There's been few months since I traded my CA63 with wooden RM3 action for a MP6 with plastic RH action. I can certainly say I like RH better. It just feels right. The weight and resistance are exactly the way I like them. I am not saying RM3 is a bad action. Yet there was something I constantly needed to adjust - touch response, sound brightness, EQ, sound volume... RH always feels right. I just turn on and play.

I like RH too although I've only played one a couple of times. I'd probably place RM3 above it but it's more a matter of preference rather than better or worse. RH is excellent for a plastic DP action.

Indeed, it's unbelievable what level of realism has been achieved by a plastic action not relying on long keys, balanced pivot points (or whatever that's called) and anything else resembling the the real thing. I've seen the transparent demo units for the RH and the escapement seems like a joke with the tiny slitted rubber, yet in reality it feels and works great. Engineers obviously did a great job

Yeah, I've heard a few people say they prefer the RH action. It certainly isn't nearly as close to an acoustic design in its construction or materials as the wood actions but for various reasons, a decemtn number of people prefer it. In fact, I sometimes wonder if the reason people prefer RM3 or GH is because they are in the top end products. Somehow knowing something is expensive or in some way authentic (made of wood) can color our perception.

Unfortunately I have not been able to test out a Kawai plastic action. No nearby dealers. But based on what I've read previously in the forum, I can easily believe that you feel that way.

The new GF certainly feels more 'real' to me than the RH / RH II. RM3 I was also always mixed about, whether I liked it better than RH or not. Perhaps there's also more variation between keybeds with RM3, so one DP could suit you better than another from a different batch, who knows...

I'm not even sure yet if I like the RH II really that much more than the older RH. It's definitely faster and easier to play, but I keep having the impression key travel is less (although Kawai states it should be the same) and that RH connected a bit better with the internal sounds. For me it's a trade off: lighter , faster, easier against a more perfect key trave depth and bit heavier - but to me better matched- keybed to the AP engine. Should I have bought a GF after all is what I wonder about now. But I like the package of the ES more than a full cabinet DP.

One particular problem I found playing my CA63 was that the action was pretty heavy and sluggish, very tiring for the arms while at the same time dynamics were slightly exaggerated with the touch response being too sensitive in normal position (I always dreamed of a middle position between 'normal' and 'heavy'). It may have something to do with production batches indeed, since I played another CA63 in the store where I got my MP6 from and I felt its keyboard lighter and easier to play than my CA63.

Anyway, I am happy with the MP6, especially taking in mind the price. It seems like I got so much value for the money.

I have no quibble at all with the general feel of RM3 - I find it amazingly smooth and quiet. And I think the weighting is just right. My only criticism is that the bottoming out is on the mushy side. At the bottom of the key stroke it descends into a squishy felt pad (I assume) and I don't find that a very realistic sensation. Korg's RH3 does it too - but no other DP action does it. It's a minor point but a crisper stop point would make it a more realistic sensation in my opinion.

@EssBrace; funny - I specifically find my new RH II to be bottoming out too hard. Missing the more 'felt-feeling' of the MP6 that was a bit smoother. I sometimes wonder if that's the reason why I perceive the key travel as less deep -> harder bottoming out. So to see, everybody has his/her personal preference ;-)

I also noticed slight differences in RM3 in shops with different CA models. Not a big differences , but slightly - which I think is normal, considering the fact that Kawai makes these keybeds to mimic the acoustic feeling of a wooden keybed. No two keybeds on acoustics are exactly the same either. That's why people play these acoustics extensively in shops to get the one that has the right feel form them personally. Again no day and light differences, but perhaps enough to make it a joy or a toy to some of us.

I agree completely. It's just personal preference. I haven't tried the new GF action but I think the top-end wooden Kawai action (of whatever generation) is always among the very best available at the time. Perhaps now more than ever. That they can make the RH family so good from conventional DP principles and materials is also a great credit to Kawai.

And, oddly enough...

I find the AHAIV-F in the EP3 to be as good (or, better than) the Grand Feel action in the CA95. Just a subjective preference.

You know, within these Kawai wood actions there is a turnable screw that seems to be intended for some purpose associated with regulation, but I've never heard of anyone turning it. I wonder if there are differences in regulation causing these perceived differences between keybeds. For that matter, are there screws and things in the plastic actions that can be used to alter their touch?

"You know, within these Kawai wood actions there is a turnable screw that seems to be intended for some purpose associated with regulation..."

Just exactly what my piano tech said. I would think most people just go with a new model, by the time they put enough wear on the action that it needs to be regulated.