stay in tune or has mechanical problems will be a waste of money and you may have to pay someone to remove it from your house.

For a couple of years after I bought my acoustic piano I had a love/hate relationship with it because it would not stay in tune very well and the piano tuner I was using could tune it so it sounded OK for a day but then was back out of tune very quickly. Fortunately my piano teacher decided to supplement his income by branching out into piano tuning and bought a high tech computerized tuning system - what a difference that made to my piano. Finally instead of never sounding quite right it sounded fabulous and kept it's tuning over time as well.

A digital piano has it's good points also, they are inexpensive compared to an acoustic piano, a used DP is less likely to have problems than a used acoustic, they always stay in tune and are easy to record to a computer without requiring a microphone. Plus they are portable.

Ultimately I would say if you have the money to purchase and maintain a decent quality acoustic you will almost certainly enjoy having it but if money is an issue you may want to wait until you have been playing longer so you will know more exactly what to buy.

I am I fan of digital pianos. It's fun to play an acoustic but I'll never own one.

I think we are beginning to see a split in the digital piano market. There are two ways to look at a digital piano (1) A digital emulation of an acoustic piano and (2) An instrument that produces a piano-like sound.

The second actually advances the state of the art. When you are not making a copy you can move ahead. This second view is slowly emerging and we see a few products that reflect this. the Roland V-Piano is an physical modelling piano that is not a sample of any acoustic. Yamaha in their new flagship line of digital stage pianos (The CP1 and CP5) dropped "grading" their hammers and now all the keys have equal weights. Players say they are surprised that they like it better. These are small steps but show that the manufactures are starting to move away from even the goal of emulation.

My dad can’t live with computers. He hates it and never cares to learn its boundless applications. In order for him to read his favorite news online, I have to create a shortcut right on his desktop (yes, I bought him a labtop) so all he does is clicks that, reads his news, and be done with it.

I can’t live without computers. Before you jump in and start generalizing that it’s not food on the table, well, it is food on the table for me. My job is on the computer all day. Without it, I’d have to train other skills for a different job. It also allows me to be part of this Forum. Why wouldn’t I want a computer?

I guess old school classical musicians are probably like my father. Don’t care for technology. They are perfectly happy and if I’m one of them, I wouldn’t change for an Avant Grand experience either. Why would I? It doesn’t make me a better Pianist, does it?

New school musicians are more like Volusiano, ChrisA and me I guess. I love a perfectly tuned Concert Grand but can’t miss out on all the digitals advances out there either.

A good musician should be able to make good music on either. There are pros and cons, yes, and it’s hard to imagine getting to advanced levels classically on a Digital. But before advance, it should be adequate IMHO.

If you don’t go the classical route, I doubt you'd ever need an acoustic.

In a perfect world, I like both. I can practice on the Digital and perfect my repertoire on the acoustic on weekends, perhaps. But I know not many of us living in a perfect world so you’ll have to weigh the pros and cons, and compromise.

Some teachers here, well the more open-minded anyway, think a good digital is more than adequate for practice.

But if I’m like you, have space and $$, I definitely get a grand and also an Avant Grand LOL. Enjoy piano. It’s the music, piano in our case, that counts, not so much the Piano, I guess.

Disclaimer. I’m not a polished pianist. My comments are just common sense.

Hi scbeginner,
Looks like you're getting a lot of interesting advice, so I'll add mine to the pile. I own 3 pianos: A Yamaha YDP223 digital with GH3 action, A Charles Walter 1520 upright with Renner action, and a Yamaha C1 (5'3") grand. Each has it's strengths and weaknesses, but if I had do-overs the one I would not buy is the upright. Don't get me wrong -- the Walter is a great piano. It beats the 5'3 grand in the bass and sounds much better for blues and ragtime. But as a long term cost/value proposition uprights are a loser. There are a lot of classical techniques like trills and pianisimo that are hard to do on upright action, and resale value of a used upright is rock bottom.

You have a very nice piano with the Clavinova, and unless you are a budding concert star it's not going to limit you for quite a while. I would stick with the digital until you find the grand of your dreams.

Fair enough, Volusiano... I'm not out to pick any fights. I understand from your explanation that we just had a semantic issue about the word "mere." I would understand it to mean "nothing more than" a replication, having no bearing on the quality of such, and so it seemed odd to me that you would then talk about it as a replication, albeit a good one. No further argument on that point.

That understood, I'll steer my comment in another direction to try to get at what I was trying to say (I did have an actual point beyond nitpicking you, sorry it came off that way). I'll try stating it this way:

Your argument that it's a very, very good replication is accepted. My opinion is that no matter how good, it is in fact a replication, and I think that very fact is what turns some people off about DP's. At least, that turns me off, although as I've said, I'm trying to stay open-minded about it... maybe I'd change my tune if I played one.

So much passion and great information on this thread...

We're really fond of our prototypes, aren't we? I'm no exception. Being new to this, I was actually kind of astounded how much effort digital piano manufacturers put into replicating acoustic piano details, even things that seem like artifacts of design like resonance, hammer-off sounds, escapement etc. If Cristofori had had plastic and transistors at his disposal, we'd all be playing Casiofortes right now. Manufacturers would be trying to duplicate that authentic, non-graded spring action.

(Okay, to be fair to Casio, they appear to be doing very cool things with their DPs these days.)

Me, I like it that digitals do a great job of emulating acoustics, but I'd love to see them blaze their own sonic trail as well. I'm pretty sure no one has ever played a Strat and said, "Man, that's the crappiest-sounding Ramirez I've ever heard."

-Tom

The Avant Grand may replicate an acoustic piano very effectively but you can get a pretty good acoustic small grand for the price, I think.
An acoustic piano is individual - and can be awful. But an acoustic instrument that you enjoy playing will give you something that, so far, a DP cannot: an individual identity that you gradually come to know over a period of time. Yes, it does go out of tune, yes, its sound does alter with the humidity, but you form a relationship with it.

I'll bet that if you spent 3 hours a day for 10 years practicing (as most virtuoso pianists have done), but on a digital piano, you'd be an amazing pianist. If then you decided it was time to move to an acoustic, you'd probably have completed the transition in a month or two and would then begin to bring out incredible subtleties in your playing that you were incapable of on the digital.
I get really tired of acoustic snobs who claim that acoustic is the only way to go when people like me just can't spend $$$$ on an acoustic, have no place to put it, and really don't want to disturb neighbors/spouses with endless repetitions of the same scales and exercises.
I haven't even begun to exhaust the possibilities of my DP, and I probably never will. In fact, the only two differences I notice between my DP and an acoustic are these: 1) The action of my digital is actually a little heavier than some of the acoustics I've played, so I have a bit more aggressive touch on an acoustic. 2) On an acoustic, the sound continues just a little bit after you release the keys, even without the sustain pedal. On a digital, the sound cuts out immediately. But this has forced me to be even MORE sensitive to my technique and to try harder to bring out expressiveness in my playing. That can only help when making the transition to an acoustic.

As I wrote above, I think Roland is leading this way, Yamaha too with the CP1 and CP5. But this will be a very slow process, much conservatism in the industry and in buyers too. I think the direction it will take is to allow more and more adjustment to the sound. Already many DPs allow you to adjust the harness of the hammer felt or unison width. Some software allows for impossible things like liquid mercury strings. As DPs evolve away from being samplers to modelling the sound then will be able to evolve and pianists will be able to "design" their own piano sounds. This will take decades to play out the technology is not close to mature yet.

scbeginner would be well advised to totally ignore most of the comments in this thread and make his own judgement, advised by his teacher and by the pianists he knows and whose judgement he respects.

Too many people riding their hobby-horses.

I don't mean to nitpick your post or take this topic too far course, but I can say that on mine (Kawai MP8II), the default key-off decay is noticeable and is adjustable from very abrupt to a fairly long decay. With it turned all the way down (immediate cutoff), it sounds extremely unnatural, so I suspect yours has at least a little bit of key-off decay. Feel free to PM me if you'd like to talk about it some more.

-Tom

With respect, I have to disagree with that characterization. Opinions and levels of expertise among any group will vary, but I've found people on this and other PW forums to be uniformly unpretentious and well-meaning.

-Tom

Legal Beagle, I do respect your opinion that at the end of the day, any replication is a turn-off. But knock-offs exist for a reason, otherwise who would want them in the first place? I think the over-riding value a DP bring that's more important than anything else is the ability for volume control. As a beginner player like the OP, if you gave me a choice between a free acoustic piano and a free decent digital, I'd still pick the digital even though it's a knock-off with shortcomings because a piano is no good for me unless I can play and practice on it as often as I like, especially as a beginner. And if I have to practice a lot, I'd also like to preserve my hearing while I practice. Many people who own an acoustic still buy a DP for this very reason.

The heart of OP's original question is not about which piano is better. It's about whether he needs an acoustic feel and touch keyboard so that he would not "ruin" his learning progress if a transition is done later. This point is debatable and it depends a lot on the individual, so it's hard to say. But his acoustic friends may have a point to be concerned, who knows? So the debate is whether the digital is finally there in terms of touch and feel (leave the sound debate out). His friends say no, never. I say yes, with the AG.

So if that's the case, the question now turns into why somebody would want an AG which is still a knock off over a real acoustic? Well, between a comparable priced acoustic and the AG, I know I'd still pick the AG for the volume control, even if the acoustic sounds better. How about between the AG and an acoustic grand that's half the price of the AG that sounds comparable? I'd still pick the AG because of volume control. It's that important to me as a beginner to get quiet practice time and preserve my hearing.

If I were an advanced pianist who practices less and plays more (because I can learn a new piece quickly and easily, and I have a good repertoire to "play"), the equation may change.

I agree with Tom. No one knows everything but everyone knows something. You ask the question. Let everyone gives their inputs. Make a list of what important to you, then go out and test drive. You get the best of every world. Without this question, we wouldn’t have this thread and its diverse opinions about acoustic & digital.

Because of this, maybe some classically trained pianists will try an Avant Grand just to see what the heck all these raves about. And digital enthusiasts may venture into a shop and snatch a bay grand.

It’s good to read informative, educational discussions such as this. One thing I never like though, and that’s whenever this subject comes up, the 2 sides would beat each other to dead. I mean it can get really mean and ugly, and it has. So yeah, if it gets to that point, stay away. Or like me, just click next.