Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Digital Pianos - Electronic Pianos - Synths & Keyboards My experience from Grand piano, to Digital Piano, to Upright

I would like to share my experience between my grand piano, digital piano, and upright piano and hope it can help some of you in similar situations.

As a preface, I got a degree in classical piano performance - and at home I had a 4"11 Yamaha grand piano.

After moving, I left that piano at home and ended up buying a Roland FP7F digital piano. Recently, I got rid of that and bought a Steinway 1098 upright.

First, let's address the Roland FP7F. I am going to get right down to it: It has a nice touch, and a good enough sound all on its own, but compare it to any decent acoustic piano and it just is not in the same world.

I think it's really more appropriate for a casual player, and not a more serious classical player who wants to fully develop touch, tone, etc. It has its limitations in that regard and I would recommend a good quality upright if you could swing the price difference.

Now, the grand vs upright. I will make it simple. My Yamaha grand has a faster touch and response, which also makes dynamic control a bit easier.

Having said that, the 4"11 size grand does not sound good. It sounds metallic, dim, and overall not pleasant.

The Steinway 1098 upright in comparison was a great revelation to me - a very live, warm rich sound and good action for an upright. The sound really jumps out right at you - and has a more ringing sound to it.

So if you put 2 and 2 together, you come to the conclusion that a larger, good quality grand piano is really ideal. But you knew that already.

The second conclusion - if you're a serious player, I'd avoid a digital piano and just find a good upright. I got my used Steinway in great condition for around $5,000, which is not unreasonable when many digital pianos are near that price. (My Roland FP7F with pedals and stand was almost $2500 alone)

You points seem obvious, but they bear repeating.
- Small baby grands don't sound very good.
- Good uprights do.
- Digital pianos do not.
The DPBSD thread offers technical explanation of a few of the shortcomings exhibited by digital pianos. But the bare ear is adequate. Digital pianos are a pale imitation of the real thing.

You buy a digital to do the things an acoustic cannot.
You don't buy a digital for fine piano sound or feel.

You buy a car to do the things a pony and trap cannot.
You don`t buy a car to interact with the horse . . .

Now if someone could just explain that to DP marketing departments

That´s a good one.

You buy digital because of neighbors.

My choice would be the grand. I owned a 1098. Granted it was used, so maybe I had a bad one, but that thing was way to bright, even after I would get hammers voiced. I finally moved up to a Steinway K. That was a beautiful sounding instrument but got tired of playing upright action.

I could probably find room in my tiny house (325 sq ft per floor,) for that 4'11" but then I heard of AG here and I've been happily ever after although I'm sure the grand would be nice if it stayed in tune.

I can't help but think you miss out on why some people buy digital pianos - convenience, and other more practical things - slient playing / practice, limited space, don't require tuning or being anything like as concerned about the environment situation it's in.

The question, money, space and predisposition all equal, would be to have both. But then, invariably, things are not all equal.

I have an acoustic piano, a digital piano, and a keyboard. All have their place. The digital piano gets most use. Why? Because I can play it and not be concerned that it's having any impact on anybody else in the house, or close neighbours for that matter, at any time of day I choose. And the action and sound are good enough for the types of use I put it to.

If I was rich, with a large house, with no neighbours that were that close, I would have a decent grand and a decent digital - I'm sure I'd still find use / need for one - plus I'd also have one of the more portable (stage orientated) digital pianos and a case for when I travelled.

A grand shorter than 5'6 to 6' will usually be not worth it for the price, unless you're going for a nice piece of piano-shaped furniture. While I agree with you on the Roland as far as feel, please bear in mind that Roland is not all the DP world has to offer. Try playing on higher end Yamahas and Kawais and I think you will be much happier. It's still not the same as acoustic, but there are pretty good substitutes out there if your situation means you have to buy digital.

I agree that for long-term practicing, the Roland is not great for a classical pianist. I spent last summer playing mostly on my FP-7 (not sure if it has the same action as the FP-7F). That was not good and it prompted me to buy the MP11 for practicing this summer. We shall see how it goes, but so far I'm delighted with how it feels and sounds.

Very different action, PHAII against PHA III Ivory Feel-S Keyboard with Escapement. So if PHAII is the only Roland action you have played you may want to try other models before saying Roland is not great for a classical pianist (I am no classical pianist, but I know some the love PHAIII for classical piano playing). Action, like sound, has a certain degree of subjectivity, however.

Is PHAIII so different to PHAII?

Isn't it just a case of 3-sensors vs 2-sensors?

James
x

It might be true - I disagree but let's say that it might for the sake of your argument. Even then you too quickly dismiss some of the advantages of DPs and you also don't acknowledge the 'total cost of ownership' of an AP.

If you want to buy new $5000 will give you the absolute bare minimum as far as upright pianos are concerned. It's barely enough to get you out of 'cheap' or 'store brand' territory and will net you the cheapest Yamaha b1 or Kawai K15. If you buy used you have to be lucky or very experienced to get a used piano that was treated and maintained right otherwise you'll end up with a 'worn out' instrument or you'll have to spend additional money on maintenance and repair atfer the purchase. Then you'll spend probably a few hundred dollars per year on tuning/maintenance in addition to that.

If you don't own a big house/don't have very tolerant neighbors/have a wife and or kids/have to hold down a job then your practice hours are either very limited or you at least need a silent piano. This will push you into the $7000 territory if you want the least expensive 'brand name' instrument.

Double that if you want a grand but you'd likely end up with a really bad sounding one. You'd also need a whole room dedicated to that instrument then. If you want to breach into 6 ft. territory you'll end up paying $20,000 for a decent grand with silent function. You'd also need to consult with a structural engineer to make sure your floor can support the 700 lbs. or more of weight

Well most subscribers already know this because the whole argument has been done time and time again.

If you are lucky and or affluent enough to be able to own a great acoustic grand piano then congratulations to you sir. You are not the first one to point out the superiority of acoustic pianos to DPs though. In fact if you look around then you'll notice that that topic is debated lively and almost daily by the people on this subforum.

So while your input is certainly appreciated it's not exactly news

Secondly the instrument manufacturers have already made great strides forward to 'close the gap' between acoustics and DPs and to make the differences less noticeable.

Thirdly for many of us it is the best and or only option to enjoy playing the piano at all in lieu of our living conditions etc.

Lastly it's always a foregone conclusion anyway if you compare a Roland FP7-F to a Steinway and Sons 1098 Piano that cost $25,000 when it was new.

Sorry, I have played other Rolands before, but older models. I have not played the PHA III, but apparently the OP doesn't like it either for classical playing. But of course, it is an opinion.

Haven't played FP7 but according to Roland there is also ivory feel and escapement. Having said this a 3rd sensor for a classical pianist could make a difference (it doesn't for me).

There didn't seem to be any difference between PHAII and PHAIII when I tried them side by side. They both felt reasonably like a well regulated grand, on the light side, to me. I preferred them to Yamaha GH3, Kawai RH and some other actions: Korg, Kurzwiel and Casio.

But Morodiene, who is a classical pianist and teacher, says more or less the opposite , so it's really very subjective this. It must also have to do with the AP actions you've been exposed to and been impressed with.

Breaking News: "Acoustic pianos better than Digital pianos." The 'International Association of Associated Matters' (IAM) has determined -via rigourous tests- that Acoustics are indeed better than Digitals. As of yet, Casio, Korg, and Roland have no comment. Yamaha and Kawai couldn't care less; and Steinway, well, Steinway fully agrees and complies with the findings: 'Acoustic good; Digital bad!'

but the car has no CHARACTER, doesn't whinny or nicker, doesn't leave "gardeners' gold" (a.k.a. "road apples") on the road, has SUCH poor traction in snow that the roads have to be plowed or salted.
Plus it goes SO FAST that the wheels and suspension get destroyed on pot holes and there is No TIME to enjoy the journey...
on and on, the list goes on...

I can't turn back the hands of time on THAT one either.
{I could move to a very different area of the country that would just about REQUIRE a change of religion.}

Long live wooden pianos, with their temperature and humidity frailty - clearly WORTH the hassles for their (ever decreasing) difference in sound. (to some)

PHA II keyboard's (I own a HP-305) note repetition is quite mediocre (as best). It's noticeably better on PHA III. But AFAIK that 3rd sensor and the subsequent better ability to do repeated notes is the only difference between both. At lest in my case, I just got the same feeling playing non-repeated notes repertoire on both.

Both actions also share their characteristic thundering noise. The brand new PHA IV is a bit quieter.

Yeah, I think opinions on actions depend very much on people's experience with acoustics and on the type of music they play.
Personally, I find the Ivory feel G (sort of a half way between PHAII and PHAIII, but very different from both) closer to the action of my baby grand, as I find PHAIII too light, but sure PHAIII is faster, but this is not really an argument for me (and Ivory feel G is relatively fast, to the point that some people think it has 3 sensors). From what I have been told Kawai Grand Feel is quite lighter than RM3II, but faster. So, while I have not played either, I would probably prefer RM3II based on my experience and on the music I play.

The thing is, there are several different implementations of PHAIII, FP7f is different from RD700, which in turn is different from V-piano (which is the heaviest, and probably best, PHAIII implementation). I haven't tried HP models, but I wouldn't be surprised is it in turn different from the stage pianos implementations