Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Digital Pianos - Electronic Pianos - Synths & Keyboards Need Advice: CA95 vs V-Piano

@xhappyrabbitx,

No, as I haven't yet played on a CA95, although I do have a Kawai EP3 which only has two sensors and can say that even though it is okay it cannot compare with the triple sensor PHAIII action of my V-Piano, for example.

And, in regards to faster repeated notes it appears that no two sensor action in any digital cannot rival one that has three sensors, in general. It is just that much more responsive to touch with dynamic levels, also.

If you can afford to buy a digital with a three sensor action, why would anyone settle for one with only two sensors?

It will enhance the control and feel of the playing, there is no doubt.

I do agree with you, in assuming it will be an improvement pv88. It was after reading this quote I considered it may not be so black and white, though i doubt Kawai would change it if they didnt see an issue with the CA93 in the first place.. If the music shop hadn't messed up my order i'd be finding out for myself monday... :0(

Note that the comment I made refers only to vigorous, alternating hands repetition. (something I have never had to do yet, playing real music) When I compared a lowly upright piano to the Casio using this technique, I also preferred it to the Casio, despite the fact that uprights don't have double-escapement.

My piano tuning book talks about double-escapement, and it seems that it's more to do with rapid pianissimo repeats than it is for forte repeats. The key does not have to return as far, making it easier to play rapidly and softly. (e.g for soft trills) I haven't done any comparisons between the PX-330 and the MP9000 in this regard yet, because I'm not playing like that much at all either.

I guess the most scientific way to determine whether the third sensor would be noticable to a pianist would be to use the exact same mechanical action, and then compare two versions - one that was designed as well as possible using just two sensors, and the other designed as well as possible using three sensors.



It's possible that Kawai added the third sensor as a box-ticking exercise, to keep up with the Joneses, so to speak.

Greg.

Hi Greg. It is quite possible it's just another box ticking exercise, it's soon be exposed on here!

I honestly think the third sensor is only relevant to players with advanced technique; those who can (and want to or need to) play the same note repeatedly extremely quickly. A bit like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjghYFgt8Zk

Otherwise it's a non-issue in my opinion.

Aha... it's Martha Argerich. This (video) is truly the best demonstration of rapid fire repeated notes available, as she certainly has the chops to do so!

Happily concede that I will never have that skill :-) legend.


The issue is possibly similar to when I was into my motorbikes... arguing the toss over minor improvements each year boasted by manufacturers when us mere mortals didn't have the skill to exploit the improvements anyway.. however the knowledge that weaknesses are ironed out meant we could aspire to be great, and it is only our determination and skill limiting us..


That's how I feel about my new purchase.... it'll be a long term relationship not a quick fling :-)

If you find that the CA95 repeats better than some other model, you still can't say that the improvement is unequivocally due to the fact that the CA95 has three sensors. To be absolutely sure, you would have to compare with another DP that used exactly the same action, except with two sensors. However, it may well be due to the triple sensors - no argument there.

@EssBrace: Agreed, that is a good example I think. However, I don't agree that that kind of playing is the only kind of playing that would benefit. Again - my piano tuning book specifically mentions soft trilling. It gives an example of a xylophone player that starts of playing a trill softly, and slowly builds a crescendo. As the player plays harder and harder, the mallets will be lifted higher and higher. (imagine trying to play a xylophone softly and rapidly, if you were forced to lift the mallets a long way up - it would be extremely difficult). It's the same on a grand piano - the hammers start off very close to the strings, and the keys also start off with a very shallow return. As the pianist builds strength during the trill, the hammers and keys travel further. On an upright piano (or a 2-sensor DP), it may well not be possible to play the trill as softly, because if the hammers have to be lifted further in order to repeat, it would be impossible to play rapidly and still have the hammer strike the strings softly - the hammers would be accelerated too much because they are starting from a position that is further away from the strings.

Greg.

The third sensor can have a value beyond box ticking and fast note repetition.

0 - damp
1 - velocity upper
2 - velocity lower

If I understand it correctly, placing the upper velocity switch position (1) closer to the lower velocity switch position (2) will provide a better estimate of final key velocity. Having the damping switch (0) near the top of the return travel is probably more realistic as well.

@Dewster: Yes, I especially agree that having the top sensor higher is more realistic, at least, in theory. For example, it could make a noticable improvement to legato playing. This assumes that the 2-sensor DPs have the top sensor lower than the top sensor in a tri-sensor action though - I'm not sure this is always the case. (I remember measuring a 2-sensor Roland, and I think it's top sensor was relatively high - higher than on my Kawai MP9000, which has it at about 50%) Of course, if a 2-sensor action does have the top sensor at the correct point for damping, that would be at the expense of repetition speed.

Greg.

There are some nice audio clips comparing 2-sensor and 3-sensor key detection that we use in dealer seminars. The differences are easily heard (and presumably felt when playing), with the ability to express the range between legato and staccato playing one of the benefits.

Definitely more than just a box ticking exercise.

Cheers,
James
x

Repeated notes are common in 'classical' piano music, not just of the virtuosic category, e.g. Debussy's Minstrels (Préludes, Book 1 No.12) which is probably only about ABRSM Grade 6 standard.

Of course, they also abound in short bursts in piano concertos (Rachmaninoff's 2nd and 3rd, Yellow River Concerto), and, probably most difficult of all, in Ravel's Alborada del gracioso (Miroirs) - really taxing on the fingers, this - and his Scarbo (Gaspard de la nuit), where there are more fiendish difficulties than just the repeated-note passages....

@bennevis,

I agree with you completely about the Ravel pieces as I have always thought that "Scarbo" from Gaspard de la nuit was one of the most difficult pieces in the repertoire, as it does include quite a few repeated notes.

Here is an amazing performance (with score) by Marc-Andre Hamelin:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b7oJqi52d2I

Hi James,

Is it possible that you can post (or, give links for) the audio clips you mention that compares the two and three sensor actions?

No, I don't think so, I'm afraid. They're intended for internal use only.

Kind regards,
James
x

¿Internal?... What a pity. That should be a better selling argument than any person "singing" pros of new models in promotional videos ;P