Audibly not. I didn't mean to express that it was an audible compromise, more the fact that we should be offered 24bit PCM material without running the original material through an additional processes. Fussy? maybe, but I don't see why offering the original source material should be a problem..

Regards. Rimmer

Oh, I see that it's 192kbits/s. I doubt that I'm hearing MP3 artifacts in that case.

Greg.

Rimmer, I'm afraid that you really seem like kind of a geek if you're even regard FLAC as kind of a compromise. You get identical 24bit stuff with FLAC.... Additional processing? The CPU of your computer even don't recognize that FLAC is some additional work to do...

And regarding your lengthy post about MP3... You ignore that MP3 is transparent. 95%? 99%? I would even dare to say (if you don't have a hearing problem that somehow unmasks the psychoacoustical model of lossy codecs) that 100% can't hear a difference even with high quality equipment. I would suggest to perform an ABX test, this is an eye opener.

You're right that 24bit or even 32bit high resolution 192khz audio is absolutely beneficial, but not for end user reasons - it's beneficial for postproduction of audio material, so that you have lots of headroom. For the end result after mastering 16bit/44.1khz is absolutely sufficient, mostly also in a lossy (but transparent) format. So why DP brands should provide lossless high resolution audio demos? No DP brand currently does that.

I have a completely different problem with the demos currently available. I would be happy enough if the MP3 demos would contain real life examples, long sustain notes and stuff like that so that you can really hear the quality of the piano sounds. Instead they mostly provide some classical pieces or mixed down accompanied songs which sound nice but by no means show how the DP really sounds when you are playing it.

So the only way to find out is performing your own live test.

That's what I said all the time; the chuff sounds (I called it "zip, zip , zip") at the beginning of each note, especially in the mid register. I was already starting to distrust my ears, but lucky enough someone else noticed it too now. Listen carefully and you'll be surprised. If it's NOT the MP3 encoding, then there's something else very wrong with the sound. My ears never lie to me, they start to miss a little high frequency range, but "chuff, zip, whoosh" sounds are easy too catch ;-)

It's MP3 I regard as a compromise and more importantly the unwillingness to provide a true to life example of the instrument, which would include the D/A.. Anything other than a straight recording from the output of the instrument seems a shortcut/shortcoming to me. I'd have no problem with FLAC at all. If you don't provide an unadulterated audio file (and this has been proved in this thread) then people have every reason to question the data compression routine if they have an issue with the sound of the instrument itself rather than simply being objective about the sound of the instrument in all it's glory.



If MP3 is transparent then it goes against everything people know about the potential shortcomings of some of the compression settings. If the case is that any old MP3 codec setting is okay the it makes all newer formats a complete waste of time as well as anything over 16bit PCM for recording. Maybe James can tell us what the MP3 settings are on the MP6/10. VBR? LAME Encoder?



Okay. I agree with what you are saying about using the highest bit rate (and sampling rate) for moving data around, for processing, being beneficial but sampling a 16bit 44.1khz source signal at those higher rates only benefits the fact that you reduce the chance of losing resolution. It obviously doesn't increase the original quality of the captured source. What I proposed was sampling the source signal at the higher rate in the first place. There is nothing unbeneficial about that.. It appears that the audio we hear from Kawai is internally converted using an Mp3 codec to a memory stick at 192 then ran through Flash player. If nobody has a problem with that being the only reference material for their device then I have no problem with that. I have a problem with people claiming that anyone who questions that process as not being a perfect representation of the output of the instrument is being a geek about audio and has no basis to object.



Agreed. I tried to download the samples from the Kawai website but they are running through Adobe Flash player so I don't even know if their internal codec uses VBR. It seems people don't care that much anyway so i'm tempted to shut my gob on the subject.

I've tried to help people here that have said things like "there is no latency whilst recording audio" and "there is no point in recording using anything better than a low grade consumer recorder, or any old line in on any old computer". I'm starting to get a picture of the technical understanding of some of the general forum members and I think I am learning that people don't really care about the quality of the recording process of their pianos. Fair enough. I'm only trying to help. They are more interested in the general sound through their headphones and monitors and seem to care less (generalising a bit here..!) about recording quality. Even to the point they don't care about the material presented to them by the manufacturers, as long as it's in the "100% linear" Mp3 format. My recording process would be to record the audio through a quality D/A at 24bit (up to 192khz but usually at 44-48khz). If you go to a professional recording studio with your memory stick containing an MP3 and claim it's linear and dynamically uncompromised and that nobody will ever hear the difference then they will frown at you. Maybe they are wrong, but I doubt it..

I'll accept from now on that the general consensus here is that MP3 is a linear compression process (if you set any encoder at 192 and ignore any other settings and the encoder used) and nothing above is worth considering. If it's as good as perfect in people's eyes then i've run out of steam on discussing the subject. Again, I am only trying to help as well as get some advice on DP's for myself, from people that know better than me..

Regards. Rimmer



With the present competition between compression formats (open and proprietary) and encoder implementations (GPL'd, proprietary), any claims of transparency at any given bitrate should always be considered with some skepticism.

@Rimmer, right, that translates to: Be cautious if some encoder developer claims that its codec is transparent starting at xxxkbit. Absolutely! There need to be independent tests! For MP3 it is proven that 192kbit is in most cases absolutely transparent. Add some bits to it (like LAME -v2 which is a VBR format about 200-240 depending on the complexity of the song) you're on the secure side. So you always should only trust your own ears (doing ABX test...).

Again. I'd like to hear what James has to say on the encoder that they use in the Mp6/10 as there is no way of doing an ABX test without the original sample from the output of the keyboard. That's really the premise of my argument at this stage. Give me a straight through sample of the output of the piano and i'm happy. Anything else has the potential to have been compromised other than using true lossless compression..!

The Mp6 does sound alright but i'm concerned about the piano sound being a bit toy like. If this is the true representation of the output of the piano then i'm heavily leaning towards the FP7F at this stage.

Regards. Rimmer

Nothing is better than performing your own test. You might get an idea of how the MP6 sounds by testing any other Kawai DP that incorporates the PHI sound reproduction (e.g. AFAIK CN33). You should listen using good headphones BTW.

My ears are very compromised these days (right one is near useless). Having said that, I can still hear the difference between most mp3s and WAV files. I have to use these all the time in my work. Likewise, I can still hear the difference between most compressed digital piano sounds and those that enjoy minimal compression and more layers. That is why, unless Kawai pulls something out of the hat very soon, they will not be getting my business. And that is a shame as I was rooting for them, and actually wanted to buy from them.

Here's how it stacks up:
MP10 - I really like the sound, and I expect the action is great, but way too heavy for me = NO SALE.
MP6 - Great concept, acceptable weight, looks like a decent action, but compromised piano sounds = NO SALE.

Here's how to put it right:
Give the MP6 the core sounds (where have I heard that before?) of the MP10 - by which I mean UPHI AP and EP sounds. I'd be happy with less selection, providing the main bases of Grand, Rhodes and Wurlitzer were covered, and keep the price under 2k (CP50 is $1699). This MP6EX (thanks to whoever coined that) would then be able to compete more readily against the new Rolands, the Nord, and the Yamaha CP series. What possible reason, other than fear of undermining MP10 sales, could Kawai have for not doing that? And that fear, in my view, is without foundation. How many gigging musicians who are over thirty and don't live in a gym are going to be slinging an MP10 in the back of their car every weekend?

The old MP5 at $1099 US was a good deal at the time. The new MP6 is $1499 at a time when Roland is introducing SN across the range. It is expected they will have an RD-300NX and an FP-4f in the new year, probably at a similar price point. What then will be the attraction of the MP6 beyond its controller functions (and I can get a Casio for $799 to do that)? It seems almost miserly to put a compromised sound engine into a professional machine at a time when the industry is (at last) moving forward, and trying to play catch up with the software vanguard.

I sold my RD and my Electro in anticipation of the MP6, and that's why I'm feeling so disappointed. I know none of us have played one yet (will we ever?), but the difference between the MP6 and MP10 recordings (mp3 or not) is quite clear. The MP10 is professional, the MP6 is not.

That's a clear downside of MP3 and other lossy formats - it's not optimal for the hearing impaired (or those whose ears are somehow compromised). In these cases often the psychoacoustical methods do not work because masking some sound pieces do not work the same way as with people that don't have any hearing issues.

As stated in the owner's manual, the codec is licensed from Spirit and encodes at 192 kbits fixed.

Kind regards,
James
x

Thanks James. Never heard of them but they seem to have some audio presence on the internet. Apparently they make an Mp3 encoder with a EQ built in..

If you speak with the tech guys at Kawai and ask for a lossless version of the MP6/10 output, then that would be good. I seriously doubt they wouldn't see the value in sampling the output of both units using a quality A/D and posting it to an Mp3 sceptic. If the units are in the manufacturing stage then hopefully they could find the time. If they believe an Mp3 from a memory stick a suitable representation of the output from the instruments then I'll take it on the chin and make my conclusions from there. I don't want to come across as being an ass. It's a serious request for my own personal reasons.

I think I mentioned before that I am in Qatar working for five weeks (three weeks in..!). I have a bunch of cash put aside for a DP and am in the same situation as number of people are in here (mainly voxpops it would seem who feels much the same as me about the Kawai situation).

Despite the fact that I live in one of the smaller UK cities, there are at least two DP sellers that sell Kawai. When i'm back in the UK I am going to visit them all a few times. I will check the CN33 and all the others suggested. I'll take my mate with me who is a Roland SX owner (who has played the GX and said it's a 'little' bit better but not worth the extra cash..). I'll give a report back when that happens and hopefully get a go on an MP6, if one should turn up for demo duties.. I'm not giving up the thought of buying one until i've tried it. I promise to report what I find here so hopefully it will benefit some of the people that may not have a chance to do that same..

Good headphones will be taken when I go. I know my headphones well so I think I can judge the sound pretty well..!


Regards. Rimmer

The Casio PX-3 only has two physical zones (albeit 4 logical ones)... that is, the keyboard only supports one split point, whereas the Kawai supports 3 split points, for four physical zones. Also, the Kawai's 4 faders functions as 4 real-time volume controls for the 4-zones, the Casio has no real time zone volume controls. Likewise, the Kawai has quick on-off switches for the 4 zones, and velocity switched zones, the Casio doesn't. Also, the Kawai has a tonewheel organ mode (and a noticeably better, albeit still imperfect, leslie emulation). Kawai also has a mod wheel and expression pedal input, for two MIDI continuous controllers (Casio has none, a bit of a limitation for a MIDI controller). I'd also be willing to bet that the Kawai has a better action and probably better piano and EP sounds than the Casio.

BTW, I noticed Sweetwater now has the MP6 in stock, a bit ahead of schedule (I think they had previously given an estimate of the week of 11/6). Personally, I'm sticking with the PX-3 despite its flaws, because it weighs half as much. I can deal with 23.6 lbs, not with 47.4. (Plus case!) But I admit, the MP6 does make me drool a bit. I wish they had their feature set in a lightweight box, but I guess so much of their reputation is based on their action, and you can't get a really top quality action in something so light weight, so I just think it's something we're unlikely to see. Meanwhile, I'm looking at the Kurzweil SP4, whose feature set is closer to the Kawai than the Casio, but with only 76 semi-weighted keys. They do have an 88 coming out, though.

About the ivory surface. On my CN33 it's very nice, not shiny polished plastic, no signs of wear, and I would hope not after 5 months or so, still clean. I have played the Roland Ivory on a RD700GX in a store - it was disgustingly filthy and the store owners couldn't get it clean. I also played a HP307 with Ivory, looked and felt fine. I think the ACTION comes across as a more important factor in comparing the keyboard differences between the Roland an Kawais rather than the ivory surface feel.

MP10 wow to much to read .. any word when will it come to the states .?? it really looks like its going to have the best touch on
the Dp market out there.

Ha! I had the same experience. I was almost afraid to touch it, with all that cootie evidence on display.

MP10 demo video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RL6VeyvMcB0

Aaron

Thanks for the link, the MP10 looks really good.

Are we sure the MP10 is identical action-wise to the CA93? Or does Kawai ship "portable" version of its actions.

Regards!

Yes, MP10 is the same as the CA93 and MP6 is the same as the CN33.

Aaron

Too much talking, not enough playing. And that cacophony at the end...just excruciating! Cheesy, sleazy noises. However, the MP10 looks really nice, not what I'd visualised with the way the end cheeks are made and their shape etc, but very nice. Looks like a quality piece of kit throughout.

Steve

The keys on my G8 showed excessive wear after using it for about 1 month. I was not pleased. You think they would put those surfaces through some rigorous testing before release. I hope all is fixed with PHIII.

Zum kotzen!

I don't know if I'd go that far, but I would agree that was a pretty poor demo. He really should have stopped talking and just demo'd the sounds (and what's with mentioning the amp sim and not even letting us hear the differences).

I'm still looking forward to trying one, but not because of this video.

Aaron

Hi Guys

I have been enjoying your posts over the last several weeks. I went ahead and Ordered a Kawai MP6 on line since I could not get one to test. I was able to listen and play a CA93 so I am familier with the sounds from the MP10 so to speak. I just got word they are shipping the MP6. I plan to review it and get back to you all with my thoughts. I have been playing for about 35 years. but I started getting back to playing seriously in the last 5 years. So I already have a Kawai ES4, Moog Synth, 1973 Fender Rhodes 88 Mk1 , and a Baldwin 243. The MP6 will be a gigging and practice board for me at my house. I will use the ES4 at the office for "practice Breaks".

So next week I should have the MP6 in my fingers and be able to give you all a review.

FrankDaddy, I hope you find the MP6 more than twice as good as the mp3s! Actually, I hope you prove my skepticism to be completely unfounded - at which point I will eat my words and buy one.

What I would really like to know about is the dynamic range and whether it feels "organic." When you play ppp, does the MP6 respond with a softer, more muted timbre, or does the volume just decrease from p? Can you really dig in to the EPs and imagine you're playing your Mk1? What are the synth and organ sounds really like?

Good luck and thanks for being our guinea pig!

wow it looks and sounds wonderfull ithink it won over the Rd700nx for me

actually it does not sound all that wonderfull sound very standar, but looks really great .

too much taking!!!!!

DATOS SOBRE LA EMPRESA Y SU operación

http://keyboards-midi.musiciansfriend.com/product/Kawai-MP10-Professional-Stage-Piano?sku=H66083


Kawai MP10 Professional Stage Piano
$2,499.00


Now , i think its going to be a easy choice bweten the RD700nx and this one for a stage piano