Hi spanishbuddha

I'm interested in your solution to the NU1's inadequate bass (you mentioned that you added a subwoofer). I'm inexperienced in such things - could I ask you which subwoofer you used, and where you placed it? Were you happy with the improvement in the bass?

Matt

Hi Matt. I have a Rokit speaker system at home, and tried just the 10s sub with my NU1. I placed it to my side, although as someone else says for the low frequency rumbles, position should not matter. Yes it helps and makes a difference. It certainly exposed my beginners heavy LH. I'm not sure I got a good balance but did not try the main Rokit speakers too. The sub is not cheap so get one on trial, or buy from a store with a return option would be my suggestion if you're not happy with the bass. I no longer have the sub connected as I'm quite content with the sound for purpose of practice. I'm also quite content with the key action which is not as smooth and easy as some of the best DP actions. That's partly what I like about it, it's just like my teachers acoustic.

That is what I liked about my old cheap, cheap Suzuki SS-90...it felt like playing a spottily regulated upright and as such was a good practivce piano.

My Roland HP-307 makes things too easy and makes things sound too good. Which, for practice, can be a bad thing.

Since the NU1 has the hammer action of an upright, it plays pretty much like...an upright ;-) With all it's advantaged and shortcomings. The CA95 GF is modeled after a grand piano action. Apart from the perhaps "too easy" touch of the CA, I think it's only logical that they are so different. If you prefer upright than the NU1 is unbeatable , but if you're looking for a grand action, people may decide otherwise. In short - I think it's hard to compare the two 1:1 since it's not the same action they intend to be and therefore personal preference may play a big role. I found the NU1 to have pretty much the same feeling as the nice acoustic upright in my parents house. But for me I'd prefer something more smooth; I'm probably too lazy to do the harder work on the upright acoustic mechanism. So which one is 'better' ; I think that answer is too subjective.

I agree that learning to play on a piano that is too easy might give you a hard time later on with other instruments. But will it make you a better / worse pianist in the long run ; I think there's no scientific proof of that (yet).

@JFP,

Since I have a CA95, and, the feel of an action is always a subjective thing from player to player I do not think that the GF in the CA95 is "too easy." It is quite weighted in fact, as I find it heavier in response than my V-Piano, or, other Casio's and a Kurzweil that I have tried. The V-Piano's action is far lighter and easier to play on than the GF, no question.

I do know that the CA95 is weighted to feel exactly like the acoustic grand (RX model) that Kawai fashioned the action after.

Has anyone measured the actions; in grams, for either/both pianos yet?

If you have an NU1 or CA95 here is a link on how to measure your pianos touchweight (2/3 the way down on the page): http://www.pianofinders.com/educational/touchweight.htm

In my option this will not represent the user feel of the action but it is better than saying smooth, fast, heavy, etc. Numbers usually don't lie.

I know, it's just that others classified the Kawai action(s) as such, especially in comparison to the upright action of the NU1 and I just wanted to stress that the difference is understandable , because the GF is modeled after a grand action and not an upright. A good grand action is usually easier on the fingers than most uprights in my experience. The exceptions proves the rule , of course...

Numbers may not lie, but the best way to judge any piano is simply to play it.

If I change the touch sensitivity on my N3 from the default value of 2 to 3, it really feels like I'm playing another action, one that is more difficult to play. If I had measured the action what would the numbers have really meant?

Numbers are for those who read spec sheets; when it comes to pianos there ain't no shortcuts, you gotta play 'em.

Ok, update from my side: I have been playing for 2 hours an NU1 in Konstanz just beside an N3 and a CA95.
I do nor report the same defenct I noted in the NU1 in Italy: although the fast repeated notes are not perfect, the piano is enjoyable and the keyboard for me is much much more convincing than the CA95 one (but I still prefer its sound).
The repeated notes were much better on the N3 (even very very fast, the sound was absolutely as expected), the keyboard heavier, and I liked that, but not so natural... and of course, for that price I would buy an acoustic, no doubts.

So at the end... yes, I gave back my CA95 to get a new NU1, but... I will try it at the shop before getting it at home: at least two keys in the model I played produced a louder sound than the others (even the shop seller recognized that). Now I really hope that this NU1 has not too many defects, or is not too delicate.

Anzwaz I am happy and convinced of my choice!

Congrats, I think the NU1 is a great alternative for piano practice. In the UK they offer free extended warranty, so five years in all, not sure about Germany or Italy. Of course you hope never to have to need to use it, but it provides some further assurance.

Thank you! ...and thank you for the information: I checked and the extended warranty is available also here, but I have to register the piano within the end of March (hope the shop will take not too long to get a new model). This is an electronic instruments, and you may never know... (my Yamaha Silent in Italy is working perfectly even after more than 15 years).

I can add that I played without volume for half an hour, closing the eyes, and yes... the feeling was there; never had the same impression with the CA95 (I know that I will miss its gorgeous sound, but this is not what I really need in such an instrument).

A couple a curious things:

- Ehm, what is the noise gate?
- Reading the manual in the troubleshooting section is mentioned the event of "one note sounding louder than expected during fast repetition or trills" as normal feature due to the mechanics of the keys, but just if it happens very rarely... uhm, very strage and subjectiv justification

It's a device that cuts the output of the signal (the piano sound in this case) when it is below a certain (usually very low) level. This can be used to cut out humming or hissing or to make certain dynamic effects.



Maybe so, but it sounds kind of reasonable. Isn't this an expected effect with normal AP mechanics when dealing with delicate techniques such as ornaments at pp?

Thank you very much the explanation: so is the noise gate an important feature in the recordings... or is it beeter to accept the sound as it is?

Ehm, if you play properly the AP mechanics will never react with loud sounds... just if you try to go faster/softer you may miss some repetitions or hear only the low or the high note of the trill, but not peaks in volume unless you cause them with the fingers.

The noise gate is only relevant if you are feeding an external sound source, such as for example piano generated by a software VST, into the NU1 line-in to use its built in speakers. This gate existed on other Yamaha AG's and caused a problem by cutting off some pppp sounds. Hardly desirable. On the NU1 it can be disabled. It does not affect recording from internally generated piano sounds.

The only time I heard strange peaks in volume was when I tried playing the Harpsichord sound. I don't use this much, hardly ever, but I think there may indeed be something odd there with the implementation.

Yes, quite. Of course, Kawai are writing for all their customers with all kinds of techniques: highly controlled and not so highly controlled (like mine, for example )

Sorry, maybe I am not so technically informed, or I wrongly understood... I just never realized such a problem during my modest pianistic career with a lot of different traditional pianos.

I wonder what kind of upright action is going into the NU1 (and where it is manufactured)?

The Yamaha Silents I most tend to come across are Japanese U1s and U3s but there are also, for example, Indonesian B1s which certainly play less satisfyingly...

Exactly, don't you think it is a pity that the mechanics cannot be seen by the user? It should be a reason to not let the cover be opened, maybe to preserve some delicate parts, I do not know...

Today I just tried my new Yamaha NU1, as soon as it has arrived at the shop.
I am happy to say that I did not find any problem: neither the repetition issues nor the ugly different response of a few keys I experienced on another available model.
Ok... the beginning of Beethoven op.53 is always a challenge for the NU1, something is not completely convincing, and it sounds perfectly just on the N3 I tried (and on all the acoustic nearby).

I have also to say that I am missing from the eletronics some "power" in the fff, which induced me to force a bit too much, and get my fingers tired in the search for "big sound mass"

But at the end, coming back to any other digital beside, it is pretty evident that, at least for me, there is not comparison.

So I am happy and I cannot wait to receive it at home on Tuesday.

ps: unfortunately then I tried a Bechstein Millenium upright, uhm... still schocked...

Congratulations with your new instrument!