Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Digital Pianos - Electronic Pianos - Synths & Keyboards Escapement and double escapement in digital piano actions

I'm very annoyed with Yamaha right now. They charge a $2000 premium over the standard acoustic to have the silent module, but they intentionally do the minimum necessary for a single purpose (silent practice), forcing you to pay for much higher end pianos $30k and up for "extra" features like midi out. They also charge huge 200% markups in markets like Australia while not even making the latest models available. I have a lot more respect for companies like Kawai and Roland, I just wish they would make an Avantgrand competitor, and I wouldn't even need to consider Yamaha.

It is a well-established fact that the AvantGrand cannot play off the jack but it does feature a triple sensor action, real double escapement, and fast repetition capability.

I'm not sure what that means, but I know I will sleep well tonight.

Haha, I did modify the fast repetition part, since that's not as well established as the other statements.

Here's a post where I found a link about playing off the jack, however the link appears to be dead now:
Re: Let-off feel - grands vs uprights - any difference?

Note that it says that the piano must be finely regulated to be able to play off the jack at all, and also, you must play firmly. It also says that this technique allows playing so softly that it is not possible to achieve that softness playing normally. (do any digitals simulate THAT aspect, I wonder?)

Greg.

Very interesting link, sullivang, thanks! So it seems there IS another type of action possible apart from double escapement after all!

It's funny how they were so dismissive of digital pianos, but I would have thought the actions of an upright would be far inferior compared to a grand... (and possibly to digital pianos?) But there was a good point about how manufacturers would not be interested in introducing more parts and expense to the action, hence no one really trying to come up with a way of adding double escapement to uprights.

Yes, they are inferior. I think you need to read that link again if you got the message from it that the upright action is equal to the grand action. It clearly comes down in favour of the grand.

Actually, this has been done:The Bafunnon patent (US PAT 7,718,872, May 2010) shows a double-escapement action for an upright piano. But it's more complicated than a conventional upright action, and likely more expensive. And I wonder how well it works: It has a peculiar backcheck mechanism.

Obviously the grand is the standard, but I thought they were far more dismissive of digital pianos than of uprights (there was a "analog vs digital" tension there, when it should have been "grand vs everything else").

In any case I was more thinking about how some people will prefer to spend more money on a "good" upright than a cheaper grand piano, especially for classical music. I would have thought a better keyboard that allows better technique would trump any slight differences in "tonal" quality. (Granted, there could be space considerations.)

I suspect that a good upright action is still very well respected, and is considered superior to most digital actions. I know that an upright doesn't have double-escapement, but I don't think that matters all that much for many players - I think the general feel of the action is what most players look for, and most digital actions are hindered by the fact that they don't have a real, mechanical (single) escapement at all - the hammers simply never really detach/escape from the keys in the same way as they do in a real piano. If the upright action is so lousy, I don't think Yamaha would have bothered to develop the NU1 digital, which has a real upright action.

I agree that they did seem overly dismissive of digitals, and yes, I felt the tension. ;^) I was glad to get out of that place in one piece. I don't know what would happen if I were to give them a link to that post here where someone likened all real pianos to a (fictional) Fiat Doblo.

Greg.

I think the difference in tonal quality is more than slight. A good upright really trumps a digital because of the dynamic range and the amount of resonance available with hundreds of real strings.

Current DPs have very crude resonance simulation. The Amplifiers they use use a fair degree of compression so the dynamic range is not there. Loudspeakers tend to be a compromise. they aren't going to put full range state-of-the art speakers in a DP. There is a very real reason why a lot of people will prefer an upright over a DP. It feels more real, more present.

I would also say that a good upright action is right up there, if not superior to most digital actions. The sensation of a full sized hammer swinging and rebounding off a string is a real plus. As Sullivang said, the main disadvantage of the upright action is the lack of rapid/undamped repeats. The thing is, most of these 3 sensor digitals still fail to implement this really well anyway. If you don't play music that uses rapid repeats, it's inconsequential.

I still see DPs as a technology of great potential, but one which has not yet marshalled all its resources to put all the right features in the one box. I love reading this forum because I'm interested in the evolution of the technology, but every ounce of the musician in me says acoustic is still king, by a comfortable margin. DPs are a practical means to an end for me. Silent practice, easy recording. But they are definitely not my instrument of choice, sometimes a "tool" of choice though.

I was talking about acoustic uprights vs acoustic grands, not digital. In my experience, a lot of people will prefer to pay top dollar for an upright even though they could get a baby grand for less. However like I said, perhaps it's because of space considerations, but I find this true even for professional musicians and that's puzzling (especially for classical music)

That's because baby grands generally sound pretty terrible. They have shorter strings than a larger upright and it is very noticeable. It goes to show that sound does trump action more often than not. As I said, unless you specifically need an action that repeats rapidly, you would go for an upright with a nice sound over a grand with a weak sound. And a lot of grands out there are so poorly regulated that they don't really play any better than an upright action anyway. There is nothing terrible about a well-maintained upright action. It will get you through most situations, and you have to be pretty advanced to be held back by it.

That's absolutely true. I regularly play on a grand and upright and I notice many differences between them (primarily the way they are regulated) but speed of repetition has never been one of them. The difference between grand and upright actions (and even digital, for that matter) only matters when things are working right...properly regulated and so forth. A grand action *can* be the best of the three. That doesn't mean it always is.

I've finally managed to visit a couple of small acoustic piano specialist stores, and I have a much better idea of things.

First off:
What people refer to as the "let-off" feel is actually a small bump of resistance at the last third or last quarter of key travel. On a grand piano, if you rest the finger at that point, and then push the key down all the way, you will get the hammer to hit the string. It also seems to be the point at which double escapement happens. Therefore if you re-tap the key slightly above this point, the note will repeat. Hence, you can repeat notes by merely lifting about 1/3 - 1/4 of the travel from the bottom.

Uprights have a resistance point about 1/3 to halfway from the top of the travel. A note will not repeat if you do not lift the key past this point. So you practically have to lift the key up all the way to repeat a note.

The Kawai Grand Feel keyboard (CA65, CA95) has a SIMULATED let-off. From playing with their cross section model, the "let-off" is simply a bit of resistance from a rubber flap, and happens at the last quarter of key travel. However, no note will sound if played from that point. There is another point about halfway down the travel, at which the note will play if you press from that point. It is also the point you need to get back to before "double escapement" will happen.

So what I didn't realize was that the digital piano keys have a different escapement point above the "let-off", whereas on a grand, they are one and the same (and very low down in the travel).

I must say, I was very impressed with the Kawai GF keyboard. It had a very good touch, the fake "ivory" felt good, and the black keys had a different texture which is quite similar to how it is on a grand. And it's funny but the wooden keys seem to make a difference even though the keytops are covered in that fake ivory. It also doesn't bottom out too abruptly. The simulated let-off.. well, it's kind of silly because it doesn't do anything. On a grand, it signals the point at which you can pop the hammer up to the strings again. Whereas on the GF keyboard this is patently not true, you need to lift the key up another 1/3 of travel. They should make the bump coincide with the "double escapement" of a note, to simulate the grand. All in all though, the best feeling digital piano I've experienced so far.

In contrast, I was not at all impressed with the Roland PHA III keyboard - the fake ivory has too much texture and actually has random grooves in it. The keys seem to sit too "flat" and the travel seems a bit short. They also hit the bottom a bit abruptly.

Yamaha and Casio had no resistance at all throughout the travel. Not in the same league.

However, none of them can beat the real thing of course. Even the cheapest grand feels great.

It's real nice to be able to get your hands on these pianos after talking about them so much in the forums, isn't it? Sounds like you went a real good store if all four big brands were represented and they had high end models from each. Good deal!

Yes, all the reading and speculating is no substitute for just trying the damn things! However, without my prior research I would never have even known what the differences between DPs, uprights and grands were, and wouldn't even know what to look for!

Thanks Acca - very informative! Just one little point though - I don't agree that the simulated let-off "doesn't do anything" - I think it would still allow the pianist to become accustomed to having to overcome the extra resistance when playing softly.

Did you test the let-off point and double-escapement repeat point of the Roland? If not, get back there please. ;^)

Greg.

I must admit no, because I tested the Rolands last week before I knew much about the let-off point. I did test double escapement, but I didn't note where the double escapement point was (didn't know enough to test that last week.) I tested the LX-15 and FP-3F. However, I really was not impressed with the keyboard in general, it just felt like the travel was too short and hit the bump stop at the bottom rather abruptly.

The fake ivory also didn't look or feel right (does real ivory have grooves like that?) Kawai's fake ivory looked and felt a lot better, much closer to a normal grand (which I was able to compare almost side by side yesterday).

This is just my personal opinion of course.

I've seen that comment about the Rolands having a shallow key travel often. I measured one once, and I'm pretty sure it was about 9.5mm, which is quite normal for a real grand. However, it is a bit less than my Kawai MP9000, which is 11mm. I think my Casio is 10mm.

Greg.

Wow, that doesn't SEEM like a lot of difference... I'm also coming from a Casio Privia, but it's a perception that I never had when I tried the Kawai. (and obviously the grand)