Greg, I recently tried a bunch of GH3s on a variety of Yamaha DPs at the local dealer. I could just barely tell there were three sensors - the middle and top positions seemed to be very close together (approx. 1/2 way down IIRC with only a few mm between them). Has this been your experience with GH3?

Dewster,
You asked me this question recently in another thread, and my answer is the same as before: yes, in my brief and hurried testing in the stores, I thought it was quite narrow, but when everything is taken into account, this may be the "right" way for it to be designed for Yamaha's action.

Cheers,
Greg.

Don't know about the sound demo's; must hear it for real, because with these demo's I hear 'MID MID MID' (frequency range) and especially for the Grand way to much BASS. I hope it's the MP3 and the original sounds as it should be - more balanced in frequency ranges. On these demo's it's more like a boom box with 'oversaturated' MID range...

Oops, brain rot, very sorry.

Thanks for the response (again)!

+1
The APs are nice - but as has been pointed out, it's a little difficult to get a true impression just from the files. It's the total package that will sway me one way or the other. If the APs, EPs and organs, together with the action, come within 10% of the new Rolands, then for around $1500 it's a good deal.

I like the sound of these pianos, and I can imagine that with all of the controls, we'll be about to create a wide range of variations and user presets.

rob755, the dimensions of the MP6 are identical to the MP5, therefore you should be fine to use the existing gig bag.

The gig bags marketed by Kawai America and Kawai Europe differ slightly in terms of appearance, however both offer a nice snug fit for the MP5/MP6.

Cheers,
James
x

I agree, but offer a different explanation.

From http://kawaius.com/main_links/Blog/Blog2010.html

The ability for faster repetition would be (as it is in a real piano) a matter of mechanics. By putting the sensor where the hammer strikes, Kawai obviated the need for a third sensor.

Of course, if the hammer in the RM3 can't re-strike without the key being lifted enough to trigger note off (damper falls), then the opportunity for improvement would be in the mechanics of the action. From the pictures, I can't tell how far up you have to lift the key before you can replay the note. If not possible in RM3, then maybe RM4.

Does this help?

Cheers,
James
x

Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that the pictures were inadequate, I just can't visualize what the let-off mechanism does without seeing it in action in one of those plastic cutaways that they have at the store.

Does the let-off mechanism actually perform the same function as escapement, or is it purely for feel?

BTW, that is the clearest picture I've seen of the action. Thanks for the link!

James,
Thanks! That changes everything. I can't tell much from the picture either, HOWEVER, it would be very strange if Kawai went to all that trouble and then designed it so that the key had to be released further than it does on a real piano in order to do a re-strike.

So, can someone with a CA93 just do the test I outlined above?

The next question is: do RM3-based actions send multiple Note-Ons for shallow repeats, without any intervening Note-Offs? (The Yamaha and Casio do, not sure about Roland yet)

I'm getting a distinct feeling that I was wrong about the RM3. I hope I don't end up in court.

Greg.

AldoEsplay,



Ah, I see.

Indeed, I strongly recommend that you visit a Kawai dealer in order to play-test the 'RM3 Grand' action and to watch the mechanism moving inside the action sample model.



I believe it's largely to recreate the feeling. However, I gather a number of experienced pianists claim that the let-off simulation allows greater accuracy/control when playing pp/ppp.



No problem. I believe that's a 20% resized version from the original.

Cheers,
James
x

Upon reading the full blog entry, I'm not so sure the sensor is actually "hit" by the hammer. The reason I say this is, is because that blog entry does not appear to be specifically about the RM3 - it appears to be a general description of Kawai's wooden actions. (although, yes, they close by mentioning their latest action, being the RM3)

We've discussed this very issue before. In my Kawai M9000, the hammers themselves simply hit a pad, with the velocity sensing being performed by conventional means. Yes, the arms of the hammers do make contact with POSITION sensors, with the velocity being determined by the time interval between the two sensors being triggered. Unless the key is returned a certain amount (about 50%), it is impossible to retrigger another note - the hammers cannot return to a greater extent than the key position allows at any moment in time. This retrigger point is very definite - if the key does not return enough, no sound AT ALL can be produced with a re-strike.

Taken literally, that blog suggests that the hammers hit some kind of a pressure sensor. I'm not convinced of this yet. If the blog said that this was a new feature of the RM3, THEN I would have been more convinced.

EDIT: I can see a possible advantage of this design: given that the hammers, and not the keys, trigger the velocity sensors, it might be possible to play with shallow key PRESSES, relying on the hammer's momentum to carry them on and trigger the velocity sensors.

Greg. (will try to find a CA93 to test unless someone else beats me to it)

James,

I had the chance to play a model with the RM3 Grand action at the local dealer. Absolutely fantastic! Barring a come-from-behind victory for the PHA III action (which I haven't had a chance to play), I'll be first in line for the MP10 when they hit the streets.

Unfortunately, the dealer didn't have an action sample model so that I could see what's going on inside. My interest there is academic. Can't resist a good puzzle.

Regards,
Aldo

Hurray ! Finally the info I was waiting for all the time; price and (estimated) delivery date. MP6 € 1349 on German Stores / 29-10 expected date.

Now let's see when this info for the MP10 arrives. That would be really interesting...

To compare the two in term of keybed. Has anyone played both RM3 and RH and how do they compare. Of course the RM3 is better, but is the difference really that much ? In other words: is the RH is very decent keybed too and comparable to PHAIII-S for instance ? Thinking of ordering a MP6 (or FP7F) now , because I don't think I can/will wait for the MP10 to arrive - unless the RM3 is really , really so much better...

Unfortunately in the circumstances where I am coming from I don't have the ability to get the MP10 so it must be between Yamaha and Roland regardless.But I must note when I played it recently the action seemed plenty fast for me (and I play a fair bit of house style piano) and given the choice it would be a very close call indeed.

FWIW, overall it sounds pretty balanced to me, listening through reference headphones (AKG601). I think the Kawai signature sound does have strong mids though - it is a very rich sound. I still don't think it's as good as large software pianos though. E.g listen to these sampled Kawai EX demos:
http://www.acousticsamples.net/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=3&products_id=21 - it's in a different class IMHO.

Greg.

I think that is not the point.
As you wrote, the different mechanism makes it possible to restrike the key without lifting much. (The same might be possible with the RH3, I dont know this) I know this from own experience, because I tested the RM3 in the store. I also readjusted my own keyboard for better repetition.

However, nobody would want the possibility to restrike the key without lifting it at all! The result where that each little key or hammer bounce would trigger a tone. This would also mute the previous tone.
The problem is, this new tone will also mute the previous tone.
If the hammer bounces then the previous tone can be muted, when the bounce has lower velocity.
This does not hurt on a 3 sensor keyboard, because the previous tone is not muted immediately when the hammer falls back. Hoever this works only when the sound generator -or the piano library- is prepared for it.

Of course, when the tone has enough release time, then similar results are possible with 2 sensors, because this unintended muting can be prevented.

Peter

DrPopper,



May I ask why this is the case? A contractual obligation/restriction, perhaps?

Kind regards,
James
x

Yes, I expect the RM3 to be able to repeat with a 50% release, if it's anything like my old MP9000. I believe this is very similar to a real piano, although when I asked about this over in the piano tech forum here, they said it can actually repeat for a release of a bit under 50%.

HOWEVER, a real piano does not damp the strings until the key is returned almost all the way up. That is where I think the RM3 may fall down - I expect it to simply damp the notes at that same, 50% release. My Casio behaves properly - it does not damp until the key is higher up than 50%.

The Roland PHAII (two sensors - i.e standard) is a bit different. It actually seems to favour legato playing, because it terminates notes higher up than a 50% release. So, the three-sensor Roland actions should repeat faster than their two-sensor counterparts, because the third sensor would be lower down.

Greg.

Come on Greg, enough speculation - get yourself over to your local Kawai dealer and give the RM3 Grand action a try!

Cheers,
James
x

I think the MP9000 has very much the same action (AWA Grand Pro) as my CP136. If so, then you should see/hear/feel a big improvement with the RM3 action.

FWIW, I just measured my Casio PX-330, using a tyre tread depth gauge:

Total Key Travel: 11mm
Note-Off point: 6mm/55% release
Partial-repeat release: 4mm/36% release

Prior to this I had only eye-balled it, and I got it wrong. It is hard to estimate the distances by just looking.

I have, though, measured my MP9000 at 50% release in the past.

Greg.

Of course! I'm just skeptical at the moment that the note-off point will be much different, that's all.

I am 100% certain that any concert pianist would much prefer the RM3 action, even if it only has two sensors, to my tri-sensor Casio action.

Greg.

Sorry, I had missed this. I'm puzzled, though. The CA93 is an existing product, so why can't you simply answer the question for us? In any case, yes, I'll endeavour to try one tomorrow. I'd rather you saved me the trouble and simply answered the question though.

Greg.

Please remind me - what was the question again?

James
x

The question is:

How will the CA93 behave when the following test is performed:
(same question for the MP10):

1. Turn the volume up quite high
2. Play a note forte, but do NOT lift off the key yet.
3. Slowly release the key, until the note terminates, but no further than this.
4. Note the point in the key travel at which the note terminates.
5. Lift off the key completely.
6. Repeat steps 2 to 5 as required to get a good feel for the note termination point.
7. Play a note forte again, and again, do not lift off.
8. Slowly release the key. This time, stop at a point JUST below the note termination point. Hold the key at this position with one finger.
9. With the OTHER hand, push down on the same key with a forte force.
10. If the action simulates double-escapement, you will hear a NEW NOTE, without the original note ever being terminated first. If it does not simulate double-escapement, you will merely hear the ORIGINAL note continue to decay.

Sorry for hassling you - I appreciate your presence here.

Thanks,
Greg.

Ah, I'm sorry, I'm afraid I honestly don't know the answer to that.

It strikes me that you are rather familiar with the different action mechanisms, therefore if you wish to check any technical characteristics of the RM3 Grand action, I strongly recommend that you visit your local Kawai dealer and play-test the action yourself.

But please be sure to report your findings back to the PW faithful.

Kind regards,
James
x

My answer is (for CA63): It does not simulate double escapement. There is no way to do this with 2 sensors.

I strongly believe that this is identical on a CA93, because the only difference in keyboard action is the escapement emulation, but not an additional third sensor. Mabe someone else with a CA93 can confirm...

No restrictions I am not under any exclusive obligations with anyone.

I was playing it on the weekend and nobody said anything at all so I'd guess with the MP10 If I wanted one I'd have to actually buy it !