I'd purchase my piano from a German-speaking, 350 pound mutation of Simon Cowell, Rosie O'Donnell, and Papa Smurf -- donning a tutu and combat boots from an 80s-nostalgia consignment shop..... IF the piano purchased was the best digital piano available for the price.

How many would rather play their second choice, just so they could have their feelings stroked by a pleasant purchase experience or slick marketing?

But, that's me, perhaps not the masses.

Interestingly, there are a lot of complaints about how hard it is to try a Kawai. I'll join that club. Kawai dealers are several hours away. Even those dealers may not have the MP6 or MP10 available. If so, Kawai loses.

It would not surprise me if Kawai is torn between supporting/retaining their current distributors and getting their units into Guitar Center. Unfortunately, getting the units into Guitar Center/chains probably may the only way to get Kawai sales up to Roland and Yamaha levels.

And because a dealer is nearby, doesn't mean you can explore the organic dynamics of an instrument's sound at that dealer. I have never been in a Guitar Center or Sam Ash that didn't have some pimple-faced kids repetitively playing the same rock riff at high decibel. The noise starts when the doors open; no private booths available. Trying to evaluate a Martin or PAF in this atmosphere is impossible, much less a digital replication of an acoustic piano. At a Kawai dealer, at least I can try the board in peace, without much sales harassment.

I may purchase a Kawai or a Roland (I'll try Nord/Yam too) in a three months or so. Roland has my attention, due to improvements in sound and a 700$ gap closing on pricing between the rd700GXNX and MP8ii-10.

Though I agree a longer/more diverse trial of the acoustic pianos is of more interest to most of us, I didn't think the video was THAT bad. If Lady Gaga is the new hip, the guy in the video should remain in the 1980s. He'll be far less embarrassed, in the long run.

Finally, I am always impressed and appreciative of the European mastery of English. Many Americans haven't mastered English at the level of many Europeans, particularly writing it.

I don't agree with that. I lived for some time in Germany some years ago without speaking German, and if things have not changed notably since then, there were a lot of people that did not spoke English, or just had a basic knowledge of it. Of course, no complain here: it was me that, being at Germany, didn't speak German, so it was my fault

Yeah, the more literate ones spoke English, but not everybody is one of the most literate ones... the same would be true for France, Italy or Spain. In Netherlands I think that everybody speaks English as well as Dutch, but that is the exception.

So, if you want to sell a product in Europe, better to speak the language of the countries where you are going to sell it. I agree that an English video would had reached more people, but I guess it is on the way. A video in German is a lot better than no video at all. And you can listen to the sound of the thing without translator.

The video wasn't -that- bad, we're just poking fun at it

But sadly it does sum up kawai marketting in a way.

I tried to ignore the aesthetics of the production - and the language (difficult to filter out the backing tracks, though ). I'm much more interested in how the MP6 sounds and plays. From what I heard, although I wasn't blown away, I was generally pleased. It sounds like a good all-rounder at a sensible price. It's very high on my list at the moment (even higher since I just sold both my RD-300SX and my Electro 3 )

voxpops, you sold the Electro 3 and didn't even give me first dibs?!

Cheers,
James
x

I'd love Nords if they weren't so dammed .....red.

Sorry James, but I didn't want you getting over-excited and having another accident

Take your pick, Doc!

Look here http://www.bauer-music.de/digital-pianos/bauer-music-white-line/index.html

I think they deliver any piano in white on request for a small extra charge...

Question for James or any other techno-wizard: is it possible to control the "drawbars" on the MP6 via midi (using a midi fader device), and if so, how? I've looked at the manual but cannot work out if it's doable.

voxpops, I'll have to ask on Monday Tuesday.

Cheers,
James
x

EDIT: Monday was/is a national holiday in Japan.

Thanks, James!

Wow it sounds nice! This might win me over from the rd-700nx after all.

PHI and UPHI - probably this has been explained somewhere else on this forum, but for my understanding and final decision:

- What are the actual - real - technical differences between PHI and UPHI ?
- Is the basic sample material exactly the same and can the difference only be found in extended processing of string resonances and such, or is there also a difference in the base material ?
- If the difference lies in the processing ; what is then added/enhanced in the UPHI in comparison to the PHI ?
- If the difference is (also) in the sample material - what is then altered; are the samples in UPHI longer , from another set, or in an other way better ?

If these questions have been sufficiently (!) answered before, then please add a link to the thread. Thanks !

Another question for KJ: Why is sysex section omitted from MP6 manual? I myself wrote a simple librarian out of my need to convert files between the Normal Dump and Divided Dump formats and to facilitate renaming and reordering Setups and all that thanks to the above mentioned section in my MP5's manual. I admire Kawai for releasing sysex dump and sound&setup format data along with MP5.

Cheers,

JFP,

The questions you raise, while entirely valid, have no answer in the public domain that I'm aware of. To answer your points would mean Kawai revealing how much (or how little) technical processing is going on and the specific nature of this processing. For them this is a proprietary process and subject to commercial sensitivities (read, secrecy!). Yamaha use similar jargon to PHI/UPHI such as "AWM", "Pure CF Sampling" etc and Roland now use their "Supernatural" process. None of these technologies are ever really explained in the kind of depth that satisfies a healthy, curious mind. It's very frustrating for the anoraks among us (me included) but inevitable in a competitive market place.

For what it's worth I have no doubt that UPHI will be superior in a subjective sense to PHI. Despite the lack of info available I know enough to believe that the MP10 should be on anyone's try-out list before purchasing. RD v CP v MP now makes for a very interesting and potentially rewarding choice.

Cheers,

Steve

Well, I would also be VERY interested in answers to these questions, but I'm afraid there are no official answers to these questions, since KAWAI won't tell you how they do it. They consider this a company secret. Other brands might provide you with a little bit more information, but all these technical questions unfortunately are somehow hidden by marketing talk.

That's one of the reasons why there is this very nice DPBSD thread. Dewster tries to uncover at least some of the technical questions. But finally you have to try the DPs for yourself to get an idea of what best fits your specific needs.

I'm not expecting them to hand out the algorithms and codes of the processing taking place, I just want to know in what way these techniques are different. I sure that can be explained without giving the competition the all technical details of the proprietary process.

If you call something PHI instead of UPHI you should at least be able to explain what the difference are to your customer; what's the use otherwise and why would anyone be convinced of these enhancements without any details ? I simple "UPHI is better than PHI, just believe it" without further explanation is not sufficient.

So, what do I miss with PHI and why should I bother to pay (so much) more for UPHI. Convince me ! (And no.. I'm not able to testdrive both in the near future so I have to go with what info will be released...)

JFP,

As EssBrace and mucci have already note, I'm afraid I am unable to answer the questions that you are asking to the extent that will satisfy you on a technical level. All I can say is that UPHI requires a larger amount of sample memory that PHI. More sample memory allows greater levels of expressiveness, expressiveness = better.

Some claim not to be able to hear the difference between a 'Concert Grand' UPHI sound and a 'Concert Grand' PHI sound, or that the differences are not noticeable enough to be worth the extra investment. Regardless, from a technical perspective UPHI is superior to PHI - it cost more to develop, thus instruments that utilise the technology are more expensive than those that do not.

Cheers,
James
x

batak, I'll have to look into your query regarding the sysex information tomorrow.

Kind regards,
James
x

Hey, don't forget about the NP Steve!

Cheers,
James
x

More sample memory can permit three things:

1. more samples across the keyboard, so less (or no) stretching is required for a given sample to cover adjacent keys

2. more samples within a given key, as a method to more accurately reflect the timbre and envelope changes you hear when striking a single note at a variety of velocities

3. longer samples, so that more of a note's natural decay is captured before reaching the point where you are instead manipulating a looped sound

Can you say which one (or which combination) of these is the function of the additional sample memory in UPHI vs PHI?

Yep, that's what I would like to know as well. Again - not the technical details that would hand Kawai's R&D efforts right into the hands of Yamaha&Co , but more the simple facts like:

- UHPI has a new larges sample set , resulting in longer decays / more samples per key und such..

And also:

- UHPI has a better snare resonance algorithm than PHI, or more levels of damper resonance simulation ...
and more of that kind of non-technical but understandable differences between the two technologies.

That shouldn't be so hard and keeps the Kawai processing secrets intact.

Yeah, but... what!?

You should keep your mouth shut, otherwise you are begging for additional annoying requests!

What I don't understand is: Why should a specific technique or algorithm like UPHI require larger amounts of memory? You can provide PHI the same amount of memory and getting better results, so what? Does the processing somehow require extra memory? This doesn't make any sense to me... So come on, give us some extra hints, otherwise I am forced to speculate too much about nothing...

Yes, James - I should've mentioned the mighty little Nord I suppose...it is still entertaining me, which is quite a feat given how restless I am about these things.

Fair points made above, or should I say logical assumptions made by anotherscott but UPHI may involve a different approach, who knows? For instance on the Nord, which Dewster so kindly analysed, there are two principle piano voices...a Steinway that checked out in the DPBSD test at seven layers (which is almost unprecedented in hardware DPs I guess) but unblended. The Studio Grand 2 (Yamaha) is blended and it is not possible to ascertain how many layers - but I would guess there are fewer layers than the Steinway. Both are very playable and very dynamic...but for some reason Nord have chosen to employ different methods with their sounds.

It cannot be that Kawai are using less stretching on UPHI because they do not use stretching anyway. More layers in the blend is probably the answer...and this would certainly tend to make something more expressive (and the need of more sample memory), which is what James is saying.

Cheers,

Steve

Okay, invitation accepted.

Please listen to Steve - his posts tend to make a lot of sense.
(must be because he's British...)

Good night chaps!

James
x

Hmm... I doubt that. To be honest, new layers would not explain a "new technology", a jump from PHI to UPHI... Sorry to say that, it's just a minor improvement of something that already exists. Improving something from PHI to UPHI I would assume that at least some part of the algorithm was significantly improved. For me adding a new layer is not such an improvement. Everything that does not change the algorithm itself, e.g. adding more memory, more layers, longer sounding notes before looping starts, less stretching etc. is not something worth a new improved "technology".


Otherwise KAWAI is kidding us... Marketing talk... You know what I mean...

Hehe, I knew this was coming...



Okay... (writing)
PHI: 88 key samples, x layers
UPHI: 88 key samples, x+n layers...

What else?

Ok let me add another rumours
Less sample compression in UHPI - more high frequency detail
Longer loops. More detailed keyoff samples for different velocities
;-)

"Less sample compression in UHPI - more high frequency detail
Longer loops. More detailed keyoff samples for different velocities"

Ok that's getting somewhere, unfortunately they are only rumors. As always , we are left in the dark as far as real facts are concerned.

So , when they sell a 20.000 euro BMW car with a BMW engine and they sell s similar BMW car for 35.000 euro with "a" BMW engine, would you think the salesman would refuse to tell the customer what the exact differences are ??! He would be all over you with specs and details, just to convince you to buy the more expensive version. What do we get from Kawai and alike: simply believe me - the top model is much better, because we added UHPI ! So what does it do and why is it better and in what way , you might ask ? Sssssssst, we can't tell you - simply throw in your money, believe us when we tell you it's superior and you'll be happy with it !

Yeh, really ...why not just tell what the difference are, I really don't like all this hokus-pocus and don't understand what's it's good for. Yamaha certainly doesn't rip off the UHPI when you just tell it added two velocity layers to the sample material and/or creates a smoother experience in pedaling / resonances and more off such details.