Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Digital Pianos - Electronic Pianos - Synths & Keyboards Help: Roland HP 506 x Roland HP 507

Hello everyone, this is my first post here and I'd like to ask for help to decide which DP I'll buy.

I'm used to play an upright acoustic piano, but it's too old now and it doesn't hold tune anymore. Also, for several reasons, I decided to move for a DP.

I've made some research and decided to go for a Roland HP. To be objective: my doubt is between the HP506 and the HP507, since they're available for the exact same price in retail stores.

HP506 has the new PHAI 4, while the HP507 has the potent sound with subs and all (even though Roland says both of them go up to 112 dB).

Anyway, I can't decide which one I should go for... Even though 506 is newer, 507 is the top of the previous series...

What would you guys do / recommend?

You have to play it to feel the differences between the key actions of PHA3 and PHA4.
PHA4 has the appropriate damping IMHO. PHA3 I did not like at all.
What was important for me, the HP506 has a button-only user interface, the 507 at least has a master volume slider,
no MIDI connectors on the newer HP506 any more, only some midi connectivity via USB
...
HTH

I just bought the HP 506. I felt the touch was close enough to a real piano and I like the keytop material.

Even within PHA4 there are differences though, the 504 has PHA4 premium keyboard and the 506 has PHA Concert keyboard. I noticed the difference when I tried them even without knowing they were not the same. So it's definitely good to try the pianos out properly, especially if you are used to a real piano.

The sound on the HP506 was a pleasant surprice, after some setting I think it sounds quite good for a digital just with the internal speakers.

Whether you need the features missing from 506 depends on what you are going to do with the piano...

What differences did you find? Was the PHA4 concert noticeably more realistic? I've noticed differences between the FP-80 and LX-15 before with the PHAIII actions. The LX-15 felt like a higher grade more realistic action.

So you think that PHA4 on the HP506 is more worthy than the better sound on the HP507, even if they're at the same price, is that right?

I would definitely go for the HP507 if they're the same price.

@lolatu, would you please explain why you'd go for the 507? have you tried the PHA 4 in person? Is it because of the better speakers?

Better speakers, MIDI ports, bigger screen, chunkier furniture, a few more options in the piano designer.

PHA3 is very nice and gels well with the sound engine. The bottoming out feels firm and rubbery. PHA4 has a softer felty bottom and I found it a little bit strange initially, though I'm sure I'd get used to it. Not strikingly better in feel, although quieter is better for your neighbours. I liked PHA3 and you probably won't feel that you're missing anything if you get that. If stores are selling both, you can try them and see which you prefer. Both are good pianos.

Question is that they are not at the same store and the 506 is only online, so I can't test it...

Anyway, seems that there is one vote for the 506 and one for the 507 haahah

PHA4 concert felt more responsive and comfortable to play to me. Cannot tell exactly why though.

From the one official Roland Guy on the forum.

An HP507 at the price of a 506 is a REALLY good deal.

If you liked the touch and sound of the 507, go for it. You will be happy that you did.

Jay

Cannot answer that because I cannot tell if the sound is really that much better on the HP507 (when I was trying out the Rolands last year I didn't even seriously consider the 507, didn't think the extra features were worth the much higher price than 505). But I was never shopping for the sound since I mostly play on acoustic and much prefer real piano sound anyway.

To me the HP506 sounds very good for a digital and there are a lot of options to tweak the sound.

If you cannot try both out, my only advice is to consider that when it comes to electronics, they tend to grow old fast. So I personally usually prefer to buy the latest models if there's no special reason to want an older one. In this case the good price on the 507 could be such a reason if there really is something you need/want on that model.

You could also download the manuals from the Roland site for both to check out what exactly are the differences in features, I like to do this before I buy.

In my very personal case, opinion and circumstances, I would choose the 506.

- Both the 506 and 507 share the same Supernatural tone engine, although it appears like the new series have a slight improvement to manage better the forte sound (or that's what I believe to read, please correct me if I'm wrong).

- The new PHA IV on the 506 is smoother and quieter than the PHA III of the 507. I have a 305 with PHA II (PHA III without a 3rd sensor) and its very noisy (maybe one of the noisiest in the market). I always wanted this action was quieter.

- The speakers on the 507 are more powerful. But 506's are not bad. And the 507 speakers sound (at least to me) rather muffled. In my humble opinion, I would not sacrifice a probably better and more comfortable action (the one of the 506) for better speakers (specially if, as is my case, I would play most of the time with headphones or at a quite low volume).

- The 507 has more parameters to tweak the sound. While nice, I don't think this is indispensable.

Leo Henry,

I asked similar question some time ago. Lotalu just likes the PHAIII. Me personally... well... I only tried it... but the hard bottoming wasn't pleasant...
I have yet to play the new series, so I cannot tell anything about it, but if the action is heavier and less bouncy, I would choose the newseries.

Evemtually, all it's up to you. If you have choice to buy blind old 507 or new 506, I would choose 506. I know there are many old HP series models on the marked... but... the new has really some advantages. and disadvantages, mostly regardgin midi.

Let's be clear here,

There are no restrictions to what can be done with MIDI, as long as you have a MIDI/USB Cable that allow Class Campliant or tablet mode.

So although the MIDI ports are no longer present, a cable will provide all the functionality that the previous series offered.

Jay

Hello Jay,

Thanks for info reading MIDI/USB. The first time I get a clear answer on that.

What USB/Midi cable would you recommend?

Could a foot bass pedal be played via MIDI/USB on the 506?

Lo PHi

With "real MIDI", I can control my microKorg synth from my DP, _without having a computer_ between them.

. . . All I need is a DIN-connector MIDI cable.

How can I control my microKorg from the HP 506 (only USB/MIDI), without a computer between them?

. Charles

As far as I understood, there is a little processor built in right into the cable and powered by the USB jack.

Roland UM-One for a price, and there are refrences to an MkII on the net.

Interesting are those nifty little incompatibilities, reported in user reviews about many of those adapter cables ... and none I asked really has tried it.

Edit:
Sorry for getting OT here. Probably that would be worth another thread.

I was wondering the same thing.

This still does not answer Charles Cohen's point. USB over MIDI is fine where one of the devices is the host - ie a computer of some sort. This is the design principle of USB.

MIDI, on the other hand, is a peer-to-peer system in the sense that none of the connected devices is a central control (although you can certainly set one up to be, of course). This means you can connect two equal keyboards, or a keyboard and modules, and they will all communicate as 'equals'. But you can't do that with USB.

If you use a midi-USB cable, then the USB end links to HOST. That's no use for linking up, say, a sound module like a Proteus or Roland MKS20, say.

It could work if the USB to DEVICE outlet can work as a HOST outlet (which kind of goes against the whole USB design idea which avoids power overloads). The question is, have Roland set all of their USB only pianos up this way, so as to work with ANY midi device, including ones make before USB was ever dreamed of?

If so, that's great and, rather unexpected. But I do not think this has been confirmed yet. And it would make sense for Roland to advertise the fact, making it very clear that the USB to DEVICE outlet now doubles as a HOST to MIDI connection.

Thank you toddy for clarifying this topic.
Kind Regards,
Lo Phi

Say for instance you connect a Roland UM-ONE-mkII to the USB Stick port on the HP504/506/508. You make sure that the interface is in "Tablet" mode, and you get the same functionality that the piano would provide out of the MIDI In/Out ports.

There's nothing not "real" about it.

Not sure why it's not advertised, except for the fact it is not a "normal" way to make this connection.

Either way, it works well.

Jay

So the trick here is to use the correct mode - and 'tablet' basically means MIDI IN / MIDI OUT using a standard USB MIDI cable.

That sounds more than fair enough.

Does this mean then that there is definitely no need for a device such as the Kenton USB MIDI converter to plug the new Roland DPs into old midi instruments such as modules and keyboards, without the use of a computer?

If so, that's great news. Problem solved.

Tablet mode is basically a Class Compliant driver that means that the device receiving won't require any kind of driver, and the HP also won't.

It does still require a device but just a MIDI to USB Interface. That Kenton box would be completely redundant.

But that MIDI USB interface must also offer a class compliant mode. Some of the cheaper ones do not. The only one I've ever had occasion to try (of course) is the Roland UM-ONE-mkII.

Jay

Mmmm - as far as I can see, 'class compliant' means a device that will work without any proprietary drivers needing to be installed in the operating system for it to work. However, I do remember having to install an updated driver for the Yamaha UX16 (USB-MIDI). Does this mean that it is not class compliant? I have looked online for this information but can't find anything conclusive.

This is all rather complicated: MIDI was far simpler.

Though it's interesting that Roland's UM-One Mk2 costs only £29 compared to £44 for the Yamaha UX16. And many users report problems with the cheap generic cables - not worth it - hours of wasted time, torn out hair and lost music.

There is something I am not certain I understood. After reading this thread I have done some test with my Neusonik (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Neusonik-uMIDI-O22-interface-Macintosh/dp/B008F5UX40), and well while I have never had problem connecting my keyboards to any of my PCs/tablets with it, there is no way I can use it to connect my keyboards between them. Are you saying that Roland UM-One Mk2 can do this? (that is do what the expensive Kenton MIDI USB Host does?). If so, where do you plug the usb end of the interface? (my Neusonik does not work if I plug it where I normally plug a UBS key in my Roland for instance..)

You plug the USB end of the UM-ONEmkII interface into the same port where you would normally insert a USB stick.

Also note that the USB ports are on the right hand side, just below the keyboard. On the HP507 the MIDI ports are on the left. This can be a big deal depending on where you want to plug the other end of the cable.

I really don't like the port placement on the HP range. There's a 50% chance the ports are on the wrong side for any given user, and cables look so messy hanging out from underneath the keyboard, and trailing round the side.

They should be in the centre, on the back, at the top just behind the music rest, in a recess. Then they'd be easily accessible, usable from either side, with cabling safely hidden away behind the piano, and not getting in the way if placed against a wall. Like this:



But at least the Line Outs are still on the back, unlike some pianos (you know who you are...)

It's certainly better to have the USB memory stick port on the front for easy insert and removal of a USB stick which is its primary purpose.

Jay has said that you plug in at the DP end to the USB-Device socket (well, there is no other choice, is there?) and that this will work.

But isn't this a feature of the new series of midi socket-less keyboards (HP508 etc etc), as the older ones with a set of MIDI sockets? So it probably wouldn't work on a Roland HP302 or FP-4F.

That's pretty strange, as when I try to connect a class compliant device like iRig Keys Pro to that port it turns it on, but cannot receive any midi signal from it. Same thing for my korg, which should be class compliant too. Does this work on any Roland DP (mine is FP-4F) that has that port (that is, can the port for UBS drives on any Roland DP act as a midi in)?

Don't know about an older unit. Can confirm that it works on the new HP products and new DP, F-130R and RP401R too!

But if the USB A type socket works as a MIDI to MIDI device outlet (with the correct cable), just as the old MIDI IN/OUT sockets, why on earth does the HP508 specifications sheet have only this to say on USB connectors;

USB COMPUTER port: USB Type B
USB MEMORY port: USB Type A

....with no mention of MIDI at all?

As mentioned before, I don't know why it's not mentioned. All I know is that it works.