Privia PX3 vs. Yamaha CP50
Aug. 8, 2010

I went shopping again today for a new digital stage piano. My trusty Privia PX300 has served me well but I am still searching for that elusive perfect piano sound and feel. I heard that Casio had come out with a new Privia Stage Piano called the PX3. Yamaha also had come out with three new Pianos in their CP series. Both Yamaha and Privia pianos were suppose to use a new technology to produce the best piano sound ever. (heard that before) I wanted to compare the two.

For my use I wanted a stage piano that had a great piano sounds and a list of other features that would allow me to play as a soloist. On my wish list was:

Great Piano sounds
Great piano action and feel
Additional useable sounds (organ, strings, basses, synths, pads, etc)
Splits/Layers
Layers with Splits
Programmable setting or patches that saved everything for easy recall
Memory card storage
Ability to playback MIDI files for drum parts.
Ease of use
Light weight


The Casio Privia PX3 had all the features I was looking for including a lot of bread and butter sounds, splits, layers and ability to store all setting to a patch and to an SD card which can also be MIDI sequences or drum parts that you can call up for live performance.
It's light, (23lbs) easy to carry and features a new “Ivory Touch” keyboard that is touted to be more like a real piano. All for less than $800 retail. Sounds like it would be perfect! Yamaha has a great reputation for making quality instruments but the price was more than double the Privia and more than I wanted to spend. So off I went to my local music store armed with my trusty Sony 7506 headphones.
For the purpose of this comparison I used headphones only. The first reason being it’s hard to hear anything in a music store especially when five other people are playing piano in the same area. The other reason was to make a fair comparison without different speakers effecting the sound.

Casio Privia PX3

The Privia PX3 is supposed to be a limited 30 year anniversary edition with only 3000 made. Casio says that if the demand is there they will make more. It’s a good looking, well designed keyboard with buttons that make sense and a logical intuitive lay out. The new “Ivory Touch” keyboard is a step up from the other Privia pianos and feels more like a real piano. After trying the PX3 out for a few minutes
my first impression was that the sounds are thin and lacked body. There is a built in EQ section and I’m sure the sound would benefit from EQ but the basic sound was disappointing. Privia PX3 literature talks about 4X sampling and proprietary cross fading but the samples are too short. The initial attack sample is too short and does not make a smooth switch to the second sample. Instead of a smooth decay, at the point where the attack sample changes to the second sample, there is a sharp volume drop. The second sample does not have enough length or character to keep it interesting through any sustain.
This is not uncommon in a lot of digital pianos and is the reason product demos are usually pieces that move quickly rather than legato parts. On the positive side, almost everything on my wish list (aside from great sounds) was onboard the PX3. The features were perfect for my live gig but without a great piano sound I could not get excited about the PX3. I audition several of the additional sounds and they were just OK. Nothing knocked me out.

Yamaha CP50

Yamaha just came out with 3 new models of their CP stage pianos line. The CP1 ($5K), the CP 5 ($2600), CP 50 ($1700) Both the CP1 and CP5 feature real wood keyboards. The CP50 does not have a wooden keyboard but feels like it does and weighs a lot less.

They all feature a new Grand Piano sound using “Spectral Component Modeling” which is what I was most interested in.
I tried the least expensive model which is the CP50 first. My first impression was how much better built the Yamaha instrument was. I've always felt Yamaha had the edge in pianos because the feel was right. The key bed is solid and you feel like you can beat the hell out of it and it will take anything you can dish out. When you play soft it responds like it should. The whole instrument felt like a higher quality product. Of course it's twice as expensive as the Privia so that makes sense.
The sound of the Yamaha did not blow me away as I was hoping. It was good, not great but then I've never heard and electric piano I thought was great. And if I ever did who knows if it would translate to a live situation and still sound great. The sound is similar to the Yamaha P155 model but is slightly better. Is that difference worth and extra $500? Probably not but the CP50 has a lot more going for it than the P155. More sounds, (12 pianos and 215 additional sounds) more flexibility (customizable functions)
Then I compared the CP50 Grand Piano to the CP5 Grand Piano. Product information said they were the same and it my ears indeed they were.
The Yamaha did have splits but no layers. Other features of the Privia were lacking but the sound of the Yamaha was better and the feel was right.

I spent about an hour going back in forth between the Yamaha CP50 and the Privia PX3 and every time I went back to the PX3 it got worse. I started noticing more and more the plastic body and flimsy feel of the PX3 verses the metal and wood construction of the CP50. The difference became more evident the more I compared the two instruments. It seems like a small thing but the included sustain pedal for the Yamaha was a beefy metal pedal like a real piano where the Privia was a cheap light weight plastic box switch that looked like it could break easily. The more I compared the more I liked the feeling of the Yamaha CP 50 for the build quality and for the better piano sound. Again, the piano was not incredible, but it did sound better than any of the other stage pianos in the store. But then there was the price. Almost $1700 for the Yamaha CP50 compared to $800 for the Privia PX3. These companies must have geniuses figuring out the exact price point that is just over what you want to spend. If it were 20% less you would buy it immediately but they want to squeeze out every dollar they can from you so you beg, borrow or steal to somehow get the extra cash you didn’t have.

Summary

Casio Privia series hits and very comfortable price point and Casio has made improvements in their quality. They seem to be listening to the working musicians and adding the features that make sense for players. (no more auto accompaniment or built in recorders please!-Yamaha please take note) Privia pianos are very light and easy to carry which is a BIG plus for the gigging piano player. Privia pianos are no longer scoffed at by players and there are plenty of Privias out there on stage and in homes with many of happy owners. I am one of them. I have a Privia PX 300 which was the first stage pianos in the Privia series. It cost me less than $500 and still sounds and plays good. I would love to replace it with a better piano with more polyphony and better sounds but I can’t seem to find anything that tempts me enough to cough up my hard earned cash.
Yamaha IMHO, has been and is still the piano to beat. All the piano companies are still playing catch up. Yamaha pianos are consistently better built and sound closer to the real thing. Their keyboard action and feel is closer to a real piano. I don’t think they have achieved the goal of a digital piano that sounds and plays like a real 9’ Grand but they are the top dogs and are getting closer.

If both the Privia PX3 and the Yamaha CP50 cost the same the Yamaha would be a hands down winner. But the additional features of the PX3 are strong and exactly what I was looking for. But without a great piano sound the features are not enough for me plunk down my cash even at it’s modest price compared to the Yamaha CP50. So it follows, is the Yamaha CP50 with it’s better build and better sound but lackinig most of the other features I need, enough for me to spend over double the price of the Casio. That is yet to be determined. One thing is for sure. Both Yamaha and Privia will continue to upgrade their piano lines in pursuit of building a digital piano that sounds and plays like the real thing. I hope I have not bought the model just before they finally get it right.


I am a working musician and in no way endorsing any company in this review. I am not an employee of Yamaha or Casio and have no affiliation with Casio or Yamaha. I have not received any compensation of any kind for my time. You should play should these instruments for yourself and make your own judgment as to which instrument is right for you.

Brooks Reid
Miami, FL

Good morning Brooks, welcome to the forum, and thank you for posting that excellent account of your PX-3 vs. CP50 playing experiences.

Please do keep us all informed of your thoughts about the CP50. I have yet to play one, however on paper it appears to get a lot of things right, and I'm confident that you will grow to appreciate the instrument's piano sounds over time.

Cheers,
James
x

Golly BR, that's a better piece of work than a lot of pro journalists turn in!

Very nice review Brooks Reid! Headphones and all!


My fear, though rather expected unfortunately. Darn.


This is very interesting information. I would love to confirm it in a rigorous way.


Humorous way to state a rather harsh reality.


The technological stasis of this entire industry is scandalous.


I think you can rest easy. If the past and present are any indication, there seems to be zero chance of that happening anytime soon (Winter NAMM 2020 is my prediction, and probably by accident).

Could you comment regarding the user interfaces on these two DPs?

I would also be very interested in your views on the P155, RD-700GXF, and any models by Kawai.

For the $900 difference between the two, I wonder if there's any module that would give you the piano sound you want, which you could drive from the PX-3, and that way have all the PX-3 features you want (and the lighter weight) while still getting a piano sound that excites you.

Netbook + pianoteq for under $300, perhaps?

Cheers,
James
x

Modules, netbooks, whatever.

When did products stop having to do what they were supposedly designed to do? I buy a DIGITAL PIANO but, in order to make it sound decent, I have to REPLACE ITS ENTIRE GUTS with third party hardware and software?

This entire market is absolutely insane.

If it's that trivial, can't Kawai do that for me and save me all that trouble? I mean, isn't that how you guys make profits and stuff? Making products that consumers want? And then we buy them and junk?

Sorry, I only had two semesters of Econ and I was probably asleep during the upside down inverse bizarro world DP market lecture.

It's trivial for the consumer, certainly, yet considerably less so for large manufacturers. Kawai does not specialise in developing computer hardware or software - it specialises in manufacturing pianos.

Cheers,
James
x

Brooks,
I played a CP-50 recently in a Guitar Center hooked up to an amp. I could not figure out how to change the grand piano sound to another voice. I was able to get the different voices being on a different sound like EP, Clav, strings, etc by spinning the three knobs below the display but could not figure out how to change the GP voice. I wasn't overly impressed with the grand piano voice considering the price of the CP-50. Didn't think it was better than the P-155.

Concerning the PX-3, Mike Martin did a demo on June 30 2010 that was streamed and recorded. He mentioned it was possible to edit all of the on board sounds and save them as presets. I thought the sound demos on the priviapiano.com website sounded reasonably good for the PX-3. I think the current piano sample on the Casio Privias is darn good for the money. But their keybeds are another thing. This seems be their weak link as the quality control varies from piano to piano and keybed to keybed. On the whole Casio is good for the money but definately built to a price.

dewster,
I have no experience with the Kawai digital pianos so I can't comment. I have not played the Roland enough to make a good judgement call either. I did own a Yamaha P155 for a short while and I did compare the CP50 to the P155 in the store. The sound was close but the CP50 had more detail and subtle nuances. It also sounded less digital or static. That was the reason I ended up returning the P155.
As far as the interfaces on the Yamaha CP50 and PX3, I had a tuff time getting around on the CP50. The front panel made no sense to me. I prefer the PX3 interface. It seems more logically laid out for my brain. Again I love all the features of the PX3, I just was very unimpressed by the sound even compared to my Privia PX300. There is not enough meat to the sounds but I'm sure tweeking EQ would help for some.

Another Scott,
I initially wanted to buy a sound module but I've come to the conclusion that if you want a good piano sound you have to have the whole package-the right sound, the right touch and feel and the controls all in one package. I'm looking for a gigging instrument that I can split and layer and have enough sounds to cover the songs I play. This would include: strings, organs, pads, basses, etc. I would also like to have some drums or beats although I'm still wrestling with that because I don't want to sound like Karaoke.

galaxy,
I watched the Mike Martin demo and was also impressed with the sound. In fact I posted a question on there as to what setup he used to run the sound through. All I can tell you is that the sound of the PX3 in the store was not the same as the sound Mike had on the demo.
When I first played the PX3 I was impressed with the "Ivory Touch" and thought it was an improvement over previous Privia keyboards. But after playing the CP50 for a short while and coming back to the PX3 it felt like it was cheap, flimsy and plastic. I probably would never have made that judgement if I did not have both keyboards side by side. I sure many people will love the CP3 keyboard and I really wanted to love it because it had all the features I wanted and the price was right.

I'm really close to buying a CP50 and I'm even considering the CP5. I need to do a bit more homework to see if I can split the left hand and layer the right. Also if it will play back MIDI drum parts and how easily I can call everything up in a live performance. I know the CP5 will play WAV audio files. Also I need to work more with the interface to see if I can understand the layout and get around on it easily for live playing in the dark. I still don't understand why these keyboard companies use tiny lettering on (usually black on black) or worse; reflective surfaces that are impossible to read in low light. And if by some chance I'm playing in the daylight and do have enough light to see the printed surface then the LED display is not bright enough to see in the sun!

Thanks all for the nice welcome.

Brooks,
I think you are correct in assuming Mike ran the PX-3 through some kind of audio interface to help fatten up the sound. They want to show the instrument at its best. He did the same thing when the PX-130 came out a year ago on his demo of it. I really like the newer Casio piano sample compared to what I have on the older PX-575. I also agree the sound on the older Privias was better especially those that used the ZPI chip. The AIF has more Poly but isn't as nice sounding. As far as the touch on the CP-50, I think the action is the firmest I have ever played on a Yamaha and it doesn't feel springy like the P-155. But I'm not in love with the piano sound on the CP-50.

We know that the main piano in the P155 and CP1 (and also the CVP-505 and the CLP-330) comes from the same sampling session of the same physical AP, so it's interesting to hear your observations there.



So it's not just me having trouble with the UI on the CP models. I think I need to watch a training video or something before I touch one again.


I think this is entirely true. In the beginning I thought one could simply buy some keys that feel good and lash them to a decent sound module. But you lose so much from the dis-integration. Modules usually have less control surface area with smaller (if any) displays and fewer controls, and are generally mounted (in our studio anyway) in ways that are inconvenient to view and edit. Perhaps most importantly, you can lose critical timing info and pedal/key interaction over the MIDI connection.

If true, that strikes me as dirty pool. Demos are called demos for a reason.

Not PC hardware or software certainly, but Kawai most definitely specializes in DP software running on embedded computer hardware, and I'm sure has the patents to prove it.

Currently, your HW/SW is doing everything right IMO except looping too early, and this is because the sample set is too small. A little more Flash and you're there, it doesn't strike me as anything all that difficult from a technical perspective.

Interesting comparison but the result was something akin to inevitable given the price differential.

Your statements contained in the first post should have been qualified by adding that you have little or no experience of Roland, Kawai, Korg or Nord.

Yamaha are patently NOT the best at the moment...others are not catching them up, Yamaha have some catching up to do. In terms of pure tone generation technology, Yamaha are some way behind Roland, whose Supernatural sound engine is unquestionably the most advanced hardware sample based sound engine currently available. That is not the same thing as saying it is always preferable to Yamaha, because the timbral characteristics differ...it is quite legitimate to prefer the Yamaha sound but it is beyond doubt that it is technically inferior. But this is today, tomorrow could be different and I don't expect Yamaha to play second fiddle for long.

As far as key action is concerned, Yamaha are also a little bit sly...in some of their products what they call wooden actions are nothing of the sort...they are standard Yamaha plastic key actions with slivers of wood stuck on the sides of the keys to give the appearance of wood. Contrast this with the higher spec Kawai products: long, all wooden pivoted keys giving what many have described as the best action currently available in electronic pianos (short of Yamaha Avant Grand pianos).

Good luck in your search for the right piano for you.

Steve

I agree that choosing the keyboard and sound device separately is not ideal, but among a variety of choices each of which is a compromise of some sort, it is one option that may get someone the closest to what they want.

I actually am not so bothered by the limitations you mention. For piano use, I don't need to manipulate a module's controls in live performance, all I need are buttons on the master controller that call up the preset that I want (and if the controller lacks them, they can effectively be added with something like a Rocktron MIDI Mate), and I don't think a simple one-keyboard-to-one-module MIDI hookup should have timing issues.

Though I do worry about something else: I think the mating of the board to the electronics can be a playability issue when you're using sounds that really depend on touch, like piano. When a manufacturer builds a piano sound into a keyboard, they know (or can suitably manipulate) the default velocity curve to best simulate a natural feel. Separate keyboard controllers (or other keyboards you might choose to trigger from) have all different (and often changeable) velocity curves, so there is more variability and trial-and-error in matching how hard you have to hit the keys at different levels from soft to hard to match what should be the natural curve of the piano sample. Of course, there's no guarantee that a manufacturer will get it right out of the box either, but I think the odds are better, because the manufacturer does control every aspect of the instrument, whereas the touch response is simply something they can't possibly perfectly account for when they don't know the characteristics of the particular keyboard you're going to be using.

EDIT: That's not to say that you can't get a good match that way, it's just one more variable that you don't have when it's all built together. Sometimes it can work out the other way, like when people say that the Nord Electro piano sounds play better from an external 88.

I wonder if this is why I keep liking the sounds of the older Casios better! I didn't realize that they had changed the underlying sound engine.

Actually, I think it's impossible to get all that in one package, if for no other reason than the "right touch and feel" for piano is completely different from the "right touch and feel" for organ.

So I would suggest a whole different approach... stop looking for the ideal keyboard, and instead, start looking for the ideal pair of keyboards. One with a nice feel for piano, and one lighter touch for organ. (Also, I always think it's best to take two boards to a gig regardless, so you have a backup to get through the gig if you have an equipment failure. It's rare, but it can happen.)

An alternative recommendation:

If you really want to stay with one keyboard, it might be worth looking at the Kurzweil SP4-7 which is supposed to ship at the end of the month. The sounds (taken from their PC3) are stronger than Casio's, it has all the split and layer functions you want (probably more flexible than Casio's), and it's closer in price to the Casio than the Yamaha. Big trade-off: 76 keys vs 88. And I don't know anything about the keyboard feel. They say "semi-weighted" but that covers a lot of ground... some semi-weighteds are much better than others. Since they are marketing this primarily as a piano, I hope/assume that they chose something that should feel good for piano, but we'll see.

I'd still prefer two keyboards, though.

It will most probably be the same shitty keybed from FATAR on the SP4 as on all the other Kurzweil machines. Although I had several Kurzweil(s) for a long time , I think an upgrade in sound and hardware (read keybed) is long overdue. Would't put my money in such completely recycled (20 years ?!) technology - especially not when there's most probably real new stuff coming from Kurzweil in 2011 , unless they go bankrupt again before that happens. I hope not - really liked their approach in the past and think they want to make a great re-entry when they get the chance.

Well, I really disliked the action on the PC2, but that goes back a ways. That's the only semi-weighted Kurz action I remember playing. I think their unweighted PC361 is fine (for what it is, not for piano). At any rate, I think the SP4 would have to different from some of the other semi-weighted actions if for no other reason that it doesn't have aftertouch, so it has to be a different keybed.

Thanks again for all the input. To address a couple of comments.

I would love to have 2 keyboards especially for organ sounds. (BTW I restore Hammond organs and Leslies and have several in my studio) But for my application as a solo performer doing one night stands I long for a simple solution that does not require a lot of schleping and setup. That is a big plus for the Privia.

EssBrace, you are absolutely right. I should have qualified that statement to only the keyboards I was comparing. My comparison was limited to what GC had in their keyboard room. I would love to compare the Roland, Kawai, Korg, etc but I don't think it's fair to make a comparison unless they are side by side.

Another note on the CP5/50 interface; I was on the phone with Yamaha today asking questions. One of my first comments to the tech support guy was that I had a hard time understanding the layout of the interface. I voiced concern to him that one of the first things that a potential keyboard buyer wants to do is try out the sounds. On the CP5/50 I could not even figure out how to scroll through the sounds.
The tech told me he had the same issues when first introduced to the instrument! So if you don't get it you're not alone.
From my further reading and research I now understand how it works but it's by no means intuitive.
The idea is that all sounds exist within a preset. You call up a preset first and then assign the sounds you want to the "parts". Each part has a pot assigned to it's parameters on the front panel. On the CP5 you have 6 parts, one of which is the mic input record. On the CP50 you have only 3. I grilled the Yamaha tech on many performance details that he was at a loss to answer. On the upside he did send me the Performance List which shows all sounds on how they are assigned on presets. And I finally got the owners manual which was disappointing because it did not go into enough detail. I wish these companies would hire someone who knows how to put together a manual!
I would like to try the Roland V Piano as well as other pianos but the Yamaha seems to fit my needs more with the extra sounds onboard, splits, layers and ability to playback audio and MIDI. If I do decide to purchase the Yamaha, I leaning towards the CP5 at this point. Here are the major differences:

More pianos on the CP5 including the CFIII S and S6B, (CP50 has only CFIIF), Five Rhodes sound vs. one on the the CP50. Unfortunately neither the CP5 or CP50 have any of the DX7 engine sounds. The AWM2 modeling includes DX sounds but it's not quite the real thing.
Wooden keys on the CP5. Although the action on the CP50 felt very accurate to a real piano.
Mic input on the CP5
17 pianos 305 other sound on the CP5 vs. 12 /215 on CP50
6 "Parts" (including mic input) on the CP5 vs. 3 "Parts" on the CP50- meaning more ability to layer, split and have audio or MIDI playing simultaneously.
No Power amp or Compressor Block on CP50-This is part of the sound shaping and is important to me.
Master EQ 5 band on CP5 vs. 3 band on CP50
XLR Balanced outs and input on CP5 vs. 1/4" outs on CP50
2 foot controller inputs vs. 1 on CP50
CP 5 is larger and heavier 55.4 lbs vs 46lbs.
AC Power plug on CP 5 vs adapter on CP50

Surprisingly the CP1 does not include any of the AWM2 sounds and only 2 "Parts". It's design is focused squarely on the purist. (with a lot of money)

I have not purchased a keyboard over 2K in quite a while. (TX 816, JP8, ARP 2600) I know the only way to find out if it's going to fit my needs is to get it home and try it on the gig. I would have to really fall in love with this thing to keep it and it's been a long time since I fell in love.

Brooks, given that you restore Hammond instruments, and one would assume that you're quite a tasty organ player, how do you feel about playing organ riffs on weighted keys, intended for piano?

Cheers,
James
x

It's a real challenge. It's also rough on the hands if you play glissandos, swishes, slides etc. in true Hammond style. I had the ultimate keyboard rig in the 70's. Rhodes, Clavinet, Minimoog and a Hammond B3. I've been searching for a good acoustic piano sound ever since. Really you just can't play a organ properly on a piano action. Again I believe that you have to have the whole package-sound, feel, touch, expression, etc. to get to the organic (sorry) nature of playing any instrument. Using modules is great and I've had racks of them. But playing guitar, brass, etc. on keys is more of a challenge and exercise than digging into the real thing. Somehow somewhere in the 80's keyboard players were all of sudden expected to come up with every instrument sound in the world! I'm love technology but I don't want to be a technician on keyboards. I don't need a an arsenal of Ocarina, Shamisen, bagpipes, or Guitar God sounds. (OK maybe I need the bagpipe)

Interesting, thanks for sharing your thoughts.

I'm inclined to agree. It's obviously handy to have a good selection of organ sounds on a stage piano. However if the focus of the instrument is on realistic acoustic (or even electric) piano touch, I would argue that such sounds are unnecessary.

+1 on the bagpipes though, I'd never be prepared to give up that patch.

Cheers,
James
x

Now that you've stretched your budget up to CP5 territory, and in light of the comments about your organ background and what a pain (figuratively and literally) it is to play organ on a weighted keyboard, I think you should not be quick to dismiss a 2-keyboard solution that could still be simple without a lot of shlepping.

Privia PX-3 + Nord Electro 3, combined weight, 39 pounds. Far less shlepp than the CP5's 55+ pounds. Add a K&M 18880 stand with an add-on tier for a stand that weighs under 7 lb and is super-easy to collapse for transport, no need to disassemble/reassemble anything, it moves in one piece.

Then you've got a good piano action and a good organ action, full drawbar-style organ capability with much better organ sounds, a choice of excellent piano sounds you can download into the Nord which you can drive from the Privia's weighted 88 keys (splitting and layering it with the Privia's own sounds), plus better EP sounds, and a bunch of other high quality sampled sounds (plus the ability to load your own sampled sounds). The one caveat is that the Electro is monotimbral, so when you're using it for its piano sound, for example, it's not available for anything else. So the idea would be to use the Nord for your "main" sound at any given time (piano, organ, EP, etc.) while using the Privia's internal sounds for the "supporting" sounds that would be layered or split (or simply played on its own keyboard).

Does the PX3 give you any control over the amp ADSR envelope?
Does it have a control for resonance or note-off samples?

anotherscott, that's a good suggestion. So essentially the Electro 3 is doing most of the work, while the PX-3 is just used as a weighted-key controller to drive the Nord's piano/e.piano sounds?

That'd work.

Cheers,
James
x

Bagpipes--- who has bagpipes? I'm green with envy. Love bagpipes, must be the Scots in me.