Welcome to the Piano World Piano Forums Over 3 million posts about pianos, digital pianos, and all types of keyboard instruments. Over 100,000 members from around the world.
Join the World's Largest Community of Piano Lovers
(it's free)
It's Fun to Play the Piano ... Please Pass It On!
I know, it's a loaded question. Not looking to start a flame war here.
But I've run into a couple of instances with churches lately where they have decided to switch to a Digital Piano, both paid somewhere near $3500.00
Now I have nothing against digital pianos, but as a piano tuner and pianist I tend to lean toward acoustic pianos except where digitals make more sense, like if you have to haul the piano with you to a gig.
So I'm asking for input from the members on the Digital Piano forums.
I realize this will be a matter of opinion and is subjective, but many of you have a lot more experience with DPs than I do and I know many of you have good ears.
Speaking of which, if you are going to be at NAMM this year and have a chance to check out the Digital Pianos, Hybrids, Keyboards, I'd love to have you post pictures and opinions.
Now, to my questions:
1.) Can you really get a good DP for $3500? By good I mean, is the piano sound really that good? (I'm not interested in the bells and whistles).
1b.) How Good? ( comparable to an acoustic piano like a ... ?)
2.) How About the Action? At what point do they start to really feel like you're playing an acoustic piano? Do they ever really feel like you're playing a grand piano, and if so, at what price point?
Please base your input on first-hand experience, not something you read somewhere.
Thanks in advance for your feedback/help, much appreciated.
My Keyboards: Estonia L-190, Roland RD88, Yamaha P-80, Bilhorn Telescope Organ c 1880, Antique Pump Organ, 1850 concertina, 3 other digital pianos ------------------------- My original piece on BandCamp: https://frankbaxtermrpianoworld.bandcamp.com/releases
Me banging out some tunes in the Estonia piano booth at the NAMM show...
In the context of your question, in large venues where you'd tend to need a microphone to amplify an acoustic piano, the direct output of even a low-cost digital piano is going to be a huge advantage, where those premium sampled sounds are going to blow many acoustic church pianos out of the water.
FWIW, there are some piano dealers that appear very knowledgeable and poke their faces around here every once in a while. For example, there is a member that works for pianoworks atlanta IIRC, that stocks both, demo plays both on youtube from time to time, sells both digital and acoustic. Pianoworks very occasionally posts here, with some very insightful information I find when that happens, but could easily miss a post like this I imagine. Somebody like that may be well worth while contacting via PM or a phone call.
Even if he would post here to the questions you posed, he may well not wish to express any personal bias towards any brands or models here I guess, but in a PM or phone call he may spill the beans a bit more openly.
Good luck in search of your answers along with what turns up here in this thread.
Selftaught since June 2014. Books: Barratt classic piano course bk 1,2,3. Humphries Piano handbook, various... Kawai CA78, Casio AP450 & software pianos. 12x ABF recitals. My struggles: https://soundcloud.com/alexander-borro
I'm new to digital pianos but have spent the last 2 weeks researching and have made 3 separate visits to piano showrooms to play the digital pianos as well as acoustic grands and compare their actions to each other.
1.a) Yes, you can buy a good digital for $3500. Within that price range you can buy a digital piano with the most premium (with the exception of hybrid) digital piano action offering from Casio, Kawai, Korg, Roland and Yamaha.
Hybrid digital pianos use an actual acoustic action, but I have not researched this area. You'll have to jump to $4800 for Casio's GP300, $5500 for Yamaha's NU1 and the AvantGrand's are certainly out of the price range.
I've researched mainly the digital piano actions (I'll be hooking it up to my computer,) not the sounds, so I can't really comment, but one thing to consider is the difference between a sampled and modeled digital piano sounds.
2. From my research, and playing on digital pianos I've narrowed it down to Roland and Kawai. These are subjectively my favourites. The Natural Wood action from Yamaha is a contender but I personally feel it still falls short of the best Roland and Kawai actions. Roland has 2 main "types" of actions, in your price range I'd recommend the ones where the hammer points away from the player, and Kawai has several actions based on grand piano actions.
I made a spreadsheet comparing most major recent digital piano actions. If you look at this it will be easier to see the order of most recent/most premium digital piano actions, and how they differ from previous ones, and will help you understand what people are talking about when they use the key action acronyms. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...1ashmGS5FBmbIkn1bYDow/edit#gid=160247993
I'd probably say the Kawai RM3 Grand II and especially the Grand Feel II feel most like an actual Kawai grand piano action. Especially if you look at the underlying technology of the action, the AWA Pro and up use a pivot design where the pivot is behind the keys so it functions similarly to an actual grand piano. One of the major benefits of this design is that pressing further on the keys requires less force than actions with a pivot at the back, similar to an acoustic piano.
Although I haven't compared the Rolands to other grand pianos as much as I'd like to, I am leaning towards a Kawai for myself since their central-pivot design actions were most similar to a Kawai grand other than any other actions I have tried.
1. Yes, depending on your definition of "piano." DPs are good parlour instruments and some are loud enough to work in worship settings. But they're not a realistic substitute for a good grand which costs at ten to fifty times as much.
1a. I don't think DPs are comparable to any specific acoustic instrument. Maybe the best way to think of them is a different instrument. DPs and acoustic uprights are both compromised instruments compared to the reference top-line grands - which is most people's ideal version of a piano. But the compromises are different. DPs don't quite have the volume or the richness of tone, ut are much easier to play through a PA. AP uprights don't have the tuning stability or the consistency of the sound, but sound richer when in tune.
2. Kawai probably have the best action in this price range. No DPs have an exactly grand-like action, but the Kawai GF2 seems to come very close. Only the Yamaha AG is better, and that costs a lot more.
Kawai CA67, Doepfer LMK2+, NI Komplete 11 Ultimate, Amphion One18 monitors, 2 x UAD Octo FX, Ableton Push 2, Maschine Studio, Maschine Jam, and a Nice Desk from Ikea
No I don't believe you can at the moment find an instrument for $3500 that is going to take the place of a proper baby grand which I believe most church's do or should own if they perform acoustically. If there is a chapel service in a smaller room, that's a whole 'nuther story. Or if we are talking about a contemporary worship band - that is a WHOLE 'nuther story - the answer here would yes, you could use a $3500 digital or less. Most of the problem has to do with the timbre and throw of internal amp+speaker systems on digitals. By and large, they are all pretty lousy when played at louder volumes - and very directional. You could of course use one of these cheaper instruments with a better sound system... some suggest the Center Point Stereo v3 is a nice choice. Or a Fender Sound System. There are pricier powered PA speakers as well which do a much better job than any internal amp and speakers on any existing digital piano.
You could, and I have seen some churches/schools, pick the Yamaha Avant Grand N3 (now the N3X). It will do the job - However, the speaker system, while very good by digital piano standards, is not the same thing as an acoustic piano. It will achieve similar volume to a small baby grand but it's not the same timbre - you really have to use additional sound reinforcement to improve the color/timbre and throw of the instrument as well.
Thanks everyone, so far I think what I'm reading supports what I expected.
There are some very good DPs out there, but at a $3500 price point you aren't likely to get the sound and touch of a good acoustic. Of course to be fair, you aren't going to get a good acoustic for that price either.
But if the church already has a reasonably decent acoustic piano, perhaps their money would be better spent on the piano they already have, either in fixing the piano or in converting it to a hybrid.
I think the companies producing digital pianos will continue to improve the quality of the instrument voices, as will third party companies like PianoTeq (and yes, they are an advertiser on Piano World, but some of their instrument sounds are pretty cool).
For my money as a piano player I'd really like to see improvement in the actions though.
Is anyone out there producing a DP with an actual grand action?
I think that's why I enjoy the hybrid I installed in my Estonia, because I still have the feel of a nicely made grand with the flexibility of a midi controller. And I know there are other hybrids out there. I also know they are at a pretty high price point.
Which, circling back to the churches makes me think they'd be better off investing in their existing pianos, or saving their money until they can afford a nicer acoustic, or digital.
My Keyboards: Estonia L-190, Roland RD88, Yamaha P-80, Bilhorn Telescope Organ c 1880, Antique Pump Organ, 1850 concertina, 3 other digital pianos ------------------------- My original piece on BandCamp: https://frankbaxtermrpianoworld.bandcamp.com/releases
Me banging out some tunes in the Estonia piano booth at the NAMM show...
Is anyone out there producing a DP with an actual grand action?
Well, aside from the potentially vaporware-ish one-offs, there's the Yamaha AvantGrand, which has a real, honest to goodness grand piano action (and in many estimations, stands apart from any other DP due to that). I think the N1 starts around $6k street.
Originally Posted by Piano World
Which, circling back to the churches makes me think they'd be better off investing in their existing pianos, or saving their money until they can afford a nicer acoustic, or digital.
Taking amplification out of the question, do these churches you work with really need crazy authentic grand sound/action? I've never been to huge cathedrals or heartland megachurches, most of the ones I've been to had pretty old uprights (or maybe grands) which were rarely ever tuned, and mic'd into a PA if the room was large.
I'm frankly a bit surprised at the responses here...yeah, $3500 won't get you a truly authentic grand replacement, but man it's enough to get you a really GREAT instrument. It's easily enough to get you a DP with Kawai's very best action. It gets you Roland's very best action. It gets you Casio's very best action. And the sound from any of these instruments will be fantastic. Are these churches going to have professional pianists recording in a studio environment, or performing in a concert venue? If they're going to be playing for accompaniment for a congregation to sing, I have a hard time believing what is available here won't be sufficient (again assuming supplemental amplification).
I'm nowhere near a pro pianist, but I have the incredible fortune of being able to regularly practice on a 6-figure grand and other quality acoustics, and none of their actions feel anything like the others. And honestly, I can't say any of them are really all *that* much better than the action on my Kawai DP. Even if the feel of the action on the DP is *imperfect,* it's certainly more than playable, and it makes real music. Isn't that really the goal?
I think if the space is live enough and not too large, where an acoustic grand can fill the space without amplification, use an acoustic. But a good used acoustic would run at least $7000, and if the temperature in that church isn't constant, you'll have to tune it six to twelve times a year. And if you have to mic it, there's more expense and fuss, because micing an acoustic piano is tricky and it's easy to have it sound like mud over the mains.
For not much more than $3500 you could get a Kawai ES8 with the built-in stand and triple-pedal, plus a Bose L1 tower with one bass module, and you'd have a very good (and loud) piano sound, and you could feed it into the main sound system if you need to blend it with other instruments and voices. No microphones also means no feedback issues. The only way to see if you like it is to try it (or better yet, have the church's regular pianist try it).
For the record, I own both a grand and a digital (as noted in my signature). I perform and record using both, depending on the circumstances.
Again, thank you everyone for your input, please keep it coming.
One of the churches has a Yamaha (acoustic) baby grand and a serious sound system, along with some pretty decent mics. But, the room has some humidity issues, and the piano isn't as stable as I'd like.
They are considering moving to a digital in the $3500 range. I'm weighing that option against turning their acoustic into a hybrid.
The other church also has a pretty strong sound system, but a so-so piano.
A lot of churches in this area (southwest Maine) have so-so pianos and limited budgets. I'm trying to figure out the best path for them, but admittedly I'm a bit biased as I prefer acoustic pianos and their actions, and I'm a piano tuner.
My Keyboards: Estonia L-190, Roland RD88, Yamaha P-80, Bilhorn Telescope Organ c 1880, Antique Pump Organ, 1850 concertina, 3 other digital pianos ------------------------- My original piece on BandCamp: https://frankbaxtermrpianoworld.bandcamp.com/releases
Me banging out some tunes in the Estonia piano booth at the NAMM show...
1) Including the b-stock aspect of the market in this country (Netherlands), one can get about 35% discount off the list price for most digital pianos, and at that point I would say without added amplification, no. The speaker systems on DP's are their weak points, and the evenness of acoustics is approached but not met. A better return on investment would be stage versions and added good amplification since the play is for an audience but that won't achievable at this budget alone - however, since the church in question already has a good amplification system....:
1b) As for their internal sound so to speak - yes, at that budget the sound is pretty nice. Over the amplification systems they would please.
2) As for the feel - yes, some very good ones out there for this price. Might run into some _milder_ issues in regards to humidity with some of the actions from casio and kawai since they are fully wood - roland's pha-50 action would be impervious. Yamaha's action in this range is also wood mostly, but is plastic reinforced and less susceptible.
cost benefits of stage versions are substantial in this case - kawai mp11 will stay within the budget, so will some models from Nord - nord having the added benefit of free lifetime access to new sample libraries which can be loaded into the piano, and also some fine action in those, and they add new sounds to their main libraries very regularly.
Personally, we were going to choose the Roland LX17 - it offered the best overal sound system and action, and here at least, it could have been ours with full warranty at €3400. One of our concerns also was climate - our house, and our climate in general, goes from cold and dry to hot and humid with regularity, and some of the experiences of users of those otherwise fine actions in all wood compelled us to choose something a little less susceptible. It's output levels go as high as 112db, which should be loud enough for a decent sized hall by itself though those levels might not agree with the player..
Last edited by Goss; 01/13/1704:28 AM.
Roland HP605|Senheiser HD558|MSFT Surface Pro 4|coffee
If it's an issue of practicality over authentic sound quality - I think practicality is winning. I can't remember the last time I saw an acoustic piano at a church/worship service. And I don't think anybody has ever really said "this church service would have been so much better if we had a 'real' piano". But I have been impressed by what some musicians have pulled off with a digital setup. (and that's not counting mega church performances like TimesSquare Church or the Brooklyn Tabernacle)
For example one compelling practical reason for a $3,500 keyboard - it can replace BOTH the acoustic piano and church organ. Heck it can even give you several of them. (yeah I know - them's fightin' words, but it's true in many, many cases)
Or what if you have to hold occasional services outside of your normal venue?
So I think it's less about how authentic it is and more about "what else can we do with it?"
We are the music makers, And we are the dreamers of dreams.
. . . Are these churches going to have professional pianists recording in a studio environment, or performing in a concert venue? If they're going to be playing for accompaniment for a congregation to sing, I have a hard time believing what is available here won't be sufficient (again assuming supplemental amplification).
I've been reading, and having the same thoughts.
I just tested a Roland FP-90 -- a "slab piano" with Roland's newest (and very nice) PHA-50 action, and modelled sounds. It has its own speakers and amps built-in, for small rooms. Paired with a small PA system -- a Bose, or Yamaha Stagepas -- it's reasonably portable, and it will fill a church with nice sound.
Exactly like an acoustic, touch and sound? -- No.
A good-enough emulation so nobody in the congregation will care ? -- Yes, IMHO.
As for replacing a church organ, that's a whole other problem (IMHO).
. Charles --------------------------- PX-350 / Roland Gaia / Pianoteq
Folks, a bit surprised by the responses here. Let me start by saying that playing a digital piano side-by-side with an acoustic piano will always yield a "no comparison" to the acoustic piano. But ............ if no acoustic is present and all you play and hear is a high-end digital piano, it will sound real and it will sound GREAT!!!
In the $3500 range and below with proper amplification, the following digitals will sound amazing:
1. Kurzweil Forte and Forte 7 2. Roland RD800 3. Kawai MP11 and ES8 4. Yamaha CP4 5. Nord Stage (although a bit higher than $3500)
Depends on whether the $3500 has to include speakers. Does the church have a laptop that can run Pianoteq?
And does someone have the will, and expertise, to set it up properly whenever it's needed?
I love Pianoteq, but if someone asked about a DP for my synagogue, "MIDI controller + laptop + Pianoteq" wouldn't be on the list of candidates.
Or the church might be lucky . . .
Morodiene might have some words of wisdom about this . . .
I haven't been brave enough to try this, although I'm tempted. Since I play mostly strings, organ and synth at my church, there hasn't been much of a need as my MOX6 sounds pretty good in the house (I think). So I haven't toyed with that. The pianist was complaining about her CP4 sound, but I think it works really nicely in the mix, it's just when she hears it in the house from the stage it doesn't sound good to her, but she uses in-ear monitors, so that's more accurate as to what people are hearing.
Having said all that, it wouldn't be out of the question, but you'd want to have a brighter piano setting than you'd use for a classical solo sound if you are in a band.
I think the actions of Kawai, Roland, and Yamaha are all contenders in this price range (I'm thinking stage pianos mainly) and any pianists would be happy to play on these actions in this kind of setting.
As for the OP with the best touch and sound in that price range, I haven't played Roland or Yamaha consoles lately to say, but I'd place my bets on Kawai. To me, the GF most closely replicates the feel of my acoustic grand, and I have not found anything that I can't play on the Kawai that I can do on my acoustic. I'm speaking of the action.
Expression-wise/sound-wise, of course, there's a larger gap. The pedal unit leaves much to be desired. I have yet to encounter a pedal system that feels like a grand. Again, I haven't played the consoles, and this is probably where you would get a better pedal setup.
For sound, I feel I have more control on my acoustic. Using software pianos gives me a better sound and a bit more control, but there's that little bit of latency to accommodate. I don't get this with the onboard sounds, so I use that mostly when practicing, even if it's not the greatest sound available.
I'm not a church person, but I was at a funeral in my local parish church recently and the music was played on a Clavinova. It's a reasonable-sized church by UK standards, and the Clavinova had no problem filling the space. It also doubled as a pipe organ for one section.
I don't think the question is "Is a good DP really a replacement for a baby grand" - because of course it won't be, any more than a similarly-priced AP would be.
The question is more 'Will it do the job and be less expensive to maintain?" Given that most churches don't offer living room temperature control, and most non-musicians probably can't hear much of a difference between instruments, and not many church pianos are used for classical concerts, and not many church pianists really need a professional concert grand action, and a good DP should sit there and "just work" with minimal maintenance or tuning, a DP makes perfect sense for a smaller venue.
Kawai CA67, Doepfer LMK2+, NI Komplete 11 Ultimate, Amphion One18 monitors, 2 x UAD Octo FX, Ableton Push 2, Maschine Studio, Maschine Jam, and a Nice Desk from Ikea
Due to your responses I'm not sure if you really read the recommended, well written guide by RickardNi.
Further more did no one recommend a Kawai CA 97 e.g. Based on my and many other users' research and expertise I would say that you won't get much more D-Piano or even Piano experience for $3200.
Although I am an agnostic, I used to be the main church pianist/organist/keyboardist in my parents' church for quite some time in my teen years. There was a well maintained upright, a digital organ and a Clavinova. I liked playing the acoustic piano when there were solo classical acts. However the varying humidity and temperature and the difficulties in amplifying the acoustic piano made it a major pain in the a**! The Clavinova was just superior in everything else except solo classical repertoire. And we're talking about a very early Clavinova from about 20 years ago. All modern Clavinovas, CA-series etc. are a no-brainer for church use, even for classical music. If I am in that same position now choosing a single instrument for the church, I wouldn't even blink before I get the digital piano. I'd get a CA97.
I should make it clear this isn't strictly about the churches, it was just that the churches got me wondering.
As it happens both of these churches have very music oriented parishioners. In fact the pastor in one of them is a musician, with very sensitive ears.
I probably should have asked... ~ How good of a DP can you get in the $3500 - $4000 range?
And by good I mean, the quality of the piano sound, and the feel of the action.
I realize you also pick up additional instrument voices, although I've always found them to be a bit weak compared to the real thing.
By the same token it's been a few years since I played around with different digitals, and I know the technology keeps improving. Which is why I reached out to this group.
There are many of you with far more experience with digital pianos than I have, which is obvious both by your answers and in some cases also by your signatures (where you list your equipment) :-)
My Keyboards: Estonia L-190, Roland RD88, Yamaha P-80, Bilhorn Telescope Organ c 1880, Antique Pump Organ, 1850 concertina, 3 other digital pianos ------------------------- My original piece on BandCamp: https://frankbaxtermrpianoworld.bandcamp.com/releases
Me banging out some tunes in the Estonia piano booth at the NAMM show...
I should make it clear this isn't strictly about the churches, it was just that the churches got me wondering.
As it happens both of these churches have very music oriented parishioners. In fact the pastor in one of them is a musician, with very sensitive ears.
I probably should have asked... ~ How good of a DP can you get in the $3500 - $4000 range?
And by good I mean, the quality of the piano sound, and the feel of the action.
I realize you also pick up additional instrument voices, although I've always found them to be a bit weak compared to the real thing.
By the same token it's been a few years since I played around with different digitals, and I know the technology keeps improving. Which is why I reached out to this group.
There are many of you with far more experience with digital pianos than I have, which is obvious both by your answers and in some cases also by your signatures (where you list your equipment) :-)
I think with a top-notch stage piano + software piano + good headphones or monitors, I think you can get a pretty darn good DP setup for $3500-4000 that would rival an acoustic grand in the $20k-30k range in sound and feel.
The action, as others have said, will be different, just like all acoustics differ from one another, but they do very well at mimicking the feel of acoustic grand piano.
The sound is different mostly due to the fact it's coming from speakers, but then you also don't suffer from the lacking in the bass notes of an acoustic grand less than 7'. So, that could be considered a trade-off.
I think it would behoove you if you are offering advice to customers to go to a shop and actually try out these DPs. Go above that price range with hybrids, and also try out top and mid-range DPs, and even try out the sub-$1k ones. I think that is the best way to answer your question.
At this point I'm not offering advice to customers, I'm actually trying to get some education.
I totally agree there is no substitute for trying any instrument in person, although I believe with digital instruments once you've tried one, you don't need to try several of the same model / setup. You should however try several acoustic pianos of the same make/model if possible.
I had the distinct pleasure of comparing three pianos of the same make and model side by side when I chose mine. It took me two days and lots of playing before I could decide. Obviously if you were looking at a used/rebuilt/restored piano this wouldn't apply. Either you like that one or you don't (well, even that isn't entirely true, because a good tech and voicer can make major changes to an acoustic).
But I digress.
I'm finding this thread very helpful because you are all giving me things to think about and information that would take me a long time to accumulate.
To continue my education I will visit some dealers and make live comparisons when time allows.
I know, it's a loaded question. Not looking to start a flame war here.
But I've run into a couple of instances with churches lately where they have decided to switch to a Digital Piano, both paid somewhere near $3500.00
Now I have nothing against digital pianos, but as a piano tuner and pianist I tend to lean toward acoustic pianos except where digitals make more sense, like if you have to haul the piano with you to a gig.
So I'm asking for input from the members on the Digital Piano forums.
I realize this will be a matter of opinion and is subjective, but many of you have a lot more experience with DPs than I do and I know many of you have good ears.
Speaking of which, if you are going to be at NAMM this year and have a chance to check out the Digital Pianos, Hybrids, Keyboards, I'd love to have you post pictures and opinions.
Now, to my questions:
1.) Can you really get a good DP for $3500? By good I mean, is the piano sound really that good? (I'm not interested in the bells and whistles).
1b.) How Good? ( comparable to an acoustic piano like a ... ?)
2.) How About the Action? At what point do they start to really feel like you're playing an acoustic piano? Do they ever really feel like you're playing a grand piano, and if so, at what price point?
Please base your input on first-hand experience, not something you read somewhere.
Thanks in advance for your feedback/help, much appreciated.
Hi Frank,
The best sound depends upon what piano sound the user/listener likes (just as all acoustics sound different).
There are 5 possible sound sources for digital pianos where the sound is either created by the piano's on-board chip, or, the sound is created by a lap-top and software (VSTi): 1) Fully modelled on-board sound (where the sound is created in real time using math algorithms---for better dynamics. 2) Mostly sampled on-board sound with the various piano effects created by modelling (some Roland models e.g., RD800, and many Kawai/Yamaha digital pianos). 3) Fully sampled sound with no modelling (on board) 4) Fully modelled VSTi (virtual studio technology i.e., the laptop creates the sound via Midi signals from the keyboard) 5) Mostly sampled VSTi sound with the piano sound effects created by modelling.
Here is my ranking for piano sound (subjective opinion): 1) Roland's fully modelled piano sound (in the LX17, LX7 and FP-90 etc) OR Pianoteq (a VSTi that is fully modelled) of which there are several really good pianos: the D4, B. 2) Garritan CFX (a VSTi that is a v. large sampled instrument) OR Imperial Vienna 3) Ivory II (a VSTi that is sampled) or similar VSTi 6) Kawai EX Grand piano (MP11, MP7, ES7 etc) or Yamaha CFX (CLP595) 7) Kawai SK Grand piano (CS11, CA97/CA67, ES8)
The next problem is amplification. Even really good modelled sound such as the Roland or pianoteq sound will not be impressive if the speakers or amp set-up are not good. The Roland LX7 I found disappointing; the Roland LX17 made the hairs stand up on the back of my neck. Similarly, the CS11 from Kawai has the same sound source, but sounds quite a bit better than the CA97 does.
I would put amplification ahead of sound source in order of importance.
Action ranking: 1) Yamaha Avant Grand piano action (N1, N2, N3X, NU1) 2) Casio GP500 piano action/Kawai Grand Feel 2 (CS11, CA97/67) 3) Kawai Grand Feel 1 (Kawai MP11, Kawai CA95) 4) RM3 Grand II (Kawai VPC1) 5) Roland PHA-50 (LX17; FP-90) / Kawai RMII (MP7, ES7) /RMIII (ES8) 6) Everything else.
The action of a digital piano can't be altered, so what ever of these the player is content with is still an option.
Buying stage piano or portable piano and adding great monitors or PA system is a good way of maximising sound tone quality, sound amplification at reduced cost.
For instance: Combination 1: Roland FP-90 + studio monitors/PA [might be great value for money if you can enjoy the PHA-50 action] Combination 2: Kawai MP-11 + studio monitors/PA + VSTi
However, if you want real piano action, you'll need to go with the Casio GP500 or the Avant Grand N1 (maybe second hand).
The advantage of the N1 is that it is a real action; the disadvantage of the N1 is that it has very old sampled sound which you would need to supplement with a VSTi.
I don't know, but my suspicion is that the Casio GP500 with a VSTi like Pianoteq or Garritan CFX plugged into a PA might give best value for money (assuming that Avant Grands are too expensive)---i.e., for combination of best action, best sound source, best amplification.
If you can put up with the Grand Feel II action (which is the best digital action outside of the Avant Grand/Casio GP500 action), then you can combine a Kawai CS11/CA97 with a VSTi.
Presently, there isn't really one digital piano that has the best action, sound and amplification. If you can put up with the Roland LX17 action (PHA-50), then it probably has the best sound/amp combination of the cabinet digitals (without going into the baby grand price bracket). Summary:
Personally, if I was going to push the boat out to over $4000 but below $6000, I'd probably opt for the Roland LX-17 or Kawai CS11 with pianoteq (but also test the Casio GP500); however, if I was wanting perfect action, I'd push the boat out on price and go for the Yamaha Avant Grand N3X with pianoteq or Garritan CFX VSTi.
If I was on a tighter budget, I'd go for the MP11 with studio monitors and pianoteq and/or Garritan CFX VSTi.
If however, I was wanting more than just piano, I'd opt for a Kawai MP7, Kurzweil Forte, Roland RD800 (or even the new version out soon) or Korg Kronos 2/Yamaha Montage 8.
Last edited by Doug M.; 01/13/1701:08 PM.
Instruments......Kawai MP7SE.............................................(Past - Kawai MP7, Yamaha PSR7000) Software..........Sibelius 7; Neuratron Photoscore Pro 8 Stand...............K&M 18953 Table-style Stage Piano Stand Piano stool.......K&M 14093 Piano stool
Frank- it's really difficult to get a sonic impression of a DP at NAMM. The noise on the main floor room now is so over the top , even with headphones and the volume cranked up all the way - most often you get the effect of - ok I know that's an imitation digital piano I'm listening to but it just sounds like any of the other countless digital pianos on the market.
Kawai usually has the best (read most quiet) room if you can hit it at the right time when there's a lull in the activity. But even Kawai I've found , like many of the manufacturers in the last 3-4 years, has a history of displaying their electronic keyboards with entry level, inferior , Radio Shack quality headphones.
So I think if you're lucky, you might get a general idea about the way something feels or sounds but you'd be better served finding a music store to audition things.
The fact the church has a good system is half the battle right there. If you don't need the home console look, already have the amplification covered, then yes $3500 is a generous budget to find something functional. Inspiring ? Well that's entirely subjective. For someone that's used to playing acoustic and a grand , they will never be satisfied. I look at it like you pick the least offensive contender.
The premium stage pianos that are available right now that I would list (in order of my preference fwiw) would be :
Yamaha CP4 - since I move it around , weight is a big issue with me. The Yamaha is 38 lbs. with a good (not great) build quality. That aside, it has the best feeling action and tone that I've found. And sounds good through all different quality levels of speakers.
Roland RD800 - heavier in weight. It's the best feeling and sounding stage piano from Roland ever! Could be due for an update at NAMM. I'm still partial to the Yamaha tone and action though.
Nord Piano 3 - a new Wood type Fatar action makes the NP3 MUCH more playable then any of their previous keyboards. The action is nice and I'd even say inspiring for a Fatar. I still prefer both the Yamaha and Rolands to it though. Their piano sounds are highly controversial and usually in two camps- either you love them or hate them…well I guess they also can be considered an acquired taste.. They continually up date their piano sounds (via free downloads) and their latest (Royal Grand) gets excellent reviews. I have not heard it.
Kawai MP11 - has the best action out of all stage pianos but personally I'm not a fan of the tone.
Kurzweil Forte - it has more synth capabilities then everything previously listed. For many people I know, they wouldn't play anything but a Kurz for pianos. They've never been my thing and I'm not a fan of the Kurz Fatar actions in general.
Korg Kronos 2 - arguably the best work station available and probably overkill for "just piano". Still many people are drawn to their piano sounds and action. I'm not one of them.
I'l be there , either Thursday or Friday ( I go down with 2 other friends and usually defer to what's the best day for them), doing my usual wandering around and hanging out. If you want to connect for a little while, shoot me a PM.
Last edited by Dave Ferris; 01/13/1701:40 PM.
2005 NY Steinway D Yamaha AvantGrand N3X, CP88, P-515
Interesting points, Doug. I take a different view, though.
You rank Pianoteq or LX17 or LX7 at the top. (Odd though, that you said the latter "made the hairs stand up on the back of my neck".) I've not tried those Rolands. But I would place Pianoteq quite low. Nearly every one of my sampled VST pianos sound better than Pianoteq.
So my ranking is: 1. Any number of sampled VSTs. 2. High end Kawais (CA or CS series). 3. Any Clavinova 4. Pianoteq 5. Any of the many freebie/junk VSTs available, and some of the older pay versions.
Also, you put amplification ahead of sound source in order of importance. I feel quite the opposite. Both are important, but a low-quality source will sound bad under all circumstances, even with mega-dollar audio gear. A good quality source will sound decent even with cheap speakers.
I came to that when trying to improve the sound of my Clavinova. Its sound was lame, so I added some quality speakers. That didn't help. The big improvement came from VST sounds.
I totally agree there is no substitute for trying any instrument in person, although I believe with digital instruments once you've tried one, you don't need to try several of the same model / setup.
Just a thought on this one. Generally, I think this is true with digitals--they don't have the individual variations inherent in a handbuilt acoustic.
However, as you look into DPs you'll notice that for a given manufacturer, many share the same parts. The Roland FP-90 stage piano, for instance, is touted as using the EXACT SAME keybed (Roland's PHA-50) and the EXACT SAME sound engine (fully modeled SuperNATURAL) as in some of their other pianos, some of which cost much more (the HP603/HP605/LX-7/LX-17). Here, the main difference is cabinet style, build quality, and internal speaker/amp/soundboard differences (and also onboard features/voices, but the tone generator is the same). You'll see the same with Kawai and Casio too.
In this case, you can typically get a sense of how one model should feel and sound if you play on the sibling, particularly if judging action and using headphones. But like all things aesthetic, there is a huge mental component involved, and it's possible that you will personally feel more of a connection with one instrument on the basis of its build or speaker setup. The keybed might be a bit quieter if it is bolted to the a sturdy cabinet frame versus a stage piano, a cheaper model's speakers may be inadequate and make the entire DP feel sluggish or lacking, etc.
All the above is just a long way of saying that it's very easy to take this line of thinking too far with digitals.
The Natural Wood action from Yamaha is a contender but I personally feel it still falls short of the best Roland and Kawai actions.
I'd edit my post if I could but I would like to instead state that I did not spend enough time with the Yamaha NW action to make an accurate assessment. Within my 1-2 minutes on this action it is hard for me to say definitively why a Roland action seemed superior. Perhaps my impression was influenced by others. I also have not tried any piano actions other than those from Casio, Korg, Yamaha, Kawai and Roland. I'd even say I'm too inexperienced to rule out Casio and Korg non-hybrid action. I only spent a few minutes (if even that) on these actions, and only tried one Korg model.
Interesting points, Doug. I take a different view, though.
You rank Pianoteq or LX17 or LX7 at the top. (Odd though, that you said the latter "made the hairs stand up on the back of my neck".) I've not tried those Rolands. But I would place Pianoteq quite low. Nearly every one of my sampled VST pianos sound better than Pianoteq.
So my ranking is: 1. Any number of sampled VSTs. 2. High end Kawais (CA or CS series). 3. Any Clavinova 4. Pianoteq 5. Any of the many freebie/junk VSTs available, and some of the older pay versions.
Also, you put amplification ahead of sound source in order of importance. I feel quite the opposite. Both are important, but a low-quality source will sound bad under all circumstances, even with mega-dollar audio gear. A good quality source will sound decent even with cheap speakers.
I came to that when trying to improve the sound of my Clavinova. Its sound was lame, so I added some quality speakers. That didn't help. The big improvement came from VST sounds.
Sorry, what I mean by importance of speakers/amp is: if you have a great sound source with poor amplification, the result is disappointing e.g., LX7; whereas, good sound/good speakers is great e.g., LX17. Agree that good amp doesn't rescue poor sound.
I guess everybody get's different results from VSTi's due to how much you can modify the sound. I think to get maximum out of VSTi's, one needs to slightly modify the tuning of each note to simulate the small variations between notes in an acoustic. Also, tweeking in general is difficult but probably necessary, especially for modelled sound sources. Also, I do think that sound tone quality judgement is subjective. I know many prefer sampled VST's.
I find Yamaha sampled pianos are good for Bach in particular, but I think they've fallen behind other firms.
Instruments......Kawai MP7SE.............................................(Past - Kawai MP7, Yamaha PSR7000) Software..........Sibelius 7; Neuratron Photoscore Pro 8 Stand...............K&M 18953 Table-style Stage Piano Stand Piano stool.......K&M 14093 Piano stool
Interesting points, Doug. I take a different view, though.
You rank Pianoteq or LX17 or LX7 at the top. (Odd though, that you said the latter "made the hairs stand up on the back of my neck".)
Evidently, he likes the Roland modeled sound.
However, he dislikes the LX-7's amplification, while the LX-17 made the hairs stand up on the back of his neck; which, in this context, probably means that it is very good.
Personally, I have to concur. I think the LX-17 has the best sound placement / amplification of all upright digital piano's I've tested, and the best sound, after some tweaking.
I would have loved the Kawai GF2 action in the LX-17, though, because I like it a bit better than the Roland PHA-50, but the latter is not bad. It's in between the Kawai RHII/III, and Kawai GF2.
To me, it doesn't matter too much though, because I've been an organ player in the past, and played lots of different actions; from very light synth-like actions, to very heavy tracker-type actions.
As I have never played an acoustic piano, I have no comparison, but I know how a piano should sound (and I've been able to test the digitals against a Kawai and a Yamaha grand in the store).
In the end, the LX-17 came closest with regard to the sound, especially with the resonances and sustain length (in which it beats basically everything but the grand itself), and the Kawai GF2 came closest with regard to action.
As I find the RHII action on my MP7 very playable, and didn't have any problems with the PHA-50 on the LX-17, I chose the Roland.
The LX-17 also has the added benefit (and for me, necessity) to be disassembled, or at least, be able to be split into two parts.
I've also tested the Yamaha CLP-585 but there was basically nothing I liked about it. Very short resonances and short sustain compared to the Kawai's, let alone the Rolands. The CFX sample is very dark, and distorts when brightened too much, whlie the Bösendorfer sample sounds as if it was miced from too far away.
Also, the CLP-585 has an irritating, rubbery-feeling action. It feels like a rubber-dome keyboard on a computer, and it even sounds like that when a key is depressed.
The one upshot the CLP-585 has is that it's aplification is *very* powerful. It can go really loud. However, both the LX-17 and CA-97 have a much better piano sound, and better sound placement. edit: and because the Yamaha misses so much of the resonances and extra sounds an acoustic make (damper noise, hammer fallback, etc...) it feels *REALLY* far behind te curve compared to the Kawai's and Roland's. Yamaha's VRM (Virtual Resonance Model) and its settings are a joke compared to the Virtual Technician and Piano Designer of Kawai and Roland.
If I had to choose a piano around $3500, I'd go for the CA97 (€3195), or the CS11 (€3995). If the budget would allow, and you can live with the PHA-50 action (I can), I'd go for the LX-17 and tweak the sound to my liking. (Which I actually did.)
The Kawai CA97 gives, IMHO, best bang for buck'.
Last edited by Falsch; 01/13/1708:17 PM.
Kawai Novus NV-10 | Pianoteq 7 (Kremsegg 1 & 2, Ruckers II, Karsten, KIVIR, Steinway D, K2) Intel NUC J5040, 8GB, SSD | iPad Pro 12.9 2018 | forScore
I probably should have asked... ~ How good of a DP can you get in the $3500 - $4000 range?
And by good I mean, the quality of the piano sound, and the feel of the action.
I think the answer depends more on the person using the instrument than the instrument itself. $3500 - $4500 is not a lot of money. For anyone to think that the claims in the marketing materials that a $5000 DP can equal a Yamaha CFX or Boesendorfer Imperial or Shigeru Kawai or (in Roland's case) a Hamburg Steinway D is actually true is simply living on Fantasy Island.
It really depends on the pianist at the DP. If it's someone who has been classically trained since he or she was 5-years-old, no DP at any price will be good enough to substitute a good acoustic, though Simone Dinnerstein had often chosen the Yamaha AvantGrand N2 as her go-to piano for classroom instruction but never for performance.
I have personally test played all the top end Yamaha / Kawai / Roland DP and their sound is distinctively synthetic and their action feels more like a lever than a piano action. Some are better than others as prices go up, but even the Yamaha AvantGrand action does not completely feel real. I have the AvantGrand N3 and a Yamaha C3X. They are supposed to have identical actions as per Yamaha but they do not and it is clear as day that the N3 does not feel exactly like a real piano or even like the C3X. Don't get me wrong. The N3 feel far more convincing than a $5000 Yamaha CLP-585 or Kawai CA97, but very convincing is not "ah, the real thing". It's like the difference between heavy whipping cream in your coffee compared to Coffee-mate. Don't tell me it's exactly the same. Obviously Coffee-mate has the advantage of not needing refrigeration and a very long shelf life.
As compromise goes, the $4500 DP are good. They have many advantages and serve their purpose. Is there even one second when playing such a DP when I forget and think I'm playing a real piano? No. I think anyone who claims that is either on the payroll of DP maker or haven't played a whole lot of real pianos lately. However, in the defense of the good DP at the $4500 range, they are excellent substitutes for practicing classical piano techniques. Actually, at RCM 6 and beyond, an expensive DP is better for technique practice than a vertical acoustic even though the joy of playing an acoustic is clearly missing. While focused on technique, it's ok to not experience the full acoustic experience and still make progress as long as an acoustic is always close by.
Once the marketing fog clears, at today's price point, there hasn't been that significant improvements in DP in the last 10 years. Does anyone remembers the Apple iPhone 2G from 2007? Today's iPhone is so much more advanced than that from 10 years ago. DP's just hasn't made the same kind of progress as the iPhone 2G. The OP asked how good is a $3500 - $4500 DP compared to previously in terms of progress. Today's are better, but perhaps just a little better than 10 years ago, nothing drastic.
Yes, reproducing the sound, feel and behavioir of a carefully engineered wood and metal instrument is difficult. And the means to do it with technology is no easy feat.
for perspective - amplifiers and speakers costing way more than say a shigeru kawai sk ex or yamaha cfx still have difficulty fooling the ears, so whats out there dpmwise for 5 or 10 15k yes, it's not the same thing..
Roland HP605|Senheiser HD558|MSFT Surface Pro 4|coffee
First, if you want to play an acoustic piano, then buy an acoustic piano. Second, I think people are making too much out of this, putting the acoustic piano on some sort of pedestal, and taking a €150K instrument as their benchmark.
I'm a 'defector' from the organ world: a few years classical, later Hammond.
The one thing I see people do is comparing clones to a real Hammond B3 and Leslie 122. In the end, this is the only combination that counts.
Since 2006, we have clones that are very, very good. To name a few: the Nord C2D, the XK3C, XK5, KeybDuo Mark III, the modeled VB3 VST, and not to forget the (now discontinued) NI B4 Mark II.
It's not very difficult to create the sinus wave a Hammond makes. It's actually quite easy. What is difficult, is creating the crosstalk, leakage, the keyclick, vibrato, percussion, chorus.... and the big one, the Leslie speaker.
Everything has been recreated perfectly, with one exception: the Leslie. Because the simulator will use two speakers in stereo by necessity, it will sound like a miked Leslie put through a stereo setup. (Think about how a Leslie sounds in a song.) Because of this, the simulator will *never* be able to attain the same power and presence of a real Leslie. It can't. It's impossible to simulate the sound bouncing off the walls, floor and ceiling of the room.
For everything but the most demanding setups, the organ/leslie simulator are more than good enough nowadays.
Even so, people are still bashing the clones, but the complaints become more and more desperate, trying to keep the B3 on its pedestal.
- There are no nine key contacts. (There are, in the New B3 Mark I and II) - The percussion/vibrato/chorus doesn't sound right (then change the settings!) - My neighbor's 1963 B3 is brighter/darker than this clone. (Then change the settings to match that) - The pedals don't feel EXACTLY like those of a B3 - ....
In the end, it just comes down to this:
If you want the sound, the feeling, and presence of a Hammond B3 + Leslie 122, then buy a setup for €10K, spend another €10K to restore it, and you'll be very happy.
If you want an instrument that comes close to sounding and playing like a B3, there are several options, and they are all very good.
I can assure you, I've heard people sitting at a New B3 Mark II, which runs through an XB122 (current day version of the Leslie 122, with newer connections) resort to "but I can't feel the vibrations of the running motor in the organ", or "I can't smell the oil when playing"; it's just not like a "real" B3. (Even though the New B3 Mark II is basically a physical copy of a real one; in layout, and even down to the nine contact keyboard and the pedals.)
Those people will *never* accept a digital instrument *ever*.
The same goes for the digital piano. For most home players, I'm convinced the currenct (sub)top digitals such as the CA97/CS11, LX-17, and the Yamaha's in the Avantgrand range are *more* than sufficient.
If not, you're either a *very* good player; good enough to be a professional music teacher at the highest levels or even a concert pianist, or you're part of the "I want an acoustic no matter how good a digital ever becomes" crowd. Wanting an acoustic piano is fine, but in that case, it serves you no point to keep looking digitals... just as it doesn't serve the "I want a 'real' B3" crowd to keep looking at clones. (Until all the real B3's are finally gone.)
Last edited by Falsch; 01/13/1708:57 PM.
Kawai Novus NV-10 | Pianoteq 7 (Kremsegg 1 & 2, Ruckers II, Karsten, KIVIR, Steinway D, K2) Intel NUC J5040, 8GB, SSD | iPad Pro 12.9 2018 | forScore
Yes, reproducing the sound, feel and behavioir of a carefully engineered wood and metal instrument is difficult. And the means to do it with technology is no easy feat.
for perspective - amplifiers and speakers costing way more than say a shigeru kawai sk ex or yamaha cfx still have difficulty fooling the ears, so whats out there dpmwise for 5 or 10 15k yes, it's not the same thing..
I see your point. I have a tendency of getting off topic too easily, and really should stop doing that.
First, if you want to play an acoustic piano, then buy an acoustic piano. Second, I think people are making too much out of this, putting the acoustic piano on some sort of pedestal, and taking a €150K instrument as their benchmark.
I'm a 'defector' from the organ world: a few years classical, later Hammond.
The one thing I see people do is comparing clones to a real Hammond B3 and Leslie 122. In the end, this is the only combination that counts.
Since 2006, we have clones that are very, very good. To name a few: the Nord C2D, the XK3C, XK5, KeybDuo Mark III, the modeled VB3 VST, and not to forget the (now discontinued) NI B4 Mark II.
It's not very difficult to create the sinus wave a Hammond makes. It's actually quite easy. What is difficult, is creating the crosstalk, leakage, the keyclick, vibrato, percussion, chorus.... and the big one, the Leslie speaker.
Everything has been recreated perfectly, with one exception: the Leslie. Because the simulator will use two speakers in stereo by necessity, it will sound like a miked Leslie put through a stereo setup. (Think about how a Leslie sounds in a song.) Because of this, the simulator will *never* be able to attain the same power and presence of a real Leslie. It can't. It's impossible to simulate the sound bouncing off the walls, floor and ceiling of the room.
For everything but the most demanding setups, the organ/leslie simulator are more than good enough nowadays.
Even so, people are still bashing the clones, but the complaints become more and more desperate, trying to keep the B3 on its pedestal.
- There are no nine key contacts. (There are, in the New B3 Mark I and II) - The percussion/vibrato/chorus doesn't sound right (then change the settings!) - My neighbor's 1963 B3 is brighter/darker than this clone. (Then change the settings to match that) - The pedals don't feel EXACTLY like those of a B3 - ....
In the end, it just comes down to this:
If you want the sound, the feeling, and presence of a Hammond B3 + Leslie 122, then buy a setup for €10K, spend another €10K to restore it, and you'll be very happy.
If you want an instrument that comes close to sounding and playing like a B3, there are several options, and they are all very good.
I can assure you, I've heard people sitting at a New B3 Mark II, which runs through an XB122 (current day version of the Leslie 122, with newer connections) resort to "but I can't feel the vibrations of the running motor in the organ", or "I can't smell the oil when playing"; it's just not like a "real" B3. (Even though the New B3 Mark II is basically a physical copy of a real one; in layout, and even down to the nine contact keyboard and the pedals.)
Those people will *never* accept a digital instrument *ever*.
The same goes for the digital piano. For most home players, I'm convinced the currenct (sub)top digitals such as the CA97/CS11, LX-17, and the Yamaha's in the Avantgrand range are *more* than sufficient.
If not, you're either a *very* good player; good enough to be a professional music teacher at the highest levels or even a concert pianist, or you're part of the "I want an acoustic no matter how good a digital ever becomes" crowd. Wanting an acoustic piano is fine, but in that case, it serves you no point to keep looking digitals... just as it doesn't serve the "I want a 'real' B3" crowd to keep looking at clones. (Until all the real B3's are finally gone.)
+1
Instruments......Kawai MP7SE.............................................(Past - Kawai MP7, Yamaha PSR7000) Software..........Sibelius 7; Neuratron Photoscore Pro 8 Stand...............K&M 18953 Table-style Stage Piano Stand Piano stool.......K&M 14093 Piano stool
![[Linked Image]](https://www.pianoworld.com/ABF_Medals/12xmedals.jpg)
12x ABF recitals.
![[Linked Image]](https://www.pianoworld.com/forum/gallery/42/thumbs/2529.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](https://forum.pianoworld.com//gallery/42/medium/9342.png)
They continually up date their piano sounds (via free downloads) and their latest (Royal Grand) gets excellent reviews. I have not heard it.
