Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Digital Pianos - Electronic Pianos - Synths & Keyboards Casio AP-650

That is an interesting observation ... it would be quieter too though, yeah?! I need to practice at that elevation, though wrt to my running hobby, heh. #CLEVEL (har har!)

To xorbe

It would be interesting to get actual sound energy measurements from identical pianos with identical note playing strength at my altitude (7,400 ft. above sea level) vs. sea level. The calculations below derive a difference of about 1 1/4 decibels between sound generated at a given power level at 7,4000 feet above sea level vs. sea level.

Sound intensity is usually measured in decibels which is a logarithmic scale. For example, sound at 90 decibels has 10 times the power as sound at 80 decibels. Sound at 100 decibels has 10 times the power as sound at 90 decibels and 100 times the power of sound at 80 decibels. Please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decibel

For calculations, let’s assume that you generate 90 decibels of sound with a piano chord at sea level. If you use the Wikipedia table, this is equivalent to a “power ratio” of 1,000,000,000. To convert from a “power ratio” to decibels take the log (base 10) of the “power ratio” and then multiply by 10.

If you reduce the “power ratio” by 25% due to thinner air at higher elevations, then the “power ratio” becomes 750,000,000. This reduction in the strength of sound waves should take place for sound generated by piano strings, amplifiers, or any other source.

To convert this new “power ratio” to decibels, we again take the log (base 10) and then multiply by 10. This yields a decibel level of 88.75.

Thus perceived sound is weaker at this altitude, although it would be difficult to tell the difference with ordinary hearing – especially if you are trying to remember sounds from whenever you used to be at sea level.


To pv88 and andy

I've actually gone through all the posts on this thread which is why I'm paying attention to the decay rate. I've never played the Shubert, but I used to play Rachmaninoff's C Sharp Minor Prelude. It is one of the pieces that I will be going back to - and it runs into a sustain/decay test real quick. Basically, there is a price trade-off involved between the 650 and the CN34.

DBill - I'm also familiar with the Rach Prelude in C# minor. Although I never tested this with the casio, I'd be expecting poor results again when the C# minor chord progression starts after the octave introduction. Another example from personal experience could be the Rachmaninoff Piano Concerto No 2 Mov 1 Introduction (believe this is known as the "Bell Toll"). The chords will decay far to fast on the Casio.

Bottom line here is the unacceptable "initial" decay (applies from what I've seen & heard to the AP-650 and PX-350). I've been using the AP-650 and the Schubert Impromptu to demonstrate this. There are a lot more pieces that could be demonstrated where this decay is unacceptable, however there are pieces where this decay problem would be considered not applicable, a good example (from personal experience / repertoire) to this would be the Maple Leaf Rag.

Agreed on the price trade off between the 650 and the CN34, but there is little in trade off between the AP-650 and the Roland RP301R.

I am pretty sure that most Kawai's (including the CN34) will have a better overall sustain/decay rate as compared with the Casio's. Having played both brands, the choice is clear.

It’s going to come down to “best bang for the buck”. If Kawai brings their CN34 price down to within $300 of the Casio 650, then I’ll go for the Kawai CN34. There are still several weeks to go before it’s decision time.

Here are some calculations for “fair” U. S. prices based on current UK prices. (A “fair” price is what you might expect under free-market, multiple-store competition.)

Advertised UK price for a Kawai CN34 = 1199 UK Pounds
Advertised UK price for a Casio Celviano 650 = 1099 UK Pounds

Price as quoted at http://www.bonnersmusic.co.uk/kawai...ir?cName=pianos-keyboards-digital-pianos = 1,199 British Pounds
Includes piano stool, headphones & free delivery.

All prices in UK stores include a 20% value added tax.
https://www.gov.uk/vat/overview (Value added tax = 20%)
https://www.gov.uk/vat/where-you-see-vat “it’s already included in the price”
To find the price before the VAT is applied, divide the final price by 1.20
Price of Kawai CN34 before VAT = 1199 / 1.20 = 999.17 British Pounds

To calculate the U.S. dollar rate for 999.17 British Pounds, enter the British Pound amount in the top box and click on “Pounds to US $.
http://www.dollars2pounds.com/

The conversion rate as of 1/11/2013 was 1.6130 which gives a U.S. $ amount of $1611.66.
This is the “fair” U. S. $ amount for a Kawai CN34 including headphones and free delivery. (Note, the conversion rate changes frequently.)

The equivalent calculation for the Casio Celviano 650 is based on an advertised price of 1,099 British pounds. http://www.normans.co.uk/p-4831-casio-ap-650-celviano-88-note-digital-piano.aspx Similar calculations yield a U. S. dollar price of $1,477.23 for the Casio 650.

Dbill: In your calculations, don't forget to include the cost of ending up with a digital piano that will not perform to expectations ... Priceless !

In the comments below that video it says the piano is being played through "Pianoteq", perhaps that helps?

Some information on the new Casio Celvianos (to be introduced in the U.S. at the January NAMM)

AP-250: Available in black or brown: MSRP $1399.99
AP-450: Available in black or brown: MSRP $1699.99
AP-650: Available in black: MSRP $1999.99

Based on the digital database at Piano Buyer
( http://www.pianobuyer.com/show_diginew.php ),
retail prices for Casio’s new Celviano pianos should be $400 to $450 under the MSRP.

The best bet for where you will be able to buy the new Celvianos (including online) is the “Guitar Center” chain. http://www.guitarcenter.com/Casio.gc

If you want to find the nearest Casio store, Casio has a "Store Locator" at http://www.casiomusicgear.com/wheretobuy . Most of these dealers are “Guitar Center” # _ _ _ . (Fill in a number)

@DBill,

The Kawai CN34 may cost a little more than the Casio AP-650, although the behavior of the decay/sustain/sounds are going to be so much better with the Kawai, as I had the Casio AP-620 and the decay was simply too short.

Andy0140 has told us that the AP-650 has the same issue with the short decay (not at all acoustic-like) and the overall harmonic resonance is thin and not full enough when blending multiple notes in chords and arpeggios.

Just trying to give you sufficient warning so that you are not disappointed.

I’m still trying to get as much info as I can on the Celviano 650 vs. the Kawai CN34. I can hear a difference between the two recordings of the Shubert, but to me the Casio is not objectionable. Any plus/minus evaluation will of course vary from one person to another.

There are differences between various digitals and acoustics, but I think a lot of peoples’ preferences are based on what they get used to. Once you are used to a particular instrument, then everything else is going to sound a little strange.

I learned to play on a 1920s era Steck baby grand. Stecks were good pianos at that time. (Recent Stecks are a pile of C . . . Oops; this is a public forum so make that “organic fertilizer”.) However, it’s been 35 years since I’ve had a chance to play anything. A 35-year gap will erase any “ear preference” that you might have had. My feeling is that I would quickly adapt to any differences that might exist between various pianos. Thus my buying decision will be based on “best bang for the buck” as opposed to trying to find the “perfect piano”.

At one time I was also considering the Kawai CE220, but it’s dropped out of contention. One of the things I want to try is “Jamaican Rumba” using a marimba, but the CE220 doesn’t have a marimba.

I’m still getting price quotes as much as possible from various Kawai dealers for the CN34, but as of now I’m leaning strongly toward the 650.

One of the other things that I ran into is that Mike Martin is a very busy guy. He’s actually General Manager of Marketing, Electronic Musical Instruments at Casio, and posts on a lot of other forums besides this one. He has also worked for Yamaha and Kurzwell in the past. You can throw in setting up things for NAMM as a current project.

Finally, I do have a request for Mike. The rumors that I’ve run into are saying that Internet retailers such as Kraft Music, Musicians Friend, etc. are going to be locked out of the new Celvianos. I don’t know how much influence you might have with the high mucky mucks at Casio, but I’ve been in contact with some of the people at Kraft. They seem like good guys. If only for “free market” competition purposes, it would be nice to keep them inside the loop.

Looks like a pretty big price jump for the new AP-650, since you can still get the AP-620 for $1,399.99. That's a $600 increase between the AP-620 and AP-650.

Or, that means you can only buy a new AP-250 for the price of an AP-620, which has far less features. AP-250 ($1,399.99) = AP-620 ($1,399.99) - same price?

That is like saying the less featured model is equal to and costs the same as the flagship?

For a digital in the 2K range and above, look elsewhere.

You guys are comparing Suggested Retail Price to existing MAP prices, not entirely a good comparison.

Mike has been busy! getting the http://www.casiomusicgear.com/ website up to date for the new Celvianos. For example, see: http://www.casiomusicgear.com/products/menu_celviano

Also the “Where to buy” “Store Locator” ( http://www.casiomusicgear.com/wheretobuy ) has been updated in the last few days as a new dealer has been added near where I live.

There have been some posts in pianoworld’s forums that have downplayed Casio vs. other digital piano manufacturers, but as far as I am concerned Casio (including the new Privias ) offers the “best bang for the buck”. In the past, the primary concern was the sustain time (decay rate) for Celvianos and Privas, but PianoManChuck’s video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RGG1GwWGhBA is pretty convincing that the new x50 models have greatly improved that problem.

For anyone interested in the new Priva Pro PX-5S, there’s a new page giving the specs for it. http://www.casiomusicgear.com/products/menu_privia/PX-5S

I will be buying a Celviano AP 650 just as soon as a few competitive prices show up. (Probably around $1,500 +/- for the AP 650.)

I also believe that for "bang for the buck" nothing beats Casio. Most of the detractors are comparing a $1500 with one several times the cost which frankly isn't a fair or valid comparison. For example,to most people an additional $800 or so is significant, granted, if money weren't an object there would be a Mason & Hamlin Model AA in my living room, but since it is, the AP-650 would certainly work (and being a digital, would actually FIT in my living room). Once the AP 650 is released I will be looking at one to have along with my PX-330.

Please do keep in mind that even the latest Casio currently available (AP-650) still has issues with its sounds, particularly in the short decay and lack of overall harmonic resonance (which can be heard with heavier chords) as this has already been pointed out by the OP (andy0140) in this thread.

There are other digitals at a similar price point that will give you far better performance in these areas, otherwise you will have to deal with a less than acoustic like sound with the rapid decay.

I think that almost anyone (even with a less than discerning ear) can clearly hear the deficiency of the Casio's resonance, as that is why I had to trade in my AP-620 for another digital.

I consider the Kawai EP3 to be a good comparison to the AP-620, as the piano sounds have far better decay and overall resonance. The EP3 doesn't have as many extra features as the AP-620 does, however, I was only concerned with the piano sounds and at $300 less than the Casio it was a no-brainer.

Not to be rude, but aren't you the same one confusing MSRP with actual price paid?

A digital is NOT an acoustic no matter how much you want it to be, they're two different instruments.

Everyone has different requirements and tastes, what may be a deal breaker for one might be of no consequence to another
and it IS rude to assume everyone has the same agenda as yourself.

Here is the price comparison between the Casio and Kawai as follows:

1) Casio AP-620: $1,399 (US) - online (paid) price - not MSRP

2) Kawai EP3: $1,099 (US) - online (paid) price - not MSRP

As you can see there is a differential of $300 between the two (as the EP3 costs less) as I bought them here:

1) Casio AP-620:

http://www.samash.com/p/Casio_Celvi...%20Matching%20Bench_-49952023#TabSection

2) Kawai EP3:

http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/EP3Kawai

Also, be sure to read the "reviews" on each digital above as this gives a clear indication of what others think of them. Also, I gave my review of the Kawai EP3, however, I did not give the review for the Casio AP-620.

And, there is a good cross section of reviews at guitarcenter.com, as there are seven (7) worth reading, here:

http://www.guitarcenter.com/Casio-A...ith-Matching-Bench-105783559-i1516175.gc

I have only stated what I believe to be a real flaw in Casio's digitals which is the lack of proper decay and resonance. Since there are other options I tend to advise folks in that direction.

Indeed, you have stated your views ad nausum.

Just a thought:

Neither Mike Martin nor Kawai James ever posts anything disparaging about the other's products.

My final conclusion:

The important thing is what the purchaser thinks, not what others do.

Shouldn't you be comparing the EP3 to something like the $500 PX-130 or PX-150? Everyone knows the cabinets are overpriced.