Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Digital Pianos - Electronic Pianos - Synths & Keyboards Kawai ca67 vs acoustic piano

Which is better between Kawai CA67 which has a wooden key with ebony and ivory touch and a sampling of 3 Kawai grand piano OR a used acoustic piano in same price rate. Thanks

IMHO go for the acoustic.

What when a blackout is happening?

You are the laughing pianist, while we digital sl*ts cry...

We need to know something about the acoustic you're considering. From your past postings, it looks like you've been comparing various digital pianos for a couple months.

And... Are you calculating in the ongoing cost of maintaining that acoustic? Is your situation one where you can practice on the acoustic any time you like?

IMHO, unless you will get a real gem, acoustic will be much less fun for you to play than digital of quality of the CA67.

Well, now what I need is a piano to practice but i really like the feature of digital piano such as recording and many sound ,but if the touching or a sound of acoustic is better for practising, then I'll go for acoustic. So i want to know what you guys think

If you play classical music, the acoustic is better.

For the same price range, i'm not sure an acoustic would be better. To give you an idea in the UK, Yamahas entry level (but prety decent) upright (The U1) is £6k new, compared to CA67 which is £1,700. A reconditioned U1 is about £3k from a dealer. You could pick up a cheap second hand acoustic for £1,700, but is it going to be as good as a brand new high end digital of the same price? I would say probably not. But then this is the digital piano forum :-)

The best thing to do is to go to a second hand piano shop, try an acoustic in that price range, then go and try the best digitals on offer from the major brands and compare yourself.

However, if you want USB recording (Which you mention), you obviously wont get that on an acoustic.

I swapped from a fairly cheap upright to a CA97, and there is no way on earth I would swap back now. Not just for the convenience things like headphones, or USB recording, or different voices, but it just feels, plays and sounds so much better.

I wasted loads of time trying to decide on this very issue.
I tried loads of digitals, and a few acoustics.
I liked the feel of the Kawai CA65, but honestly at this level, they're all very very good.
I don't use any of the toys, and it doesn't sound quite like an Yamaha U1/U3 acoustic, because it sounds like a CA65
Actually it's more than fine.
After a year on it, I don't record, I don't use more that two sounds, I just play, and it feels and sounds lovely.

The main choice should be based on what you want to do, play or learn. I spend a lot of my time learning new boogie woogie riffs, which involve hours of repetitive playing. I need headphones, or I'll get put into the garden.

Everyone is happy when I play, but practising, with headphones, in a house where I'll disturb everyone at 10pm meant a good digital was a no brainer.

And honestly, it's a really nice instrument, maybe when I don't want to learn any more, or I have a house big enough to not disturb others, I'll get a nice acoustic. Until then, these digitals are superb.

+1

Unfortunately, even this simple statement, i.e.' +1 for acoustic if playing classical', needs qualification in my view. Most of the higher end digitals are attempting to emulate the touch, feel and responsiveness of a grand piano. In this respect they may provide a better classical playing experience than an upright acoustic in many cases.

There is something which each digital is missing - that is sound projection and liveness, resonances and so on. However, having playes years on old and not to good acoustic, I think that the digital of the class of CA67 and better may be better. Take in mind, that cheap acoustic may put you off from the piano, because it will be cheap and not good in many cases and worn out. If you want a very good piano, acoustic in every way, but I do not believe you can anything what will give you as much fun from playing as good digital, if you find one.

Even though old acoustic dropped down their prices last year due to expansion of digitals, good ones still costs their price.

I would check few acoustics and digitals at given price and than decide.

I've explained so many times about why I prefer acoustics so I decided not to repeat myself again and just give the +1 I play a digital piano only because I live in a flat and have neighbors. In any other case I'd go for an acoustic, night and day, no pun intended

The interaction with sound feels completely different on an acoustic piano. Not to mention, every time I switch from my digital to an acoustic, using the pedal is mayhem. I can pedal the same way and the resonances get beyond control in a matter of milliseconds. I for one cannot wait to be able to replace my digital with an acoustic.

Upbeat, I guess not all digitals are same in respect to pedal responsiveness. Some high end digitals are much better at simulating this. I always worry when a thread goes from the specific to the general i.e. acoustics are much better than digital or digital now outperforming many acoustics. You lose a sense of the strengths and weaknesses of each and the arguments start to lose balance and become polarised. There are many pianists who find high end digitals just as communicative as some upright acoustics and many other pianists like CyberGene who favour the acoustic experience over any kind of digital. At this level it now seems to depend as much on taste as anything else. The exception is of course the the full monte grand piano...from 6ft plus. There is clearly no practical digital substitute for an instrument of this calibre in nearly all of its facets.

you're completely right pmh, but I much prefer the artificial thing, which is making me happy playing the piano and wanting and inspiring, than real one, which I do vnot like because it's old and worn and there is no pleasure to play on the real thing.

Of course, above all, I do prefer a good one acoustic, no doubts here, however, I do not beliebe than in competetive price one will find good enough instrument to exchange with good dp, but with each year it's more possible becaause they are chepaer and cheaper.

Unfortunately, many old cheap pianos are rebuild using cheapest parts, and they sound bright and like a crap. Achieving nice, dark and cold tone seems impossible in that price.

Go to your nearest Kawai dealer and play CA67 vs some of the K-series uprights. Even the entry level K2 already feels much more responsive, nuanced and easy to control. And the price difference is about 1.5. I don't think this is a huge difference and we are comparing brand new instruments here. For the price of a brand new CA67 you'd be able to find fantastic used uprights. If one can accept the need for tuning and maintenance and is not bothered by neighbors it's a no contest at all.

I'm not saying people should not favor digitals. They are useful tools, and depending on the situation they can be the smart choice, even if budget is no issue. My digital does allow for things I just could not do with an acoustic (recording, using vsts and transcribing arrangements via midi, headphones at night). All that said, I sincerely believe digitals are just not there when it comes to imitating the complexities of the physical phenomenon of sound and resonance. They are certainly getting closer and closer, but the fact remains they are trying to imitate something already inherent to the acoustic instrument, which makes me see the latter superior in this regard.

Cheers!

I have a Kawai CA65 and an old Gaveau acoustic upright piano. The acoustic was from the entry level segment of the Gaveau line, so nothing fancy like the Yamaha U line, not to mention more than 100 years old (purchase price $400).

I enjoy the acoustic much more than then Kawai CA65 sound through the speakers - the bass sounds boxy, boomy on the the digital, the resonances are not up there with the acoustic, partial sustain pedal effect is different (read better) on the acoustic, etc. Some other perceived differences include a uniform tone sound on the acoustic, from bass to treble, while on the Kawai I sometimes feel like a note (from a passage) is sticking out - I can't tell if this is because of me (incorrect technique, not surfaced by the Gaveau), or because of a sampling error/room resonances/etc.

The Kawai with the headphones feels very much improved - the bass is clearer, the treble is not that thin/screaming at you, the details/nuances I get from a piece are sometimes better than on the acoustic (going from pianissimo to mezzo piano is clearer on the Kawai). Most of the time the Kawai feels easier to play/control, but sometimes the Gaveau can mask some problems too that I can hear on the Kawai (scales are smoother on the acoustic, probably because it the DP has a better dynamic range).

All in all, if you can afford (space, neighbors etc), buy the acoustic. I predict you'll eventually buy a digital too, even if for night practice only.

I just went through this and I am now a happy CA67 owner. However be warned the low end is a bit muddled, the notes tend to blur. With that said, acoustic pianos are a nice thing to have in addition to a digital, not the other way around. If you have a family or want one, go digital. The best musical inspiration typically happens under the darkness of night, not a great time to be banging on an acoustic. Unless your single and live alone with the nearest neighbor 200 yards away.