You might ask why I would want to test a V-grand when I have a Kawai RX-3 sitting in my music room, but that's a long and involved story. Maybe, having started with Yamaha's CLP-280, I really don't want to go back to a digital, but I'd at least like to find out what the V-grand had to offer. So why is it that the Roland piano dealers in the Boston area have no V-grands in their showrooms?

The V-Piano Grand is still fairly new (it's only been a few months since it was unveiled with classical concerts around the world), and I don't think there're many of them around. There's only one in London, for example (in fact that might be the only one in the UK...).

Why not try the V-Piano, using your own tried-and-tested headphones? It has the same sound engine as the V-Grand, though of course you don't get the extra resonances from the V-P Grand's speakers housed in the cabinet. But you won't get the full benefit of that anyway unless you can try it out in a quiet hall - preferably a real concert hall.

bennevis:

I have been following your posts on the V-piano for quite some time and I was hoping to try some of your "pianos" on a V-grand. In fact I have a Kawai MP8ii, which with Ivory, enables me to play an "expressionist German D" piano which I like very much. As you well know, listening on headphones is not as much fun as having the sound fill the room, which is one of the two things I like about the RX-3, the other being the keyboard. So it's the speaker system in the V-grand that appeals to me as well as the possibility of designing a piano that suits my tastes in my music room at a loudness level that is comfortable to my ears.

One dealer in my area who was trying to get a V-grand for display, suggested that the $18,000. U.S. MSRP might have something to do with the limited supply as well. I think your explanation is a more thoughtful one.

Thanks for your comments.

So far, in the demos on the 'net, the V-Grand sounds better to me than the V-Piano. I'm not sure whether it's some improvement in the actual sound generator, or whether it's other factors. (including my own imagination!)

Greg.

But, the v-piano doesn't have an audio system (amp, eq, speakers, etc). So what you hear on YT depends on, amongst many things, how those players are getting sounds out of the V.

Agreed. (that's why I included "other factors").

Greg.

Why not contact Roland directly or ask larger dealers if they sold a V-Grand and if you could be put in touch with the individual or organization that bought it.

I played the V-Grand earlier today.

Given the choice, I'd go for an AvantGrand every day of the week.

Cheers,
James
x

It is the built-in audio system in the V-grand that attracts me. Of course I could get such an option with the AvantGrand but then I would be "stuck" with the pianos that Yamaha had designated, and then I'd be back to where I am with the RX-3 with pianos that I might not like in my acoustic space. The V-grand has the added appeal of being able to tune the piano to my tastes, hopefully. I'm waiting for the day when we are offered a piano with a mini-grand enclosure, a good keyboard, good audio and a computer in which we can put whatever software piano we want.

Why?

Because it's so much better.

I went from playing an AvantGrand N1 to a V-Grand in the space of 5-10 minutes and the PHAIII action felt like putting your hand in bucket of sand.

Honestly, there's absolutely no comparison, simply because Yamaha makes acoustic pianos and Roland doesn't.

James
x

What pieces did you play on the two instruments? Did you find plenty of color in Avantgrand? Did you like the sound of the instrument? Do you believe the Avantgrand replicates a Yamaha acoustic accurately?

Frankly, my answers to the above presently would be (i) classical; (ii) no; (iii) no; (iv) no. But I think I may be in the minority on this point.

Jazz/Funk, yes, yes, yes.

That's fair. I do like playing jazz on it. I just played the third movement to the Mozart CM sonata K330 on the N2, though, and I am pretty sure I prefer the Roland RD-700NX for that. Reason: within a particular dynamic range (e.g., pp to mp), you can find a greater variety of color. The actions of the two instruments are, of course, very different, and I like shifting from one to the other (and to acoustics) to keep my chops up (such as they are).

If I had the money (and the space), I'd definitely treat myself to an N1 - a beautiful instrument that was a joy to play. The representative I spoke to mentioned that unlike the N2/N3, this model uses a new sample set of the Yamaha's flagship CFX concert grand - something I'm sure bennevis will appreciate.

Cheers,
James
x

Awesome. That'll stir the pot. ;-)

It's entirely possible he was either bull$hitting you or didn't know WTF he was talking about or else was consumed by wishful thinking. AFAIK it uses the same CFIIIs set they have had for a while. I don't believe the CFX sampling was even close to being finished when the N1 was released. In fact it's still not a shipping patch for any Yamaha product at least not quite yet. If they had stuck a early version of it in secretly they would have trumpeted it to the hordes so loudly you could hear the Yamaha marketing machine on the moon.



Ain't that the simple pure truth ? It really is that simple. you want a good action go to a piano maker ....

I guess this makes sense since the CFX is so new (right?). I haven't been following it. Is it considered a very large step up from its predecessor? I wonder if the sample used in the N1 is also longer/deeper/better technically. That is, since it came out later, did they use newer electronics and a sample that will come closer to pleasing dewster?

Personally I think its unfortunate--though I can see no alternative--that Kawai and Yamaha feel constrained to sample from their own pianos for their main sounds. Don't get me wrong, I'd love to have an EX or CFX (or even play one) but they aren't the very *highest* end pianos available--at the very least they don't offer a lot of variety. Still, to make their main voice that of a different brand would be really weird from a marketing point of view.

Roland is not constrained in this way (one reason it gets good reviews for sound) but then, it doesn't have the resources an experience manufacturing acoustics that Yamaha and Kawai have.

I guess one reason there is no perfect digital piano is that there is no perfect digital piano manufacturer. In the mean time...sofware pianos, despite their quirks.

BTW I could see the new sample thing being true--even though it's not marketed generally--simply because to announce it would dilute the value of the N2/N3, which are costlier. They'd have to update the samples on all three if they wanted to really market that fact.

Or they could just use the same sample in the N1. That sounds very likely and easy. The salesman probably didn't realize he was going to be quoted and felt free to take a few "liberties."

Since you can slice and dice the samples you can either prove or disprove that statement.

I am under the impression that all three AvantGrands use the same sample set.

The AvantGrand has a full grand piano action, whereas the V-Grand just has a version of the PHAIII. I wonder whether Roland tried to source, or make, a better action for the V-Grand? I suspect that if they really wanted to make a digital piano with a grand action (or a closer approximation than PHAIII), they could. ;^)

Greg.

Yeah, actually. If they wanted they could buy Renner action (or any company's) and put an optical sensor under it. They have a long history in electronic instruments, though, and to me seem to want to create generally good actions, not specifically actions that reproduce those of acoustics. And I think for the most part that's what their customers value.

I was mentioning to someone a bit back that this trend toward lighter, possibly non-graded actions among high end Roland and Yamaha pianos is them trying to make the most expressive, easily played instrument for human fingers without the constraint that the force placed on the keys be sufficient to push a hammer fast enough to make the corresponding sound. It may well be that acoustics are more heavy and more graded than is optimal.

Personally I prefer pianos that imitate acoustic actions because I don't want to have to adjust when I play wooden pianos.

Has anyone done the experiment of taking the AvantGrand MIDI OUT into a software piano and putting its AUDIO OUT into the AG AUX IN?

Or he might have been telling the truth.

Don't shoot the messenger guys, I'm just passing on the info he imparted to me.

The chap seemed reasonably knowledgeable on sampling and the use of sample sets. My initial question was actually about one of the 'Silent' uprights, as I queried the size of the main piano sample used in digital mode (i.e. when the headphones are plugged in). He replied that while he couldn't tell me the exact size, the Silent pianos typically use the same tone-generator as the current generation Clavinova, which for this particular Silent upright would have been the equivalent of a CLP-300 series.

Then I asked how this sample set compares with the AvantGrand instruments. He noted that the N3/N2 utilise a CFSIII for their main sample, while the N1 utilises a new CFX sample set. I queried if N3/N2 owners would be able to upgrade to this sample (via a software update) and he shook his head, explaining that this functionality was not possible on the AvantGrand models. He added that this approach was a little awkward for him, as it meant that the lower price N1 utilises a newer sample set than the more expensive N3/N2, but that this was simplythe nature of product release cycles.

Sure, it's possible that this guy saw me coming, and had a well-worked story pre-planned in the event of just such a line of questions. However, in my (reasonably lengthy) experience, Japanese people don't tend to bullshit.

Cheers,
James
x

I've asked around and lets just say his information comes as news to quite a few people at Yamaha including people who really should know this stuff. Yamaha's own technical material states quite clearly that the N1 has a CFIIIs based sample in it. So clearly I'm skeptical to say the least of this guys claims.

This claim regarding the N1 would be easy enough for Dewster to prove or disprove. There are forum members who own the N1, N2 and N3.

I wonder whether the salesman was thinking of the CLP-465GP, which really does have CFX samples. (or at least, samples from a prototype of same - that's what the wording suggests)

My local supplier has a "buy it now" button for this product, but I take it from Dr Popper that it's not quite here yet. (haven't called them yet)

Greg.

I'll just add that when I played the CFX last week, I also took the opportunity to play the N1 for the first time, and compared it directly with the N3 also on display there, and could hear no difference (i.e. they both sounded like their sounds were taken from the CF-IIIS, not CFX). OK, so the DP area is far noisier than the acoustic area (where I played the CFX) upstairs, and I was using the Yamaha headphones provided, but both the N3 and N1 sounded identical through them (and the action was the same too - far heavier than any of the acoustic Yamaha grands, including the CFX.....why??).

Kawai James, I'm of course biased, being the proud owner of a V-Piano, but any 'authenticity' in the AvantGrands' key actions - and to me they don't even feel authentic, being heavier than any acoustic grand I've ever played - is entirely outweighed by the relative lack of tonal nuances possible (especially at the extremes of dynamics), the artifacts of sampling (poor sustain, looping - which becomes more and more evident if you increase its decay time etc) and the fact that they basically sound similar to any other far cheaper Yamaha DP when you use headphones.

Like kippesc, I play classical, though when the mood takes me I also vamp jazz and pop, and the V-Piano gives me all the tone color that I can achieve within my technical limits that I can't get on the AGs. Through headphones, the differences between the almost uncanny life-like response of the V-Piano to your minute changes in touch, attack, dynamics and voicing (in the classical, not jazz sense, i.e. individual weighting of notes within chords etc) and the typical DP response of the AGs is very obvious: only the N3's excellent speaker system manages to disguise some of the limitations of sampling. But comparing the N3 to the V-P Grand is, IMO, no contest - the latter can (after a little tweaking) play and sound like a real concert grand, which the N3 just can't, whatever the merits or otherwise of its key action. Piano playing is a lot more than key action: you're not playing a silent keyboard, and with the V-Piano you quickly forget that its key action has no hammers, so amazing is its response to your touch, just like a good acoustic grand. I've said it before - switching from the V-P/Grand to a real grand needs no special adjustment in how you play. Actually, remembering the last time I played two acoustic grands from different manufacturers one after the other, it took me longer to adjust to the action of a Grotrian-Steinweg after playing a Shigeru Kawai than it took to adjust to the S. Kawai from my V-Piano. If you're wondering, currently I'm practising Liszt's Weihnachtsbaum (in preparation for Christmas), the Yellow River Concerto (just because the piano part is so well written and it's a lot of fun to play....) and the piano part of Franck's Violin Sonata (to accompany a violinist friend).

Bennevis, did you adjust the AG touch to the light setting (#1) when you made this comparison, or were you using the default touch setting?

Wow!

I'd love to hear some of your nuanced playing ... on any piano or keyboard.