I am considering the 2 options. CUP2 is priced about 20% higher in my location at a local dealer.

CUP2 offers a slim poblished cabinet which makes it very attractive.

Has anyone played on both to compare the sounds and touch?

If you're interested in slimline polished instruments, how about the Yamaha CLPS-406 or Roland DP990F?

James
x

I haven't played on a Kurzweil, but have owned a Yamaha CLP for about 8 years now, and had the pleasure of teaching on several different Yamaha digital pianos from different lines, and I absolutely love them. I'll preempt my spiel by saying I have absolutely no experience with a Kurzweil piano, and so this is just what I love about the Yamaha products.

I really enjoy that you can adjust the venue setting on some Yamaha models, so no matter where you are performing, the piano should sound the same to you. I have also always found the recording functions easy to use (the CLP recording is a little easier than the CVP line for multiple tracks). Also, you can adjust the touch on some models from soft to hard, so that finger strength and age of the player should not be a factor in getting a good sound out of the instrument.

I could go on forever about these wonderful pianos, but it really comes down to what you want to use the piano for. If you want a good recording instrument, go with the Yamaha CVP line, but if you just want a simple piano with a few options, the CLP line is more than enough.

From the very few replies, it seems that not many people have played the Kurzweil CUP2.

The CUP2 specifications look pretty impressive. 140W amp/speaker. Wooden keys. Polished ebony. Slow fall board. Slim cabinet.

I checked the youtube. Could not find many videos on the CUP2.

The price of Kurzweil is also below other brands like Yamaha, Kawai and, of course, Roland. Generally.

Perhaps you should buy the CUP2 and tell us what you think?

Cheers,
James
x

Tried the CUP2. It is a slim DP with elegant polished ebony. Speakers and amp onboard 140W with tweeters. Slow fall board. Wooden keys.

This DP contains all the high end specifications.

It sounds great too.

But it seems like not many people in the forum have tried this.

There's a few favourable but brief reviews out there at Sweetwater, also on YT. I've never seen one in the stores, but it looks quite good from the photos and videos. The spec says based on PC3 sound technology, and there are a few favourable posts on here about the PC3 and PC3X. It goes on my radar if I come across one to play, as it's cheaper than the CS9 and LX15 which are also on my radar. (Spring GAS). You've played one - what does it compare like, and what with?

Does it use a Fatar action?

Hi James,

Yes, it has a new fully weighted, "wood embedded" graded hammer action, and, it is still a Fatar action.

http://kurzweil.com/product/cup-2/specs/

Extra note:

@motifmm6,

Just to put my two cents in, I previously owned a "brand new" Kurzweil Mark-Pro THREEi (purchased from an eBay seller), although the piano had issues with the pedals becoming sort of loose (with side play), and, the action felt a bit sluggish and not solid. Sort of springy/sponge-like. Here it is:

http://kurzweil.com/product/mark-pro_threei/specs/

The Mark-Pro THREEi was a flagship model a few years back, as it had been sold by the eBay seller (i.e., Doug Thiel) at both eBay and his other website, below. He was just trying to unload/sell as many of them as he could:

http://www.bestbargainamerica.com/

Also, the weight of the wooden fall board cover (over the keys) was so heavy that mine arrived with damage to the right side pin which holds the cover in place, as it went completely off of its track!

With all of the above issues, I sold the Kurzweil (for a loss) towards the V-Piano, since the seller above did not accept returns/refunds. Did not get any further replies on these issues, from the seller.

Cannot recommend Kurzweil digital consoles for these reasons and won't be buying any more Kurzweils.

Sound-wise, I think Kurzweil is quite good. I have read reviews that they sample the Steinways. I have not played on a Steinway, so I won't know. But the piano sound is quite distinct from Yamaha sounds. Main piano is quite bright and clear, speakers being relatively high-end, which deliver powerful sounds.

Action-wise, it feels quite close to an acoustic, especially with wooden keys. So you can see the wood when keys are depressed.

Slim polished ebony cabinets almost always give a feeling of elegance and luxury.

Like what PV88 said, I do not know about its quality, especially when they price their products at amazingly low levels.

Hi motifmm6,

My experience has been only with the Mark-Pro THREEi, as it was not a good one overall, so I ended up selling it.

The sounds were okay, although I was not at all satisfied with the somewhat sluggish Fatar action.

Any more experience/feedback about the CUP-2?

In my search for a first DP, I came across a nice price for a CUP-2 (circa 2000€) which means that it enters my current contenders list (Roland HP503 and DP990F, Yamaha CLP430, Kawai CN34 and perhaps also ES7 or even MP10 + stand).

On paper, it seems to be the best "piano" of the bunch (outside of the Kawai MP10 which is a totally different beast), apart maybe from polyphony. Are 64 voices that limiting?

Don't do it!

The Kurz sounds are absolutely ancient - they've used basically the same piano tones for many many years. They just don't compete with current products from other manufacturers. Furthermore the Kurz piano has a cluster of notes in the midrange that shout out from a mile away - totally recognisable tonality that for me makes them a complete non-starter. Steinway maybe, but I've never heard a Steinway that has the same characteristic.

The action, if it is Fatar, will be ok but nothing like as satisfying as those of Yamaha, Roland, Kawai etc. Kurzweil has some benefits, but certainly NOT in terms of piano sounds or key action and frankly, why else do you buy a digital piano if it isn't to reproduce the sound and feel of an acoustic piano?

Seen as a budget choice perhaps they have some merit (although the new Casio PX-850 or whatever they're going to call it will probably be gloss slimline black and will destroy the Kurz) but they simply do not compare with Yamaha, Roland, Kawai etc.

But I'll leave you with all those positive sentiments! Good luck in your search anyway...

Steve

Hi,

the CUP2 is yet another incarnation of 20 years old Kurzweil technology as far as the basic piano samples are concerned. Although the rest has been enhanced with the coming of the PC3 series ( 2007/2008 ? ) , the basic material is still ages old. That translates in a piano sound that is nit bad, but certainly not on par with 2012 offerings from other brands. No resonance effects, long samples, unstretched keyboard ranges, half pedaling effect etc.

The amplification can be very good, I don't know about that and the cabinet looks stylish.

The Fatar action is probably TP40 wood ,which is what you would find on the StudioLogic Numa Nero and which is quite good , but heavy and a bit slow in repetition (no third sensor).

I think it has an audio input, so if you like the keybed action and style of the piano, you might hook up a software piano , when you get bored with the Kurzweil offering and play if over the sound system of the CUP10. That's how I would use it ;-)

In short, if you are convinced by touch, looks and amp system and the price is right, it could be OK - but don't buy it for the ultimate piano sound (samples), cause that is really dated.

And what happened to the Mark-Pro Three of PV88 is bad, but don't let that put you off. It could have been just bad luck with that order / unit...

Thanks Steve,

at least that's clear! Too bad since it really looks nice and ticked all of my boxes spec wise.

I'll probably still pay a visit to the store (mostly a Roland reseller) and compare it with competition but I guess it was too good to be true :-(

Yes, you should play it. My opinion is just that, an opinion. There may be something about it that you really like but the interesting thing will be to go from the Kurz to a Roland with Supernatural sound engine and PHA-II or PHA-III action. Try that and compare the two. I suspect the contrast will be very revealing. Let us know how you get on.

Steve

@fiatlux,

As Steve mentions here above, I definitely do believe you will find the action and sounds to be superior on a Roland as compared with any Kurzweil, as I have owned both instruments.

Casio are yet another option but I haven't seen any at local stores and, since I have already a hard time deciding between Yamaha, Roland and Kawai, I did not bother looking too much ;-)

The Kurtzweil was just an accidental encounter.

The only other stylish piano I can think of is the S406, but that's way more expensive. The DP990/D90 are compact but not that stylish IMO.

Yes, it has audio in and USB connections.

Apparently, the control panel volume does not affect the "audio in" sound, which would mean that I could connect in USB a computer running a s/w piano and loop the sound back in the piano amps, muting the internal piano sounds.

Is this really a practical solution? I guess it would not change anything related to the action (lack of third sensor...).

I understand that price would let you prefer the HP503 (if deciding for a Roland). My experience is, that the 505 is so much better, that you should consider it as well. The 503 speaker system, keybed, digital extras (don´t remeber details, but one out of MIDI, USB connectivity or Recorder functionality was it) are lacking important features. You might get the full 505 functionality cheaper in a not furniture version DP from Roland. If I remember it right, the Fp7F would be the candidate then, but please download the manuals from US Roland and compare carefully yourself!
In comparison of the Roland HP-505 to the Yamaha CLP-440 I would say, that you will prefer more the Roland or the Yamaha piano sound, and depending on this your decision might be done. Both are excellent DPs in the other regards, so that I would here simply break it down to the sound question.

In fact, I did compare the CLP-430 to the HP-503 and I slightly preferred the cleaner sound of the Yamaha. The Roland sounded a bit boomy (?) in the low tones. I understand that the sound can be tweaked on the Roland, so for me they were both basically equally good.

I know that the 505 is a significant upgrade from the 503 (more so than the 440 is from the 430 I think), but I wanted to limit my budget. Otherwise, the Kawai CA65 becomes a very tempting alternative.

Also within budget is a 1y old HP 307 (see older thread), which, as far as I can tell, has all the bells and whistles of the current 505.

So, if I can make up my mind and convince my wife that an hugly furniture is the way to go (), I might still end up with a Roland...

Fiatlux, I tried out Kurzweil CUP2 some time ago in a local shop. I didn't like the action, subjectively it felt unpleasantly heavy. As for the sound, it sounded sort of like Steinway, but rather very filtered.

More importantly, according to this table, CUP2 doesn't support half-pedaling. That would be a huge drawback even if you used a software piano.

If I may ask, have you also considered Kawai CA65 or the older CA63?
I could try only CA63, but it had a beautiful wooden action and a stylish cabinet.
I also preferred the sound both to Yamaha CLP440 and Roland (I tried only FP7F).
CA65 costs 2260 Euro on the Thomann webpage (which is almost the same as Roland HP505).
I would definitely suggest trying it somewhere out, if you can.
Also, the older CA63 could be somewhere on sale...

(I found out that you mention CA65 just in the previous post right after posting it, so I edited my post and removed the part about CA65. Because you replied about that part, I returned it into this post again...)

Well, not as much in the end. It is mainly some brightness or some reverb, or the damper, cabinet, and string resonance behaviours. But the allover sound character will not change, it will always and clearly stay the Roland sound.
For example: playing with headphones I have reverb and brightness shut off, playing with the speaker system (HP-505) I have reverb on 1 (1 - 10 is possible) and brightness on 10 ( -10 to 10 is possible). Like this I hear the same sound, the typical Roland sound (which I love), different from the much brighter Yamaha sound.
The resonance settings in the function menu color this sound in a much more subtle way, making it fuller or clearer in the one or other situation, or sustaining with more body in the highs or lows. But it does not change the general color of the sound. Some of this resonance settings can be imagined like adding some body or reverb to certain notes in certain situations, while the global reverb and brightness setting are, well, global and general.

Yes I did (the CA65), and liked it as well. I could not do an AB comparison with the Yamaha and Roland (same store but different level), but I subjectively preferred it.

I ruled it out because it was out of my initial budget (<2000€, I'm trying to stick to it, otherwise you never know what could happen ;-), and then focused on stage and stylish pianos to try finding something that would better fit our modern home interior.

Having just identified a possible place to install the piano where it would remain discrete, a regular home piano may be re-considered, though.

I did also briefly look for a CA63. Thomann still had the "cherry" finish one on sale, but by the time we discussed whether we could stand the color, it was gone.

I thought that it had some sort of equalizer. I'm pretty sure I read somewhere someone who used this to attenuate a bit the lower frequencies.

My HP-505 does not have any equalizer settings, only a global brightness adjustment. The 507, RP700NX and other models which have the "Piano Designer" should have it, as far as I remember. The Piano Designer summarizes parameters from the Function menu (as the 503/5 have such Function menu as well) in a kind of quick access menu for specially adressing the sound settings out of the many functions, and then also adds some extra parameters for especially this. As far as I remember, the EQ settings are such extra parameters available in the Piano Designer.

The Kawai CS9, Roland LX15, and Yamaha NU1 are equally, if not more stylish and in the same form, which seems to be one of your criteria. More expensive yes, but then their sounds and action are all better than the KCUP2. At least that's IMHO having play tested them all.

Just a quick update on the topic.

I passed by the store selling the CUP2. The guy demoed some Roland HPs, and when I asked about the CUP2, the seller told me "I ordered two without prior listening. They are heavily discounted, for a reason" and did not even suggest playing on it. Pretty honest from the dealer... Not sure how he's going to get rid of them, thouh. Open doors day lottery?

I did not insist, especially as I found some of the details of the piano to look flimsy.

The CUP2 is a great option for many people. Most of the negative comments on this thread are being made by people who have not specifically played this model. It's wise for us all (myself included!) to restrain from commenting publicly on a particular model unless we have direct experience. I have played the CUP2 many, many times and find it a very good piano. The Fatar wood key action has a very solid feel and will appeal to piano purists. Regarding sounds, Kurzweil sounds are awesome! I can't believe a couple of the comments made on this thread regarding Kurzweil sounds...The Kurzweil sound engineers (based in Boston) hand-picked the sounds on the CUP2 from the legendary PC3 Pro keyboard. Across the board, pianos, electric pianos, organs, strings, you name it - ALL the sounds are awesome. A customer looking for a beautiful slim-upright cabinet, realistic piano touch, and a palette of 1st-class sounds at a decent price - I think the CUP2 is a good option.

Certainly there are lots of other options & opinions and I encourage people to put as much weight in the advice as they're paying for it!