I am in the market for a stage piano and have narrowed down my choices to the Korg SV-1 and the Roland 300NX. I would love advice from folks on this board who have experience with either (I know the 300NX is not out yet, so I mean experience with the 700NX). I know these posts usually generate a ton of questions from those who want to help, so at the risk of being long-winded, I’ve decided to include a lot of info about what I’m looking for.

I am not a keyboardist. I am a guitar player who writes and records. I would, however, like to begin teaching myself piano in earnest, and then move on to formal lessons. For this reason, the issue of “feel”, which I know is very important to the real pianists on this board, is not as important to me (yet).

Sound, on the other hand, is another matter. I own an upright piano, and have previously owned both a Rhodes and Wurli. I love them all, but now I need something that does not require regular maintenance and which will allow me to practice and record silently. Because my ear was trained (spoiled?) by my analog gear, I am very picky about tone. Even when I’m playing block chords on a recording that has 10 other instruments (all of which I suck at, by the way), I want things to sound organic and musical. That doesn’t necessarily mean that it has to be a perfect replication of its analog equivalent – it just has to have natural variation, organic strike and decay, and it has to sound good all by itself. I am 90% interested in acoustic piano, Rhodes and Wurli emulation. Organs, Clavs, strings, etc. are not as important to me.

I have done a lot of research, and have played both the Korg and Roland (700NX) in stores. The reason I’m posting is because I want to know from you owners out there whether it is possible to tweak either of these boards to compensate for what I perceive to be their relative shortcomings. Namely, I think the Korg acoustic piano is not as good as the Roland, but I think the Roland EP’s are not as (immediately) impressive. I also find the Korg design to be far superior, and I’m wondering if the Roland can be set up to make things like instrument, preamp, and effects as easy to call up as they are on the Korg.

Here are my opinions so far:

Korg: brilliant design (I hate menus and manuals), excellent Rhodes and Wurli, but unfortunately I find the acoustic piano sounds to be good but not outstanding. I have not heard the Sound Pack 2 sounds yet, however, so please chime in if you have. For the SV owners out there: Is it possible to improve the SV’s acoustic piano sounds to get anything close to the sound of the Roland SN pianos, or a good software modeler (like Pianoteq)?

If anyone wants to hear a great, detailed example of the differences in tone between these (or any other) dp’s, without being distracted by a given performance, check out Dewster’s awesome mp3 collection here:

http://www.mediafire.com/?sharekey=7ef2fd9c0f59e62824a64199ac7f73e562543888620acf74e91dc00c2f906379%3Cbr%20/%3E#1,1

Roland: In my opinion the Roland Super Natural acoustic pianos are clearly superior to any other stage piano sound. This might be because I am partial to modeling over sampling, and I know the Roland SN technology uses a combination. However, I have not been able to adequately tweak a Roland to get the same kind of organic EP sound that I get instantly on the Korg. So, a question for the 700NX owners out there: can you tweak the Roland to get the Rhodes and Wurlis to sound as good as the Korg EP’s? And after you have arrived at a perfect patch, how easy is it to save it and call it back up?

Incidentally I’ve eliminated the Yamaha CP50 and Kawai MP6 because the acoustic piano sounds are not to my taste. I realize that they are both highly customizable, and I have not spent nearly enough time with either of them to really determine how to max them out, but as you can see, part of my thing is that I want to be able to sit down and go. Also, I can’t afford a Nord Piano, and I don’t want a software-based solution.

Lastly, and this is off-topic but I’ll throw it out there anyway, the Korg SV and the Nord boards are the only DP’s I’ve ever played that have the vibe of a “real” instrument. I can’t understand why Roland, Yamaha, Kawai, etc. can’t design a board that doesn’t look like a black (or grey) plastic rectangle. Think about the design diversity of electric guitars, or even acoustic upright pianos. Why do modern keyboards have to be so boring?

Sorry for the long post, but I’ve thought about this a lot and I’m looking forward to hearing from people who are both technically and musically where I hope to be in 2 or 3 years. This board is just incredibly helpful for someone who is hoping to grow into an instrument.

Thanks!

I've not been able to check out an SV-1 with the Sound Pack 2 APs in place, but there are (or were) some demos of the new sounds on the Korg website and I have to say they seemed to be a great improvement on the shipped sounds. I briefly had a SV1-73 (sold mostly because I couldn't get on with the limited note range) and the EPs and clavs blow anything Roland can offer out of the water. And even the original APs sound pretty good in a band setting. Here are some videos of the SV-1 in use.

The Roland will almost definitely have a more responsive keybed and better APs, although in the past these have proved problematic in band settings - I can't say how much the "Sound Focus" feature on the new Rolands has helped that problem. I love Roland's keybeds (I also owned an RD700GX) but if it was the pick of these two, I'd still probably go for the Korg.

Nice solo Aidan on 'It Had To Be You'. The SV-1 sounds pretty darn good, but more importantly it sounds good in the mix and cuts through really well. I'd have to agree, I'd go with the SV-1 88, although, if not for live use, I'd goo with the R-300NX and get the RPU-3 Triple Pedals to go with it.



I'd have to agree. I have a had my fair share of DPs and the NP88 without a doubt has the coolest, most 'real' vibe, whether I'm playing Wurlitzer/Rhodes or the outstanding acoustic and upright pianos. Best stage piano I've owned by a long shot.

By "limited note range" are you referring to the 73 keys? That brings up another question - for the songwriting and recording stuff I do there is no reason to have 88 keys. However, insofar as I'd like to start really learning how to play jazz, and also some (modern, French) classical, should I definitely get the 88 key SV-1?

I think it's unlikely that I'll be playing in a band setting. There are a lot of real keyboardists where I live. This is mostly for home use and recording. Is there a reason you'd prefer the RD300NX in that situation?

I would just go with an 88 key keyboard from the start that way you don't have to worry about 'upgrading' later, besides, pay for the 88 keys won't cost much more than the 73 key, and if you're wanting to start taking piano more serious as you alluded, you'd likely be better off getting the full range of the piano going with an 88 key board.

As far as what's better for home...well you'd most certainly be better off I'd think with the Roland. I've had an RD-700GXF and RD-300GX, and used both for live use, and was very unhappy with both, even the 700GXF with its SN pianos. So for home use, if I were you, I'd go with the RD-300NX with the RPU-3 pedals, or even take a look at the FP-7F with RPU-3 pedals. The Roland, especially with the SuperNATURAL pianos sound really incredible through headphones and studio monitors, but as soon as I put them on stage, those same pianos sounded totally neutered-just anemic. Thus if you were going to be playing live, I'd go with the Korg SV-1 because it's cuts through better live, but since you said this will be predominantly for home use, go with the Roland.

Thanks very much for the input - how do you think the Roland SN EP's compare with the Korg?

I have the RD700GX with the Supernatural piano sounds. By far the best DP I've ever owned. I was practicing with an FP-7 before which was also quite good but the 700GX is a whole other level of piano sound. I agree with the above; that the sound through headphones and for recording to digital media is amazing. I also play my board through KRK Rokit 6 speakers and to me, the sound remains incredible. I have not done a gig with the 700 as it is much easier for me to bring my FP7 along but I would imagine that with a high quality sound system, the Roland should sound quite good live.

Check out VKgoeswild on YouTube, particularly her version of Chopin Nocturne, Opus 9, No 2. The piano sound is absolutely fantastic and the dynamics are incredible that she produces with this DP. It makes me realize the power of my DP that I have yet to unleash.

So far these responses (which I really appreciate, by the way), are confirming my suspicion - that the Super Natural piano sounds are peerless among stage pianos. However, my primary question about the Roland remains - is it possible to get EP sounds that are as good as the SV1, and also to set up the board so they are instantly accessible?

I'm no EP expert, but you might want to look at this post over at Rolandclan:

http://forums.rolandclan.com/viewtopic.php?f=28&t=33363

It's pretty easy to edit and save setups on the NX.

Too bad Korg got overly ambitious (IMO) with the AP sounds in the SV-1. If they'd stuck to a single AP they probably could have eliminated stretching. They should blend the layers and come up with a key sympathetic resonance algorithm too. Otherwise, for a looper, it's technically pretty good.

dewster, how are new visitors to this forum supposed to interpret such information?

You begin by criticising the Korg's AP sounds, but then summarise with "it's technically pretty good" - what does that mean?



Cheers,
James
x

If this is for home use and recording why not a virtual software piano? With software you can pick and choose the EP you like and the AP you like from different vendors. If you are recording you likely already have a computer set up.

Confused noobs (not that there's anything wrong with that) can become PW members (it's free!) and ask me what the heck I'm talking about . Whereupon I would direct them to the squinty fine print at the bottom of the DPBSD thread.


IMO, Korg starts out strong with pretty long attack and loop samples (as these things go, and not that I am a fan of looping in any way), but then dilutes the offering by (in order of decreasing importance IMO):

1. Stretching the sample set
2. Not blending the velocity layers
3. Not implementing key sympathetic resonance.

Instead of two piano voices, if they'd stuck to one they could have avoided the first item in that list of CONs, the most egregious offender IMO (after looping, IMO).

IMO.

Okay, thank you for clarifying this.

I very much doubt Korg would ever develop a stage piano with just a single acoustic piano. Moreover, I suspect consumers would prefer the variety/flexibility of two 44-key AP patches over a single 88-key sound.



Are you sure about this? A brief Google search suggests that the SV-1 does offer string resonance and key-off samples etc.

Cheers,
James
x

This is what I was thinking. I can understand the need for wanting some killer AP and EP sounds to choose from on stage, but for home use when their is a multitude of software pianos to choose from the on board sound doesn't matter as much as the action does.

Although, it can become pricey buying those virtual pianos and if your forking out 1600 bones on a new DP it better darn come with some killer sounds, sounds that don't need to be replaced virtually!

Suffice it to say that I work on software all day long, and when I come home I just want to throw on some headphones, flip a switch, and go, you know what I mean? The last thing I want to do is stare at another screen, reboot/troubleshoot when latency creeps in, etc., etc., etc. This is supposed to be the way that I get AWAY from computers, to the extent that's possible. That's why I said in the original post that I'm not interested in a software solution.

I think it's cool that people are starting to really analyze the way these machines work, and that an objective standard is emerging as to what is good and what isn't. It seems to me that the modelers are superior to the samples, though I know that point is controversial. I read the recent thread on this and it didn't seem to come to a real conclusion. I'm curious though if the relevant companies will respond to this analysis. I know that James works for Kawai so maybe he has an opinion. Pianoteq has been around for quite a while now and I don't understand why the big companies like Yamaha and Korg have yet to move away from sampling. Back in the day I would have thought it was a memory/cpu issue, but at this point my phone has enough memory to run Pianoteq, so it can't be that. Is it just that the big companies have already invested so much in sampling/looping technology that they feel like they can't abandon it?

Ivanosky,

As a current owner of a Roland RD700SX and more importantly, a Korg SV-1, I'd strongly suggest you listen to the AP's from SoundPack 2. The pianos in SP2 are worlds apart from the originals and the often mentioned issue of too shorter sustain is resolved. I absolutely love the Soundpack 2 piano 2A, but much prefer the EPs that came with Soundpack 1. As far as getting the APs to sound equal or better than the RD700NX, I'd think that might be a difficult task, however, the EPs on the SV1 are incredible - so gritty, lots of bark, and oh-so tweakable!

It's worth noting that you don't have to use all the sounds from any given soundpack at the same time. If you enjoy the EP's from SP1 and the AP's from SP2, you can simply install your favourite ones from each soundpack. Thus, making the library of sounds available to you a lot more extensive. This sort of sound replacement is not something that Roland offers without enduring the huge expense of add-on cards.

There are 8 'favourite' buttons on the front panel which give you easy and quick access to any of the installed sounds and you can save all of the FX along with the sound - effectively giving you 8 customized one-touch pre-sets within easy reach.

As is obvious from the front panel knobs, adjusting any affects on the fly is really easy to do during a performance to get the sound just right. I MUCH prefer this over my RD700SX's way of doing things and frankly the newer RD700's aren't much different in that regard. The SV1's tweakability makes it hugely fun to use! Possibly much like Nord owners say about their respective units.

The "piano noises" such as String Resonance / hammer noise and pedal noises are adjustable in volume using the included editing software, however they cannot be adjusted from the front panel of the SV1. To be honest, it's far from being an issue as these tend to be 'set and forget' parameters.

It's worth noting that the SV1 is primarily mono-timbral, however, Korg did listen to a number of us users who wanted "splits" and gave us a patch that has a Bass in the left side of the keyboard and Piano to the right among others.

If you want layered sounds or easily configurable keyboard splits, the Roland's are ahead of the game on that front.

Most importantly, as with ANY musical instrument purchase - trust your own ears. It doesn't matter what the science says or what happens to be technically more superior if you don't enjoy playing it. Get as much hands-on time with the instruments as you can prior to purchase - preferably with your own headphones and with a similar speaker setup to what you intend to use at your place of performance. Graphs and statistics will mean very little if you don't enjoy playing your instrument and can often distract you from the purpose for which it is intended for - making music.

Hope this info helps a little.

Thanks - this is very helpful and exactly the kind of response I've been looking for from an SV owner. If the SP2 AP's are really as much of an improvement as everyone seems to say, I think they are probably good enough for a lousy player like me. I'm going to try to find a store in my area that has loaded up the SP2 sounds into a demo unit. A tall order, but not impossible given where I live.

Certainly shouldn't be a tall order. If they want the sale, they should be prepared to upload the latest Soundpack along with the latest version of the OS.

It's important to make sure the latest OS is loaded as I believe it's a pre-requisite for Soundpack 2.

Also, I'm assuming you've already decided, but if it's going to be your only board, make sure you get the 88key version unless weight and size during travel are an issue.


regards

.

Call me crazy, but I'd much prefer one well implemented piano over two half pianos. Kawai gave up stretching a while ago, is it too much to ask for Korg (and Yamaha, etc.) to do the same?


When it ran the DPBSD gauntlet I couldn't detect any key sympathetic resonance (which is entirely different than key-off samples). Maybe it's one of those things that doesn't play via MIDI?

Anyone with an SV-1 want to test this? If so, here's how to do it (please record it and post an MP3 so we can all hear it):

1. Lightly press note C3 with your left pinky, and C5 and C6 with right thumb and pinky, and let any sound you hear completely decay.
2. Play C4 (middle C) loudly and very briefly with your left thumb.
3. Two seconds later lift C3.
4. One second later lift both C5 and C6 together.

Thanks for chiming in, Dave. I have actually read all of your excellent posts on this matter. Regarding price, I'm likely to try and grab a B-stock or refurbished SV-1 88 if I go that route. I think the Roland is retailing at 1699 to start, but I'm not sure what it will actually sell for when it hits the street. With refurbished SV-1 88's selling for 1600 on Ebay right now with a full warranty, I'm thinking they will probably end up being roughly the same price.

Just so it's clear to everyone seriously considering the SV-1, and please correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe Soundpack 2 is just a new set of presets. There are no new fundamental samples to be found in it, just new presets of the samples built-in to the SV-1. No?

.

Any of the new Roland's that combine modeling with sampling (NX technology), this results in near seamless dynamic control, are the go to boards for me.

I have owned an SV-1 73 for the past 4 months and I really enjoy it. My primary interest was in the quality of the EP sound, and the bark of the SV-1 made it seem like a real Rhodes. I wasn't impressed at all with the AP sounds, but bought the board anyway... then I downloaded the SP2 sounds -- and now I feel the AP sound is the best feature of the keyboard.

My favorite AP sound is Grand Piano 2A from SP2, and my favorite EP sounds is TineEP&DmpRes from SP1.

The best part about modern keyboards is that they can improve after you buy them (at no extra cost!). Go to you local Guitar Center and try out every keyboard, and let your ears and hands be the final judge.

Well, what if the two 44-key sampled pianos had twice the sustain of the single 88-key patch? Which would you prefer then?



You couldn't detect it. Oh well in that case...



Maybe it is.

Cheers,
James
x

Hi,

You're right -- the SV-1 uses custom ROM chips so no new samples. However, I think SoundPack2 makes use of some bass samples that were previously "hidden".

For what it's worth, I owned an SV-1 for almost a year, but decided to sell as I thought the SP2 acoustic pianos weren't enough of an improvement. The sustain got longer, thankfully, but what troubled me was the basic piano tone of the instrument. I found there was way too little mid-frequency information in those samples, forcing me to boost the mids by 8 to 10 dB to get anything resembling a decent Steinway tone. Many DPs - stage pianos especially - seem to have this kind of forced EQing, which is a shame really. I find Yamaha and Kawai are the only ones who do not hype their samples in this way.

Some further impressions on the SV-1:

- Excellent Rhodes and Wurlitzer sounds
- Very average CP80 electric grand
- Action feels good, but not great
- Average keyboard-to-sound connection on acoustic pianos
- Nice complement of front panel controls, although they feel a bit cheap
- Good modulation effects
- Brittle sounding distortion effects, including valve circuit
- XLR outputs a plus

All in all, a nice instrument, if you like the tone. Try before you buy.

-joachim

Any opinion on the EP's Jazz+?

Did you find a board you liked better jve?

I'm still looking. I might get a Yamaha CP1 if I can find a good deal. There's the CP5, but the user interface doesn't inspire me. These are not perfect pianos, but I think I can live with the flaws. To me piano tone and player-sound connection is most important, and the Yamahas fair well in that department.

cheers,
-joachim

Yes I think they confuse damper resonance and symphathetic string resonance without pedal. That happens quite often, also for the Casio's.

From Korgs advertising I believed, the PA588 has sympathetic, but when I tried it, I couldnt hear it.
Reading the advertising again, I came to the conclusion they mean damper resonances. Unfortunately there is no clear definitions about these terms.

All else being equal, like most people, probably the brighter one (as long as it isn't overly bright).


OK I just checked this again. Nope, no key sympathetic resonance in either SV-1 AP (via MIDI). Nothing but noise floor after the stimulus. I do hear a string damping effect that sounds pretty realistic, but that's an entirely different thing.

The stretch group transitions are really audible over the lows and mids (not the best timbre matching between groups) which is a shame. The mechanical key and pedal noises are a bit too prominent, though I assume these can be lowered en masse by adjusting the confusingly named "RX noise level" parameter. Too bad the various noises aren't individually adjustable as a little goes a long way and more isn't necessarily better - they need careful management to avoid sounding obnoxious.

I personally demand that all editable parameters be available via the front panel, even if this means a deep dive into cryptic menus. The USB driver will almost certainly cease functioning with some future version of Windows or MacOS, and then where will you be? IMO they oversimplified the UI in this regard.

I asked you about sustain length vs stretching - I don't understand why you need to introduce brightness.



I gather the SV-1 interface is intended to be as direct and immediate as possible. However it's still possible to adjust the sounds using a Windows/OS X application.



Well, I doubt Windows/OS X will be dropping USB support any time soon.



See my previous answer.

Cheers,
James
x

Very sorry, I completely misread your question. I believe you're asking if I prefer stretching with longer loop samples or no stretching and shorter loop samples. If so, my answer is: this is 2011 why are we even discussing this kind of Sophie's choice?


I'm looking in the editor manual, it seems you can only adjust the "RX noise level" which I believe is after all the noises are mixed together at whatever levels Korg has deemed proper and correct. Do you see where they can be individually adjusted?


No, the fear is that Korg won't keep their SV-1 editor and USB drivers up to date.

Just for clarification, the level of the "RX Noises" can be adjusted without the editor by engaging the function button and turning the bass knob in the equalizer. However, Dewster is correct in that these noises can't be adjusted as separate components.

Most of the major manufacturers have a pretty good track record of keeping updated drivers available and Korg is not the only one with this issue to bear in mind.

I suspect the Korg EPs are better, but Roland's seamless dynamic control over the acoustic piano makes the choice easy for me. Piano trumps Rhodes and all the other considerations in my situation.

Correct. These are some of the factors that DP sound designers must consider when creating each patch. I onced asked a Yamaha engineer why their DPs typically do not feature 88-key sampling. He answered that, in his opinion, musicians are more likely to appreciate longer sustain lengths than shorter individual samples for each key. We went on to talk about other challenges facing DP hardware - suffice it to say it was a very interesting discussion.



Okay, but this doesn't really answer my question, unfortunately. Let's try again: if you were placed in the shoes of that Yamaha (or even a Kawai, Roland, Korg...) engineer, and required to decide how limited sample memory should be used most efficiently (and musically), which method would you chose?



No I don't, and after watching this overview of the software, it doesn't appear possible for each 'RX noise' level to be adjusted individually. However, the editor software certainly does provide access to parameters that cannot be adjusted from the 'oversimplified' front panel (the point I wished to demonstrate), and I for one rather like this approach.



Well, there's always that possibility, and the same could be said for every other manufacturer. However judging from the SV-1's editor application, I'd suggest that the Korg software team is pretty strong.

Please note that I have no connection with Korg, and I'm certainly not a fanboy. The SV-1 looks and sounds like a strong product, with features that will clearly appeal to a certain type of player - arguably someone who is more interested in vintage electromechanical sounds than acoustic.

There may well be flaws with the SV-'1s piano patches - some of which may even be highlighted by your DPBSD test. However, there's clearly a lot about this model that does work very, very well on a musical level. Therefore it's important to judge the overall product as an instrument, rather than continually focussing on minor details that the majority of players are unlikely to worry too much about.

Kind regards,
James
x

This is something I don't understand. From your conversation with those engineers, are we really to believe that there is "limited" memory in a $1600 + piece of gear? I realize the literal answer to that is yes - everything has limited memory - but the memory and computing power required to run a relatively sophisticated modeler like Pianoteq, or a top-notch sample library, is easily achieved with a $500 laptop in this day and age. I assume that professional keyboards remain expensive compared to far more sophisticated pieces of technology because there is not as much scale to drive down manufacturing costs. There aren't that many consumers for these products.

But there might be another reason. For the sake of argument, suppose the DPBSD helped us arrive at a nearly-unanimous consensus about which technology is superior among the available options. Not that we determined the platonic ideal of acoustic piano tone, but that we determined that one of the given technologies was officially so good that for all intents and purposes a sophisticated audience could never tell it was digital on record or even in the room. That technology would have to become cheaper over time, because that's what technology does. There is hardware involved too, but again the cost of keybeds will only go down. And yet, somehow, I bet that the requirements of marketing, salaries, and the arbitrary product hierarchy that all of these companies maintain would keep prices about where they are now. In other words, maybe the only reason there isn't a board with no compromises that costs the same as an X-Box is that they need it to be that way.

The trouble is that widespread exposure to personal computers, at relatively low cost, has made us all something of an armchair expert. Yet such comparisons are apples to oranges.

For a start (as you do in fact go on to point out), there are the economies of scale. Personal computers are a consumer electronics staple - musical instruments, of which keyboards form only a small part, are a highly specialist market.

Computers use dirt cheap RAM to achieve most of their magic, using a bus design which broadly speaking, hasn't changed for years. Keyboards, on the other hand, use mostly custom ROM chips, immediately piling on R&D and manufacturing costs.

Then there are the physical components to consider. These are nearly all specialist and must be custom designed and manufactured. More cost.



With respect, there are good reasons to assume quite the opposite of your assumption here. Manufacturing costs, even in places like China, are rising sharply - people aspire to and deserve a decent living and the number of "sweatshop" economies will continue to shrink. Plus, keyboards contain a lot of plastic. Plastic is made with oil. Oil is becoming scarcer and more expensive.

What else? Then you have to manufacture and distribute, worldwide, a relatively bulky, electronically sophisticated and heavy item. Then you have to promote it. I don't know what Synthogy's advertising budget is for Ivory, but I'm willing to bet it's a fraction of the advertising and promotional budgets of the big Japanese manufacturers.



Unfortunately, the overall appeal of a musical instrument cannot be quantified in a series of tick boxes and feature points.

If you follow Dewster's argument, Roland's RD Supernatural pianos are technically substantially ahead of the pack - every note sampled, modelling used to disguise loops and layers etc.

Putting aside the concerns about note-stealing and key wear, I still find the SN pianos very aggressive and metallic, particularly in the upper mid registers. So I could care less how perfectly formed the sound is - it's not for me.

Then consider the recent love here for Yamaha's CP33. Here is a piano which offers only 64-note polyphony and is merrily looped and stretched across the board. Yet it still sounds pretty good.

We need to remember that musical performance is a different psychological space for both performer and audience. Neither are listening to the end of notes to detect looping etc. In such situations, factors such as overall tone and keyboard responsiveness become far more important to the final overall impression than the inherent sampling technology behind the sound.



Everything has compromises, from an X-Box to a Steinway D.

If one of the Big Three could put together this idealised keyboard we have in mind and deliver it at a price close to a laptop, they'd be doing it. They'd be utterly stupid not to. But they can't and they won't.

My speculation as to why DPs are so far behind the technology curve is twofold:

1. The hardware design teams are stuck in an ASIC mentality.
2. Most customers are not enthusiasts, and so are largely content with the current offerings.

Putting an ASIC in a big volume seller like the Casio PX-330 makes some sense, but these days developing an ASIC for a single niche product doesn't.

The development costs for an ASIC are astronomical, so companies try to put the same ASIC in as many different products as they can, and then milk said products for as long as they can, in order to amortize the development costs. This is rational behavior if you find yourself on the ASIC road, but the reasons for being on that road in the first place have changed both drastically and recently.

If the consumer base is largely content with the current offering, why spend more on hardware and R&D to improve what is likely a diminishing returns scenario? This leaves the enthusiast out in the cold in what amounts to an untapped niche market.

It isn't that they can't make a DP with an acceptably sized piano sample - the Korg Kronos is proof that this is possible, and Nord is slowly closing in. The other manufacturers may offer similar fare someday if we as consumers communicate our wants and needs to them. I try to do my part in this regard by being as technically informed as I can be, and by ranting on-line about the things that strike me as woefully in need of change. I know it gets old and I apologize for that, but they say reps read these boards, and short of developing and producing our own DP I'm not exactly sure what else we can do.

Mmmmm, sigh...hardware instruments and their limitations;

despite of their shortcomings - I like the way you can just switch them on and start playing without EVER to have to bother about all the stuff you're usually involved with when using computers. Believe me, I've got all the hard- and software stuff available for a decent software solution, but for me I figured out it keeps me mostly from what I want to do => making music. I take smaller sample memories and some outdated technology for granted in that respect.

E.g. the more the Kronos becomes like a loaded computer , the less interesting it may be for me and I rather opt for this simple RD stagepiano or another old-school hardware machine. Keeps me from getting lost in endless software tweaks and configuration sessions, that can keep you busy for hours...

Been there, done that. Now back to basics...I'm getting really old ;-)

...meet the Nord Piano-the best of both worlds! ;-)

.

Even with the less than stellar (but not at terrible) RH3 action, an SV-2 with Kronos derived piano sounds would be a bad a$$ little board.

I keep coming across mentions of the "SV-2." I'm assuming this is merely a theoretical possibility, or does anyone have anything concrete about this?

You assume correctly.