Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Digital Pianos - Electronic Pianos - Synths & Keyboards New digital piano for 8 year old Yahama CP50 or Roland FP-7F

Hi guys,

Am a non-musician and my 8 year old daughter has been taking piano lessons for the last 18 months and she's really into it, we don't even ask her to practice. She's been playing on a hand-me-down 25 year old (or so) Technics electronic piano and we feel it is time to upgrade.

After consulting with family, friends & a dealer, we're looking at the Yamaha CP50 as the primary choice, and the Roland FP-7f-BLK as the secondary. Both are in the budget range.

We're looking for a digital piano (don't insist, not the real pianos) with USB for storage and host control, good keys, good sound. She's project-driven so the usb host is key to hook up Garage Band when she's ready to tackle this.

I'm assuming I'm selecting the right tool either way, but thought I'd post this here to gather some thoughts.

Thanks!

Personally, I don't think you can learn properly unless you're sitting in front of a proper piano, which is why if you're going digital (which I am), I'd go for one of the 'cabinet' style DPs. the Yamaha CLP, Roland HP, Kawai CN/CA.

Sure the sounds and the keys and the action might be the same, but its just not the same as sitting in front of a wooden instrument.

We're going digital piano for mobility and we don't want to get the "cabinet" style ones, you get a better bang for the buck if you go with one of digital stage pianos. Same sounds & keys, less money

I'd rather have an adjustable height stand for this too. She's kinda short

Two completely different animals ....
One is a pure stage piano ... one is a home portable console type piano.

The CP50 stage piano competes with the Roland RD300NX and Kawai MP6 stage piano these pianos have no speakers .. the console equivalent (Roland) is in fact the Roland FP-4F (one model down the tree).

The FP-7F is the home version of the high end Roland RD700NX and would compete with the Yamaha CP5

The main difference is the stage pianos do not have built in speakers and you would have to buy these seperately.

The Roland FP-7F (and its stage RD700NX sibling) is consistently rated amongst the best DP's money can buy while the response on the Yamaha CP50 (and its CP5 big brother) is more mixed. Personal I prefer the Yamaha sound but that's possibly because I'm conditioned to it because I play a Yamaha Grand Acoustic piano but technically there is no doubt the Roland is a better piano.

There is no substitute for personal feel and preference .... if your looking for a stage piano also seriously consider the Kawai MP6 as its very highly regarded in this market segment.

I think that is complete utter rubbish, there is no difference between playing a DP in a fake wood cabinet and one out of it except maybe in your mind.
The only DP where it matters is a AG and that's only because of the action.

Then we'll have to agree to disagree.

Depends on where you're having lessons of course. And where you're going to take your exams (assuming that she'll be taking some grades).

I wouldn't like to learn exclusively on a 'slab' and then play my exams on an acoustic or 'cabinet' DP. Your frame of 'mind' makes a HUGE difference in an examination scenario. If you're not comfortable playing the instrument you won't perform.

I think the key action is way more important than the enclosure material when it comes to learning how to play properly. If the action is good in the DP it is very easy to go between APs and DPs. Thus, buy the best action you can fit into your budget.

For learning, I don't think you can go wrong with the FP-7F. The action is top-notch and allows a very wide range of expression (not always the case with DPs). The sound, while not a perfect facsimile of an acoustic, is technically one of the best, if not the best currently available under $5k. The built in speakers, although a compromise, are great for convenience.

The Yamaha CP50 may be a nice mid-range stage piano, but the action is not as advanced (two sensors as opposed to three in the Roland), the sound engine is "watered down" compared to its bigger brothers, the CP5 and CP1, and it requires monitor speakers or headphones.

The Yamaha has a brighter, perhaps clearer, sound. The Roland has a darker, perhaps duller, sound. However, the decay on the Yamaha is fairly static, while it is much more organic on the Roland.

This is crazy talk, and it's wrong.

It's not completely irrational to say that it's better to learn on an acoustic than on a digital (though I think that's wrong too), but you are saying it's better to learn on a cabinet style DP than a stage piano and that is patently false. Stage-style pianos have the same actions and sounds at better prices and often with greater functionality. There's no advantage to having plywood "cabinetry" except aesthetics.

A bit of fake wood here and there is not going to affect how well anyone plays or learns. Would you play a better game of tennis if your raquet was painted brown so that superficially it looked like it was made of wood instead of carbon fiber?

I guess I'll take the opposite side of most people who have commented before.

The FP7F is a highly rated instrument, but if I was going to get one of these I would personally go with the Yamaha. Roland's actions feel very light and, to me, unnatural. Yamaha's are a bit more conventional in my opinion (more similar to the "average" acoustic while Roland is similar to a "light touch" acoustic). It's true that it's a two sensor action instead of three, but that difference is generally not noticeable except in rare cases for advanced players.

At her age she's probably not super advanced, but you might have her play both and see which action she finds more similar to that of her teacher. Action should probably be the deciding factor, as both of those pianos have very good sounds.

Of course I wouldn't. But I would say that you would play a better game of tennis if you played on the same court you learned on rather than playing at a completely different venue.

Flip over to the 'teaching' forum and you'll find many a teacher who will advise against learning on a 'slab'.

Whilst I agree that there is no significant difference between the console type piano and the stage type piano for the (young) learner - MUCH more important is the piano keyboard action - I would add that it is a good idea for all piano pupils to have some experience on an acoustic from time to time, so they know what the authentic feel of a piano is like, and so they are less likely to have a shock when they come to a piano exam.

On the whole, though, I think today's DPs are a better option in the sub 5K market than acoustic pianos (unless you have luck with a 2nd hand bargain). The pianos my contempories and I played on back in the 60's, 70's and 80's were mostly very poor in sound and action and usually in poor or terrible condition. Things are much better today with the best DPs giving the player a very reasonable imitation of a good standard of grand piano.

And I think JPH42's daughter would do really well with an FP7f - a great option for anyone!

JPH42;

If at all possible, have your daughter play both and then graciously abide by her choice - and you are gracious, if writing the check, for this.

Some here are prone to speak of "The One True Way to Piano," but the matter of greatest import is to support your child's endeavor.

And, bless you for that. Not all here were so lucky, I'd imagine.

--Pat

As many have pointed out, actions in acoustics vary widely. The Yamaha grand I play very occasionally has a rather heavy action (almost cumbersome), and I think the CP50, CP33, P155 and P140 feel not too dissimilar from this. However, others have likened the Roland action to that of a Steinway (not to mention the sound). I cannot confirm this latter point as it's many years since I played a Steinway, but I really don't think that the Roland PHAIII action is unnatural or overly light. More to the point, though, is the way that it connects to the sound - brilliantly, IMO.

Hi Pat

You're the 2nd person to mention this - thanks for your input.

I'm starting to think that she needs to choose, based on her experience on a real piano at her teacher's.

Either way, I don't think I lose on the Yamaha or Roland

Piano teachers say things they don't know, and that are wrong, all the time. This is particularly true where digitals are concerned. Teachers are typically not experts on digital pianos as most do not use them.

I have a piano teacher friend who has been telling students for years that you can't learn properly on a digital. She completely changed her mind when she played mine because she was previously had not known that there is such a thing as a fully weighted digital action. Good teacher, complete neophyte when it comes to digitals--and her students have been taking that advice for years.

Any teacher who recommends getting console style pianos instead of slabs because they think it will somehow help technique is definitely saying something they do not know. There is no reasonable justification for such an outrageous claim.

Regarding the notion that the look of the piano might affect your comfort with playing, the best thing you could do would be to bring your own bench to lessons, so your butt doesn't get confused by the change of venue. No one does that, though, because it's crazy.

Glenn Gould excepted.

Fear of the new or unexpected IS something that can upset one's psychological balance when playing, and the older I get the worse it becomes: I find that I am much less comfortable gigging with stools/stands that I'm not familiar with (at least for the first few numbers). However, a young person is infinitely more adaptable, and I think it's good to get used to playing different pianos and actions, as long as those instruments and actions do not impede performance or development of technique.

That's a good point. It probably is a good thing to play on a number of different pianos, especially while learning.

However, let's assume we do want to match pianos for some reason. In this case we are comparing two pianos that are functionally identical except that one has cabinetry while the other is slab style. There won't be a difference in action or sound, which is the important thing when going from one piano to another. When going from your digital to your teacher's acoustic there will be a lot of differences that actually do matter (the sound and touch response, for example). The veneer or shape of the stand of on which your piano sits will be the least significant of these--not even worth talking about. That is, a console-style piano is not going to look like your teacher's acoustic anyway or be more similar in other ways.

Regarding the tennis analogy, hanging a cardboard sign with the word "Wimbleton" spray painted on it in my local tennis court will not help me when I go to London to play. The increased similarity between the two venues because of the sign is not where it matters.

Sorry to use such strong language when talking about something that could be considered opinion, but your advice is contrary to the most reasonable and common advice in digital piano purchasing and doesn't seem well justified. Most frequent posters in this forum use slab style pianos and for good reason. They are usually cheaper and very often better than the cabinet style pianos available. Cabinet-style pianos basically take advantage of the fact that most purchasers are not very sophisticated or alternately place high value on a certain aesthetic and are willing to compromise on functionality and/or pay through the nose to get it.

I would lean toward the Roland because I think, all else being equal, it's preferable to have built-in speakers (you can still use better external speakers if and when you prefer, but you at least have the option, and I think the vibrations make it feel more real to play).

Other than that, sound and action are just personal preference. The CP50 action is on the heavy side, the Roland is on the light. If you prefer the Yamaha sound but wish the action were closer to the Roland's, you can look at the CP5, which has one of Yamaha's lighter actions.

The only advantage with a cabinet style DP is that the keyboard is already at the height of a real piano and that the pedals are in the right place (and also stay there). And perhaps that the music rest is already there too. With a stage piano you need to set all these things up correctly yourself. There's a good chance the newbie will end up with a setup that is less than optimal for posture plus would then feel strange when sitting at an acoustic.

That's a good point. At least with the FP you can buy the (overpriced) matching stand. It would be sensible to also buy the Roland three-pedal unit, and devise a method to fix the pedals in the correct position.

If I might join the fray on slab/stage v cabinet...

I only started playing on DPs for the very first time 2 years ago because I wanted to buy one (- acoustics were out of the question due to neighbors), and soon found that cabinets were more expensive than the equivalent slabs. Once I'd got over the shock of their appearance - not easy as I'd only ever played on acoustics that looked like acoustics before - I realized I didn't want to pay for cosmetics or woodwork, or even speakers: I just wanted the very best in playability and musical experience, not appearance.

But then you should have bought an AvantGrand, which has the best of both

I will say only this about the OP's question. For an 8 year old (or any beginner), one responsibility of the parent is to regulate the volume to teach proper dynamic expression. I recommend to parents to limit headphone practice to no more than 1/2 of the actual practice time. A real piano doesn't have a volume knob which is important in training new fingers. If you monitor it to correct levels, then you'll get the benefit. Without that, it is significantly more difficult to transition what you've learned to the variety of pianos you will play.

As far at learning on a great digital goes, I believe that once a player reaches an intermediate level of play, they must have regular access to a decent acoustic piano both for better pedaling technique and to balance the "idealized" performance of a digital. Real pianos with minor imperfections teach us to be more flexible, to stretch and adjust to the real world. It's good to have both.

I think both offer a lot. My preference for Roland has nothing to do with any parental guidance or suggestions, but the built-in speakers on the Roland keep me from asking what will be your amps/monitors/stage set-up.

Teachers teach .... players play

Enough said

I think that if you for economical reasons or other can't have your child playing on an acoustic piano, you should give them another instrument. A guitar is a lot cheaper, less noisy, and more portable than a piano. But it's still a good instrument that will grow with them, while a digital piano is neither of those.

The power of a musical instrument lies in its expressive power, and later, in it's power to inspire. It does not lie in its power to show other kids' parents how "cultural" your child is. A trumpet, a flute, a drum kit. Any real instrument is a good instrument. A digital instrument is NOT a real instrument, whatever someone on the internet, or a salesman might say. It's something they might want to check out as they grow older, but not something that's going to make them continue to play they instrument from their childhood, through their teens and into their adulthood.

I've been a professional pianist for 18 years, and for those who care, a piano teacher for 9 years. Most of my piano students are there to fullfill their parents' dream, not their own. Which usually leads to nothing at all. Believe it or not, even though to you I'm just some random guy on the internet, I know what I'm talking about.

Like I sort of said, you can be a good pianist and even a good piano teacher and still know less than nothing about digital pianos. You (torhu) are certainly an example of that.

It doesn't matter that the music is created using transistors instead of strings. A musical instrument is just a device that translates human skill into music. It could take any form and that doesn't make one less "real" than another, particularly. People who think otherwise are typically old fools that wish for their youth when things were simpler. That's certainly how you sound.

Piano is a very special instrument. It is one of the very few that may actually be used outside of lessons and school groups. In fact, it comes in handy all the time for me. I end up accompanying people on it all the time and I'm not a professional. The guitar has some nice advantages, but I would definitely not tell anyone who wants to play but can't afford an acoustic piano to get a guitar instead. That would be quite a loss for them based on my experience. If it wasn't for digital pianos, my playing and indeed my life would be significantly worse. I'm glad you were not my teacher when I was making those kinds of decisions.

You've said a lot of dumb things in your few days here in the forum and I have yet to see you say something smart. I think this classes you more with the random guys on the internet than with someone whose opinion should carry some weight, so don't try and use your self-proclaimed stature to make your prejudices sound more legitimate.

Are you replying to me?

Ok, then, here's my reply.

I have being using digital pianos weekly for 12 years, so I'm sort of aware of them. I'm also the owner of a Roland RD-700NX. But I'm new to internet forums discussing digital pianos, so I have no idea what's going on in this world. I'm very familiar with synthesizers and music software, but to me that's a different topic than acoustic instruments and their digital 'cousins'.

'Simpler' for me would mean that the RD-700NX in my apartment would actually be comparable to a decent quality acoustic piano. Which it isn't. But I try to get by, try to deal with using it as my practice instrument. 'Simpler' would mean that like a guitar player, I could take my best instrument, the one that I practice one, with me to gigs. But that's just not possible.

Yes, I agree completely. But the piano is also a great secondary instrument. Many people playing instruments that can't play chords find it very useful to be able to play the piano. I'm not questioning the usefulness of the piano, I'm just suggesting that having a digital piano as your main instrument might not be best and only way. You could play the trumpet AND the piano, the trumpet being your main instrument, and the digital piano your 'support' instrument (sorry, don't know the English terms here).

I'm sorry if I made you think that. Guitar is my second instrument, and for practical and financial reasons I wish it would have been my first. That would have saved me a lot of grief, I can tell you.

I realize I'm not very diplomatic, sorry about that. My 'prejudices' are not that, but based on experience. What caused me to register on this forum is simply that I, for the time being, don't have access to a real piano to practice on, which led me to buy a digital one.

Well your right about one thing ...your definitely another random guy.... we've had a few around here over the years.

With all due respect, I think you're wrong. A piano is the ideal instrument for a kid to learn, not a guitar - if true musicianship is the ultimate goal. Most children who 'learn' the guitar just end up using it to strum chords to accompany pop songs - you don't even need a teacher for that (I know, I am a self taught guitarist who can just about get by playing Stanley Myers's Cavatina in John Williams's arrangement, but who have no hope of ever playing Tárrega's Recuerdos de la Alhambra or Albéniz's Asturias - I mostly just strum chords accompanying pop songs.....), whereas a piano - if taught properly - will instil knowledge of melody and harmony and how they work together, as well as use of proper dynamics, articulation, tonal control...

Most children will need to be pushed to learn any musical instrument, unless (or even if) there's already a musician in the family. What happens after the formative years is down to both child and parents. And a good digital piano - that allows expressive playing, even if not up to an acoustic's level, can develop musicianship. As long as it's used properly (i.e. no fiddling about with volume control just so that the parents can watch TV while the child is practising - use headphones if necessary), it can inspire the child to greater things.

Oh my dear.

What did I start?

Sorry OP.

This just sounds ridiculous. The rantings of someone who has very fixed ideas about what is right and proper. Useless to argue with, though. I see some efforts - good, because other people who don't know much shouldn't be subjected to this kind of silliness if they stumble across this opinion and are told by a fuddy-duddy that they can't really learn to play or appreciate the piano if they have no room in their life for an acoustic piano.

Comes to a digital piano forum and says "people should learn guitar or some other instrument instead of piano" and "digital pianos are not musical instruments."

Basically that behavior defines the phrase internet troll. I should stop feeding them.

Most kids never learn the piano even with lessons from a good teacher. For every kid that gets past the most basic songs, there are over a dozen who have quit and ended up hating it. How many kids that play a violin in middle school or high school ever play it after graduation? Guitar has a very easy learning curve, as you say they strum chords to pop songs. But the avenue for advanced musicianship is there, the fact that it easier to get started playing songs they like makes it a lot more enjoyable for the child.

Note that I was talking about what people buy for their kids to use, not what they buy for themselves. And it's fine to start your kid out on a digital piano, then get them an acoustic later on if they are getting serious about their piano playing. Some of them might turn out to be more into using other sounds than piano, hooking the DP up to a computer and creating music using a sequencer, etc. In which case a digital is of more use to them than an acoustic would be. This isn't all black and white. I'm sorry if I came off sounding like that's my opinion.

But as for claiming that a digital piano is more or less the same as an acoustic, that's something I cannot agree with. Maybe it will be true in the future, but currently it isn't. Current digital pianos have more limited expressive capabilites than acoustics, and don't give you the same feedback while playing (or inspiration, if you will). These things probably matter a lot more to advanced players than to beginners, though.

I dunno I have not one but two 7 foot concert grand pianos and there is nothing they can do that I can't do on a DP ...sure they do it nicer and I certainly prefer playing them but they don't give me "additional expressive capabilities" at all. Kids are far better taught on digital keyboards with lots of sounds. Never teach a kid to play a song that's older then 6 months ...once you've got them playing their favorite tunes off the radio you've got them for life. And that's best done on a DP !

It's interesting, this point about inspiration. torhu said:

[Digital pianos]don't give you the same feedback while playing (or inspiration, if you will). These things probably matter a lot more to advanced players than to beginners, though.

This is probably the case, but that does not mean that DPs - or synthesisers etc etc - are any less inspiring or less likely to give rise to a masterpiece. But you are right - it is not the same.

It is perhaps similar to writers using pens, typewriters or computers. The fact that a writer has written on a computer probably will affect the end product in some way. It does not mean it will necessarily be inferior, though.

From my own experience though, I know very well that it was the defects of the family acoustic piano I played as a child that inspired me to create something quite different - certainly not qualities that would be associated with a well set-up instrument, and certainly not envisaged design characteristics.

From my experience it's the defects of most family acoustic pianos, the keys and tuning, that inspire most children to play guitar

Yeah, digitals are pretty much perfect for kids learning. Cheaper, lots of fun sounds, small enough to go in their bedroom, and quiet enough that they don't disturb the rest of the house much, easy to record, etc.

Digitals certainly have limitations, but so do acoustics, especially uprights like most houses are likely to have. The low price and low fuss of digitals makes them a feasible choice for many households that otherwise simply wouldn't give their kids the opportunity to play. In my experience there are lots of young people who would like to play piano but do not because their parents can't afford lessons or a piano, while the number of kids pushed into piano against their will is small (after the age of 11 or so).

I think everyone should get digitals for their kids. Big expensive acoustic grands should be reserved for either very dedicated kids or adults, who have already shown that piano is important to them.

Spannish Buddha said: From my experience it's the defects of most family acoustic pianos, the keys and tuning, that inspire most children to play guitar

Ha! Yes, that too. But to put it in context - my experience, which was probably quite typical, was that the piano was common place, old fashioned, boring and faintly comical. The guitar, on the other hand, was exotic, extremely attractive & sexy, and of course, ultimately a stepping stone to the new music: rock.

But at about 13, I did make a recording using our old clapped out piano (which my parents had tuned once a year, by the way - middle A was always the first to go out of tune, but the tuner was too lazy to sort it out, I suppose). And this recording used the knocking keys, the lack of bushing around the pins and other short-comings to produce a piece of what John Cage called 'prepared piano'. But to me, it was just the available material. This is what kids will always do. It is only we old farts who worry about such things.

So I'm not sure who's being more conservative here - certainly for straight adventure, the acoustic is the one you want.

My experience is that most kids don't care that much about things like non-piano sounds. It's fun for a few minutes when I show them the possibilites, but they quickly lose interest. I know this sounds counterintuitive, but most of them seem to prefer to just play.

Actually I think that's true of almost all of us. Certainly it's true of me. I only ever use exactly one piano sound in any one period--whichever acoustic piano sound is my favorite at the time.

I strain to imagine who uses trumpet and voice sounds. Not anyone very similar to me.

That sounded pretty black and white.

First off - thanks to all for feedback on choosing the keyboard itself, I'll take her to the store and get her to try both units. Once that is done, we'll get the plastic out and install that in the basement in a jiffy.

I think that the "feel" which will be like her teacher's piano has significant value, if one of the two is too alien then it becomes somewhat counterproductive.

Secondly, if you wish to voice options / troll / hijack conversations, even if your intents are helpful, please don't. It's very annoying. The topic was to choose between two slabs, nothing more. If you want to debate, please start your own thread. Thanks for understanding.

Haha, it would have worked better to have said this about 40 posts ago. If you want to control the direction of a thread you have to participate in it a little more.

In answer to your question you got a few Yamaha votes, a few more Rolands, and everyone agrees that she should try both out and choose and that you won't go wrong either way.

I'm not sure I'd let built-in USB connectivity dictate the choice! Anything with MIDI out can act as a MIDI controller for Garageband. Anything with line out can feed audio to a sound card for recording. How about (e.g.) the P155, which has built-in speakers and optional matching legs, making it a pretty practical home piano?

And of course, the P155 also has USB connectivity. Sounds are not as high quality, though, I would expect.

Very true indeed! But that's why I spend more time here than in teachers section . Travelling along with fast moving technology is not always easy

My 10 year old daughter learnt only on digital pianos, started on very cheap Casio PX130, then moved to Roland FP-7F. She has no problems in switching between Acoustic Grand at Teachers / Exams / audition places. She got into Grade 7 (UK ABRSM) level and taking the exam in another 2 months.

Here is what she is at the moment

http://soundcloud.com/gayatrinair/sets/piano-recitals/

Got the Roland this weekend - my monkey tried both and she found the keys to be closer to a real piano than the Yamaha - thanks all for your input!

Mistakes were made. Sometimes the main conversation sparks a more interesting / contentious sidebar.


From one monkey owner to another: congrats!