I guess I'm talking more about including the SN EPs in the FP-4F. Who knows, the sample memory might already be sufficient, it might be as simple as a compiler switch. Where I used to work they played the expensive-uncrippling-of-software-options game rather heavily.

If anyone else is interested in my brief NAND Flash raw bandwidth calculations, you can read them at this post from a while ago. I'd like to know if they are somehow incorrect. If not, a single NAND chip is theoretically up to the task of producing gobs of polyphony. And while there are certainly other issues to consider, there aren't any showstoppers I can see at the hardware level. The NAND interface was designed to efficiently stream high-bandwidth media, and with sufficient RAM buffering quite a few audio streams can be supported.

I played the SNEP sounds on 300NX today and wasn't as impressed as the SNEP sounds on the 700NX. So, maybe I can live with SNEP sounds but I'm still interested to know if the EP sounds on FP4F are identical to FP4 or are they better (even if not perfect?)

I think all of the SN EPs pale in comparison to the EPs in the Nords and Korg SV-1s. When I had my RD700GXF, I thought the EPs were pretty good, but I've been utterly spoiled with the Nords. Being that SN is Roland's best sound, I don't see why Roland wouldn't put SN APs/EPs in all of their stage/digital pianos.

I do think Nord EP's are great but...

Too expensive for my taste
No model with built in speakers
I don't care for Fatar actions
Acoustic piano sounds have yet to win me over
Don't care for red equipment (only kidding.)

1. Hand made in Sweden - you pay a premium for excellent build quality.
2. Intended primarily for performing musicians who do not require built-in speakers.
3. Hmmm...okay, I'll give you that one...
4. Acoustic pianos are rich, varied, and freely downloadable.
5. Red is distinctive.

What's with this built in speakers fetish ?
All built in speakers are complete rubbish anyhow ... none of them would even come close to even a cheap pair of external monitors.

+2 ... but I'm not kidding.

If Nord's came in something other then red I'd have a few of them.

I CAN'T STAND the red.

In band gigs they are useless except to offer vibration, which might be a placebo to think you're at an acoustic. At home, or at a friend's house jamming, at a cocktail hour in a different room, between sets if I want to warm up quietly, or when you're at a quiet gig with a small mono amp; the built-in add some stereo imaging.

No internal speakers means you're always lugging amps to any situation and I prefer a stereo sound, which means two amps or a small stereo amp combo, which would be a third amp to gig along with two bigger amps for stereo. I gave up carrying one gi-normus amp a long time ago as well as pianos that weigh more than 50 lbs.

That's what makes the FP-4 and 4F so appealing. Best combination of weight and sound in my opinion.

And I generally like the EPs in the Kurzweils and Yamahas better than the Nords and Korgs...

Yes, to all. I don't think it's a placebo per se... I think you really do feel the vibrations, which does enhance the playing experience. And yes, just at a friend's house jamming, or to play cocktail hour at the bar without having to pull more equipment out of the main reception rig and the extra wiring and rewiring that entails... all kinds of benefits.

I recently played the first reception sort of gig with my CP5 – and couldn't help thinking about the convenience of, say a P155, whose integrated speakers should have been enough for making an already nice buffet a little nicer.

Not that I would want to trade in the CP5's sound and response, of course – but anyway

I agree with what's been said about built-in speakers adding to convenience in many situations. On the FP series there's a switch to disable them, so that further extends that type of board's applicability when other monitoring equipment is preferred/needed.

But there's also another advantage. Most boards with speakers also have a line-in. So if channels are at a premium on whatever mixer is being used, or you need basic monitoring of a second board as well, the line-in gives you more flexibility.

+5! Nord offers the best overall set of compromises for performance boards out there IMHO.
Yamahas and Kurweils do have great EPs. My opinion of Kurzweils in particular has changed significantly lately. I used think they were crap boards until I played some and heard some great sounding samples.

I'd be interested to try the EPs on the latest Kurzweils, although for the time being the Sparkletop '67 with a little 'Combo' speaker drive on my Electro 3 is sounding pretty tasty!

The band I'm currently playing with are hoping to give 'Street Life' a work-out at Tuesday's practise, so looking forward to taking the new Electro along for a jam. I'm just wondering how useful the Nord's amp sims are when you're typically plugging into a guitar amp anyway - e.g. if I'm connected up to a Roland Jazz Chorus, is there any point in using the 'JC' speaker simulation?

Cheers,
James
x

If what you're working with is anything like guitar modelers, you don't want to use a speaker simulation unless you're running into something that Full Range/Flat Response (FRFR). They're basically an EQ that will cut and boost frequency ranges to make it sound like the speaker in that cab. If you're going to run that through an actual guitar cab speaker, it's then going to be cut and boosted again, and probably not for the better.

For example, a Celestion V30 has about a 15 dB falloff from 150hz down to 60hz. If you have a speaker emulation that does that and then you put it through a real speaker that does that same thing, I imagine you're not going to hear what you want from those frequencies. Also most guitar speakers start dropping off in the 4k hz range so you'd have the same thing with sounds above that.

At least for guitar, these simulations are tailored for when you run direct to the FOH or into something that's FRFR.

All that said, you can always try and see what you think too.