|
Welcome to the Piano World Piano Forums Over 3 million posts about pianos, digital pianos, and all types of keyboard instruments. Over 100,000 members from around the world.
Join the World's Largest Community of Piano Lovers
(it's free)
It's Fun to Play the Piano ... Please Pass It On!
|
|
71 members (anotherscott, AaronSF, apianostudent, beeboss, brdwyguy, benkeys, Abdulrohmanoman, 17 invisible),
2,224
guests, and
427
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,070
1000 Post Club Member
|
1000 Post Club Member
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,070 |
Interesting how different the opinions are in this regard: - Some say DPs are a good substitute for APs for practicing purposes - Some say high end DPS are a good substitue for mid range APs - Some say DPs sound is good but the action is unacceptable compared to APs - Some say DPs action is good but the sound is unacceptable compared to APs - Some (one) say(s) DPs are superior in any respect to APs, even in the $500 price range - Some say DPs are worse in any respect than even a $500 out of tune AP ... YMMV
<~ don't test forever - play and enjoy! ~>
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 138
Full Member
|
Full Member
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 138 |
- Some say DPs are a good substitute for APs for practicing purposes - Some say high end DPS are a good substitue for mid range APs - Some say DPs sound is good but the action is unacceptable compared to APs - Some say DPs action is good but the sound is unacceptable compared to APs - Some (one) say(s) DPs are superior in any respect to APs, even in the $500 price range - Some say DPs are worse in any respect than even a $500 out of tune AP
What would be interesting is to disclose the playing level of each one of the persons behind each opinion. I have found that people recommending DP over acoustic ones tend to be beginner/medium level pianists. Indeed, for advanced classical playing an acoustic is a must have, years ago in a masterclass, some teacher told us that a good pianist must be able to obtain 100 different tones from the same key, and indeed DP that I've tried are far away from that. AP and DP are just different tools, if you want to learn how to play an AP, then a DP is a poor choice, unless you know what are you doing and how can you profit from it. On the other hand, you may want to play pop/rock music, then an AP is a bad choice. I was completely lost the first time I used a Korg some years ago, I couldn't adapt to the touch. Indeed, I find Kawai models more suited for practise, whereas I'd choose Roland for playing in front of public.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 380
Full Member
|
Full Member
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 380 |
My next move - after critically analysing the sound and action of a range of acoustic insruments was to go back to a comparison of the current 'best of breed' DPs to see if there was any chance that the minority of voices saying they were still a good choice had any validity. I played the best instruments in the shops I was in (including VPiano) and found instantly that the touch was nowhere near as good as the very worst of the acousic instruments I had tried. The sound was fine, and they were easy instruments to play - but it became INSTANTLY clear to me why a DP was not a valid instrument to learn on. You were comparing the V-Piano, costing in the 5k area, with similar acoustic instruments. When Roland launched that model, my reaction was that 5k would buy you quite a lot of second-hand acoustic quality, with some diligent searching, and so I couldn't really see the point, especially as it wasn't hugely portable either. But many of the high end DPs discussed on this forum are more likely in the 1.5-2.5k territory. IMO, it would take a significant amount of luck to find an acoustic which sounded and played as well as, say, my Roland RD700GX for that sort of money. I would expect to have to pay twice that for, say, a second hand Yamaha U1 in good nick. The sad fact is that modern DPs in that sort of territory are head and shoulders above some of the wrecks we learned on as kids (and in my case, are still called upon to play) and I believe that anyone who thinks the the former were better practice instruments has the rose-tinted specs firmly affixed, IMO. I don't know how advanced your daughter is along her piano journey. Is there a point when a DP will be found wanting in developing concert-standard technique? Of course. And at that stage, probably only an (expensive) acoustic will do. But for many learners, the fact that the thing they're playing is in tune and carefully sampled from a well-prepared piano (not to mention the benefits of headphone use) is an encouragement and not an obstacle. To say these are not "valid" instruments is a sweeping generalisation.
Live: Casio PX-5S | Hammond SK1 Studio: Yamaha CP4 | Hammond SK2 | Kurzweil PC361 | Moog Sub 37
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 380
Full Member
|
Full Member
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 380 |
[quote=mucci] What would be interesting is to disclose the playing level of each one of the persons behind each opinion.
I have found that people recommending DP over acoustic ones tend to be beginner/medium level pianists.
Indeed, for advanced classical playing an acoustic is a must have, years ago in a masterclass, some teacher told us that a good pianist must be able to obtain 100 different tones from the same key, and indeed DP that I've tried are far away from that.
AP and DP are just different tools, if you want to learn how to play an AP, then a DP is a poor choice, unless you know what are you doing and how can you profit from it. As I said in my previous post, I don't think anyone would argue that classical (or probably even jazz) pianists aiming at the top of the profession are going to be entirely satisfied with a digital. And I agree that a well-trained pianist on a top marque acoustic can get more subtleties out of that instrument than would be possible on a digital piano (though the "100 different tones" remark strikes me as premier bullcrap). But I'd add three words to that observation. At. The. Moment. The current debate, it strikes me, has similarities with the digital cameras debate of just a few years ago. There were the hold-out purists who argued that pixels would never beat film for subtleties of tone and detail. Guess what? The cameras got better and better and now there are probably three people in the world left who really care. A majority of pros use digitals. APs and DPs may still be different "tools", as you say, but advances in even the last few years have started to erode the huge gulf that was once a characteristic of sitting down at a digital after playing an acoustic. As Dewster will tell you, the technology and know-how is there. I just think that the lower profile of the market means that we will have to wait somewhat longer before we get to that moment than amateur photographers did. I'm not saying that digital will replace "analogue" in our case. But there's no reason why it can't get even closer to the "real thing", in a sector which has really come a huge way in just a short time. Don't believe me? Try playing an RD1000
Live: Casio PX-5S | Hammond SK1 Studio: Yamaha CP4 | Hammond SK2 | Kurzweil PC361 | Moog Sub 37
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,070
1000 Post Club Member
|
1000 Post Club Member
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,070 |
A good friend of mine is a professional pianist. Some years ago she was out searching for a practise DP because at home she was not allowed to practise with a grand. At that point in time she couldn't find a satisfying DP. Some months ago after a complaining session from her I suggested to go to the local dealer and redo the search. Guess what. She's now a happy owner of a Roland HP-307...
<~ don't test forever - play and enjoy! ~>
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 138
Full Member
|
Full Member
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 138 |
And I agree that a well-trained pianist on a top marque acoustic can get more subtleties out of that instrument than would be possible on a digital piano (though the "100 different tones" remark strikes me as premier bullcrap).
This remark was given in a masterclass, and indeed they are 100, but infinite I mean, understand the context it was given. But I'd add three words to that observation. At. The. Moment. The current debate, it strikes me, has similarities with the digital cameras debate of just a few years ago. There were the hold-out purists who argued that pixels would never beat film for subtleties of tone and detail. Guess what? The cameras got better and better and now there are probably three people in the world left who really care. A majority of pros use digitals. APs and DPs may still be different "tools", as you say, but advances in even the last few years have started to erode the huge gulf that was once a characteristic of sitting down at a digital after playing an acoustic. As Dewster will tell you, the technology and know-how is there. I just think that the lower profile of the market means that we will have to wait somewhat longer before we get to that moment than amateur photographers did. I'm not saying that digital will replace "analogue" in our case. But there's no reason why it can't get even closer to the "real thing", in a sector which has really come a huge way in just a short time. Don't believe me? Try playing an RD1000 I agree, but I was talking about the current state of affairs. How many years are we talking about? Maybe we will be lucky to see that, but I am highly sceptical. Just look at violins. And IMHO, comparison with digital/film cameras is not fully adequate. For the record, I have not the best ear in the world, but I didn't like the much praised SuperNatural sound. It may be technically superior, but I didn't like the bass/treble mixing, disregarding looping, the Kawais UPHI have a more balanced sound. I'm eager to try Vienna Imperial and Ivory II
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 17,277
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
|
OP
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 17,277 |
As egallego is implying above that people recommending DPs 'tend to be beginner/medium level pianists', I'll put my cards on the table and admit that I don't consider myself a virtuoso, but I can play all the right notes of most piano music in the right order (and at the right tempo), if I've practised sufficiently (- that's a joke involving Andre Previn, by the way). I've already mentioned some of the music I play (Rachmaninov, Ravel, Chopin etc), which I use to sort out the sheep from the goats of any piano, DP or AP. I look for positive key action (including the ability to repeat the note even when the key hasn't fully returned - most DPs and upright APs can't do this), complete control over minute gradations of tone, with no 'stepping' involved (here, only the V-Piano's modelling technology is up the mark, as all other DPs involve stepwise progression due to their sampling techniques), 3 pedals (i.e. including the sostenuto pedal) and half-pedal effects, and no 'bottoming out' of tone in fortissimos (which few upright APs and no other DP I've found can achieve). Before anyone makes any assumptions about my strength, I'm a puny guy weighing 135 lb, and am not in the Grigory Sokolov or Andrei Gavrilov (or Evgeny Kissin or Lang Lang or...) league in terms of muscle power.
And finally, I still prefer a Bosie 290 Imperial (or Steinway D, or Fazioli, or Bluthner concert grand) over the V-Piano anyday. But not uprights in the price range of my V-Piano.
If music be the food of love, play on!
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 138
Full Member
|
Full Member
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 138 |
As egallego is implying above that people recommending DPs 'tend to be beginner/medium level pianists', I'll put my cards on the table and admit that I don't consider myself a virtuoso, but I can play all the right notes of most piano music in the right order (and at the right tempo), if I've practised sufficiently (- that's a joke involving Andre Previn, by the way). I've already mentioned some of the music I play (Rachmaninov, Ravel, Chopin etc) Nice to have the opinion of an experienced player like you bennevis. May I ask which line of thought about DP vs AP do you feel closer? [See Mucci's post for the options]
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 1,676
1000 Post Club Member
|
1000 Post Club Member
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 1,676 |
I see a DP as a great practice tool, and it can get me 95% on the way of training. The last 5% is getting used to the other piano. I much prefer a good acoustic grand over a good digital piano. However having played a lot on an out-of-shape upright, I prefer my digital piano for practice. But I'm quite sure in 2-3 years I will have moved to a bigger place, and have myself a nice grand.
Currently working on: Perfecting the Op 2/1, studying the 27/2 last movement. Chopin Nocturne 32/2 and Posth. C#m, 'Raindrop' prelude and Etude 10/9 Repetoire: Beethoven op 2/1, 10/1(1st, 2nd), 13, 14/1, 27/1(1st, 2nd), 27/2, 28(1st, 2nd), 31/2(1st, 3rd), 49/1, 49/2, 78(1st), 79, 90, 101(1st)
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 365
Full Member
|
Full Member
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 365 |
I don't know how advanced your daughter is along her piano journey. Is there a point when a DP will be found wanting in developing concert-standard technique? Of course. And at that stage, probably only an (expensive) acoustic will do.
But for many learners, the fact that the thing they're playing is in tune and carefully sampled from a well-prepared piano (not to mention the benefits of headphone use) is an encouragement and not an obstacle. To say these are not "valid" instruments is a sweeping generalisation. Sweeping generalisation - perhaps, but *if* a VPiano is head and shoulders better then the rest of the DP world and is still completely outclassed by a similar priced AP then the point remains. My daughter has to date thrived on the DP - its given her a leg-up into basic keyboard skills and a lot of enjoyment - but the main thing that stands between her and very high quality performances is *touch* (shes at AMEB Gr3 level). Its the main point of focus of her lessons and the part of her technique that most needs strengthening. Having 30 minutes a week playing a Kawai GP is not sufficient to adjust to the vast differences in touch response between a DP and an AP. I'd suggest that the 'point when a DP will be found wanting in developing concert-standard technique' is found much earlier than many of the DP followers care to admit and that only regular practicing on a decent AP will give control skills that can be transferred across any instrument. On the basis of my research our piano purchasing has taken a back seat whilst we save cash for what we deem a 'decent quality' instrument (~$10k). Ironically this striving for quality will possibly hamper daughters development whilt she is 'restrained' by the limitations of our DP. (Just as a reference my piano test repertoire includes: - Gershwin Preludes - Chopin Nocturnes - Schubert Impromptus - Debussy Bits and pieces - Rachmaninov [extracts from concerti] ..So once again - whilst I make no claims of ground breaking excellence, I'm no 'Piano Virgin' either.)
Last edited by DadAgain; 10/27/10 10:48 PM.
Parent.... Orchestral Viola player (stictly amateur).... Hack Pianist.... (faded skills from glory days 20 yrs ago) Vague Guitar & Bass player.... (former minor income stream 15 yrs ago) Former conductor... (been a long time since I was set loose with a magic wand!)
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,913
2000 Post Club Member
|
2000 Post Club Member
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,913 |
And I agree that a well-trained pianist on a top marque acoustic can get more subtleties out of that instrument than would be possible on a digital piano (though the "100 different tones" remark strikes me as premier bullcrap).
This remark was given in a masterclass, and indeed they are 100, but infinite I mean, understand the context it was given. It's true that in the educational context of that masterclass it may have had some momentary value, but this claim has been intensively tested and the actual number is closer to 10 than 100, and that is for the very best and most sensitive pianists - most of us get less than 10. (The real sensitivity in piano playing is much greater than that, perhaps not infinite but very large - but it involves how to relate several notes to each other. In playing just one note, the number of ways it can be done is surprisingly tiny.)
(I'm a piano teacher.)
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,946
3000 Post Club Member
|
3000 Post Club Member
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,946 |
And I agree that a well-trained pianist on a top marque acoustic can get more subtleties out of that instrument than would be possible on a digital piano (though the "100 different tones" remark strikes me as premier bullcrap).
This remark was given in a masterclass, and indeed they are 100, but infinite I mean, understand the context it was given. It's true that in the educational context of that masterclass it may have had some momentary value, but this claim has been intensively tested and the actual number is closer to 10 than 100, and that is for the very best and most sensitive pianists - most of us get less than 10. (The real sensitivity in piano playing is much greater than that, perhaps not infinite but very large - but it involves how to relate several notes to each other. In playing just one note, the number of ways it can be done is surprisingly tiny.) Funny enough there is very little music that involves playing just one note. When you start stringing infinitely different combinations of the 88 keys played with 100 (or even just 10) different ways by our ten fingers with an infinity of different relative timings and a continuous ability to merge the sound through pedaling, the combinations are huge indeed. You are correct in arguing that much of what we judge as "tone" has to do with how we connect notes: for example, creating the illusion of a horizontal cantabile line with legato, voicing chords, exploiting the contrast between the rate of decay of previous notes and the volume of newly played notes, pedaling to achieve harmonically musical results, etc. etc. However, I would argue that there is in fact therefore an infinity of different perceived tonal effects that different pianists can achieve playing pieces on acoustic pianos. Of course, out of this set the subset of aesthetically pleasing tonal effects that a sensitive pianist can coax out of a fine acoustic piano is smaller, but is still indistinguishable for us from infinity. By definition, the acoustic piano, based on strings and a soundboard, is an analog device with none of the artificial, technology imposed constraints of a digital piano such as limited, stepwise increments in dynamics, finite, static samples, small number of notes that can be sustained simultaneously (polyphony), no reproduction of or unrealistic reproduction of boundary conditions that are easily produced when "banging" on an acoustic, unrealistically simulated harmonic string resonance, less responsive, inauthentic actions, etc. etc. An acoustic piano also does not have the onboard sound processing algorithms found on digitals to smooth out and homogenize our playing to make us sound more even and better than our inputs justify. Does that mean that every pianist will be able to coax more out of an acoustic piano than a digital? No. Acoustic pianos are much more difficult to play well for the same reason that it is easier to flip the "on" switch on your home stereo than it is to operate a DJ mixing table. It is also comparable to why it is easier to take a home movie with a digital camcorder that has technology to steady the picture for us rather than handhold a 35 mm motion picture camera. This is also why pilots tend to learn to fly initially by handflying a real-life aeroplane with real analog controls to develop "toucher in their touche", or seat of the pants flying ability with direct exposure to the aerodynamic forces and only later use digital simulations as practice devices. Some of the best classical piano teachers focus on active listening and tone production from day one of lessons. Such an approach on a digital piano is like teaching someone to cook by using his taste buds and tasting as he cooks but only allowing him to open ready-made supermarket meals instead of combine fresh ingredients in recipes from scratch. Sensitivity to fine variation depends not only on the capabilities of the instrument and the skill of the pianist, but also on the ability to distinguish them from the listener. Does that mean that every listener or even pianist will be able to hear all the differences? No. What we hear tends to be based on what we expect to hear and what we are used to hearing. Finer ability to distinguish comes with experience and training. What better way to develop this kind of an ear than by starting lessons as early as possible on an acoustic piano?
Last edited by theJourney; 10/28/10 12:33 AM.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 365
Full Member
|
Full Member
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 365 |
Finer ability to distinguish comes with experience and training. What better way to develop this kind of an ear than by starting lessons as early as possible on an acoustic piano?
+1 Nice explanation of how I see things too.
Parent.... Orchestral Viola player (stictly amateur).... Hack Pianist.... (faded skills from glory days 20 yrs ago) Vague Guitar & Bass player.... (former minor income stream 15 yrs ago) Former conductor... (been a long time since I was set loose with a magic wand!)
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 215
Full Member
|
Full Member
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 215 |
] Finer ability to distinguish comes with experience and training. What better way to develop this kind of an ear than by starting lessons as early as possible on an acoustic piano?
better way is starting even earlier on acoustic grand piano
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 17,277
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
|
OP
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 17,277 |
As egallego is implying above that people recommending DPs 'tend to be beginner/medium level pianists', I'll put my cards on the table and admit that I don't consider myself a virtuoso, but I can play all the right notes of most piano music in the right order (and at the right tempo), if I've practised sufficiently (- that's a joke involving Andre Previn, by the way). I've already mentioned some of the music I play (Rachmaninov, Ravel, Chopin etc) Nice to have the opinion of an experienced player like you bennevis. May I ask which line of thought about DP vs AP do you feel closer? [See Mucci's post for the options] I feel that top end (and I do mean top end) DPs are better than most acoustic uprights of the same price, but are still no substitute for concert grands if you want to make it as a concert pianist. And it would seem that some concert pianists are quite happy to practise on good DPs when they haven't got access to grands, or are constrained by their lodgings. Frankly, I discovered that it was a much bigger switch (in terms of touch, key action and sound) from a small upright to a concert grand than from my V-Piano to the same grand. Again I would stress that if you're a serious pianist practising on DPs, you must set your DP to a realistic volume level - and keep it there, whether using speakers or headphones. It's very tempting for parents to reduce the volume of the DP when their children are playing/practising so they can carry on watching TV or chatting about Barack, which is a sure way to damage their children's ability to learn and improve. I haven't tried any other DPs long enough to find out if they're equipped thus, but the V-Piano does reproduce sympathetic vibrations from other strings very faithfully and realistically (and you can set parameters like soundboard & string resonance to your liking, as well as alter the (de)tuning of individual strings for each note which also change the quality of the sound), and there's no limit to its polyphonic ability. But there's still something about presiding over a beautiful wooden (2000 year old Australian trees in the case of Stuart & Sons pianos, apparently) 9 foot instrument that no DP can emulate - which is why I still hanker after one .
If music be the food of love, play on!
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 380
Full Member
|
Full Member
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 380 |
*if* a VPiano is head and shoulders better then the rest of the DP world and is still completely outclassed by a similar priced AP then the point remains.
My daughter has to date thrived on the DP - its given her a leg-up into basic keyboard skills and a lot of enjoyment - but the main thing that stands between her and very high quality performances is *touch* (shes at AMEB Gr3 level). Its the main point of focus of her lessons and the part of her technique that most needs strengthening. Having 30 minutes a week playing a Kawai GP is not sufficient to adjust to the vast differences in touch response between a DP and an AP. I'd suggest that the 'point when a DP will be found wanting in developing concert-standard technique' is found much earlier than many of the DP followers care to admit and that only regular practicing on a decent AP will give control skills that can be transferred across any instrument.
On the basis of my research our piano purchasing has taken a back seat whilst we save cash for what we deem a 'decent quality' instrument (~$10k). While I'm happy that you both care about your daughter's musical development so much, and can afford to spend 10k on a piano for her, the fact remains that this is not even close to a possibility for for many families and my point remains that a good high-end digital may still be a better proposition for basic training than some upright wreck. I play dozens of different pianos every year for a living and I could comfortably count on one hand the number I have encountered this year on which I could play more expressively than my RD700GXF.
Live: Casio PX-5S | Hammond SK1 Studio: Yamaha CP4 | Hammond SK2 | Kurzweil PC361 | Moog Sub 37
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 380
Full Member
|
Full Member
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 380 |
I feel that top end (and I do mean top end) DPs are better than most acoustic uprights of the same price, but are still no substitute for concert grands if you want to make it as a concert pianist. Agreed. Absolutely agreed. But realistically, how many of us are ever going to make it as a concert pianist? It's not all about the technique, either. You also need the right character and mental focus, and not a small degree of luck. Unfortunately, these days, you can add photogenic looks to that list as well. As I understand it, DadAgain's daughter is currently doing Grade III. There's absolutely no reason why a good digital couldn't see her through that perfectly well.
Live: Casio PX-5S | Hammond SK1 Studio: Yamaha CP4 | Hammond SK2 | Kurzweil PC361 | Moog Sub 37
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,946
3000 Post Club Member
|
3000 Post Club Member
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,946 |
... a good high-end digital may still be a better proposition for basic training than some upright wreck.
I play dozens of different pianos every year for a living and I could comfortably count on one hand the number I have encountered this year on which I could play more expressively than my RD700GXF. I don't doubt that this has been your experience. Could you tell us about your initial training experience? What percentage of your lessons, practice and playing during your first 10 years of playing was done on acoustic pianos versus digital pianos? A travelling cook will come across all kinds of poor, old kitchens in the course of his work. However, I would rather eat a meal from a poor kitchen from a cook who has been classically trained to cook exquisite meals from scratch than a cook in a beautiful, modern, plastic IKEA kitchen whose only cooking experience has been microwaving ready made meals.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 17,277
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
|
OP
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 17,277 |
I feel that top end (and I do mean top end) DPs are better than most acoustic uprights of the same price, but are still no substitute for concert grands if you want to make it as a concert pianist. Agreed. Absolutely agreed. But realistically, how many of us are ever going to make it as a concert pianist? It's not all about the technique, either. You also need the right character and mental focus, and not a small degree of luck. Unfortunately, these days, you can add photogenic looks to that list as well. As I understand it, DadAgain's daughter is currently doing Grade III. There's absolutely no reason why a good digital couldn't see her through that perfectly well. I agree, but if he can afford a good upright that he & his daughter likes, all power to him. I do think too that there's such a subjective element (not to mention innate prejudices) to choosing musical instruments that it's better in a sense that you choose an instrument that you like even if objectively, for the same price, there are better ones around. Appearances also come into it, as the piano becomes part of the furniture. My V-Piano isn't the most pretty beast around, but for me, it's purely functional...
If music be the food of love, play on!
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,789
1000 Post Club Member
|
1000 Post Club Member
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,789 |
In all this religious fervor about D vs A I think the I is often forgotten. I as in the individual. From personal experience I can tell you that my daughter very quickly benefitted from going to an acoustic (< 1 year), whereas my son would be no further behind right now if he only had our CVP. So statements like "she is only at grade III or he only has X years experience", while conveniently objective, really only paints a minor part of the picture.
I've always believed that DP's "sweet spot" is at the ends of the learning curve. They are great for beginners (price, silent study, convenience, consistency, etc) and are great for experienced folks who've already established much of their technique. It's that area in the middle where I feel it's more important to have as much face ime with a good AP as possible. Now exactly when that period begins and ends varies wildly with each person, but I think the general pattern holds true for the majority of people.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Piano
by Gino2 - 04/17/24 02:34 PM
|
Piano
by Gino2 - 04/17/24 02:23 PM
|
|
Forums43
Topics223,408
Posts3,349,457
Members111,637
|
Most Online15,252 Mar 21st, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|