This custom search works much better than the built in one and allows searching older posts.
|
|
69837 Members
40 Forums
143377 Topics
2073646 Posts
Max Online: 15252 @ 03/21/10 11:39 PM
|
|
|
#701547 - 09/21/08 03:35 AM
digital or the real thing
|
Junior Member
Registered: 09/20/08
Posts: 2
|
Hello,
I want to by a piano to get started again after a long long time of not exercising.
I once had a Seiler Piano (do you know that brand?) but sold it.
I am thinking of buying now a digital piano like Yamaha Clavinova. What do you think about?
_________________________
"we`re just two lost souls swimming in a fishbowl, year after year"
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#701548 - 09/21/08 04:28 AM
Re: digital or the real thing
|
4000 Post Club Member
Registered: 03/02/05
Posts: 4680
Loc: San Francisco
|
Digitals have their virtues, but it'd be good idea to play as many as you can, before making a decision.
With digitals, touch is probably the most important consideration, because it can't be changed. The touch settings on digitals tend to be a clever psycho-acoustic illusion. The actual touch weight never varies; it can't. Raising the touch setting cuts off the lowest numbered MIDI messages - the ones which trigger the softest notes - making it necessary to press harder, to get any sound at all. To experience a DP's full dynamic range, set touch to Soft or 1. Default setting is usually Medium or 2.
Yamaha's CLP 280 or its replacement the 380 incorporate Yamaha's Natural Action. People tend to focus on the wood keys, but IMO the important difference is in the action mechanism. Based on posts, I'd say that this is Yamaha's closest approximation to the feel of an acoustic.
When playing a DP, you'll always be hearing the sound of a recorded piano. No DP's piano samples will have the richness and complexity of an acoustic - particularly a high quality one, such as your Seiler. (You can upgrade the sound of a digital by connecting it to a computer and using the digital to trigger third-party piano samples.)
The on-board speakers are usually too small to accurately reproduce the lowest notes. To really hear the included samples' character, you'll need a good set of headphones. ('Phones are also handy for silent practicing.) The better the 'phones, the better the included sounds. To experience the full quality of the included samples, you'll need a set of studio quality 'phones, such as Sennheiser's HD 600's. They're expensive.
We love piano search stories. Please keep us updated.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#701549 - 09/21/08 04:59 AM
Re: digital or the real thing
|
Full Member
Registered: 12/03/05
Posts: 109
Loc: UK
|
EDIT:
If you are thinking about top of range digital for loud playing, then acoustic would be a wiser choice. A 3000£ Yamaha U3 is waaaaaaay beyond ANY digital in terms of action, connectedness to the sound and the sound itself (no speaker can beat a 3 square meter soundboard + 1.5 meter strings). In fact I'm sure that loud playing acoustic is better, period.
Digital IS fantastic if you can only play with the phones, or mostly play with the phones - no acoustic can give that convenience. Silent pianos where you press a pedal and felt dampens 70% of the sound- this I'm not a fan of (if I had to play like that for the bigger part) and i would rather opt for a digital with headphones.
_________________________
My gear: Roland FP4 digi-piano, M-audio A192 sound card , Sennheiser HD580 phones , Synthogy Ivory+ Italian Grand , soft-piano Pianoteq (highly recommended)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#701550 - 09/21/08 05:27 AM
Re: digital or the real thing
|
Full Member
Registered: 08/05/07
Posts: 278
Loc: Glasgow, Scotland
|
The Bechstein Concert 8 is widely regarded as the best upright in the world.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#701551 - 09/21/08 06:39 AM
Re: digital or the real thing
|
Full Member
Registered: 12/03/05
Posts: 109
Loc: UK
|
.
_________________________
My gear: Roland FP4 digi-piano, M-audio A192 sound card , Sennheiser HD580 phones , Synthogy Ivory+ Italian Grand , soft-piano Pianoteq (highly recommended)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#701553 - 09/21/08 08:54 AM
Re: digital or the real thing
|
Full Member
Registered: 12/03/05
Posts: 109
Loc: UK
|
..
_________________________
My gear: Roland FP4 digi-piano, M-audio A192 sound card , Sennheiser HD580 phones , Synthogy Ivory+ Italian Grand , soft-piano Pianoteq (highly recommended)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#701554 - 09/21/08 09:25 AM
Re: digital or the real thing
|
Full Member
Registered: 08/05/07
Posts: 278
Loc: Glasgow, Scotland
|
Back to your original point in this thread - you don't understand why people spend £3,000 on digital pianos rather than buying an acoustic upright piano. Where did you get the £3,000 figure from? I've had a look and no-one else mentioned it - you brought it up. Something else from your original point - you say no acoustic can give the convenience of playing with headphones. It would appear when your memory was blocking out all the crazily priced acoustic uprights they must have taken out all the Silent Series ones with them too!!  Indeed the U3 you were waxing lyrically about is availabe as a silent model. Perhaps it would be better if you refrained from giving out information on topics where you knowledge isn't quite up to scratch.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#701555 - 09/21/08 09:56 AM
Re: digital or the real thing
|
500 Post Club Member
Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 561
Loc: Toronto, Canada
|
Oh, snap! Well, a digital has these advantages. - Play at any time of the day or night without bothering anybody. - Possibility of turning down the sound if need be. - No need to tune it. - No need to change strings. - Much easier to move (even cabinet ones). - Much easier to record. - Increased reliability & imperveous to weather changes (humidity, cold, warmth, etc.) - Possibility of using sample software to enhance the sound (Ivory), whereas you're pretty much stuck with whatever piano acoustic you bought. Do I need to go on? An acoustic certainly has some fun aspects to it, such as feeling the vibration through the cabinet or hearing certain nuances that you wouldn't get otherwise on a DP. Who says you can't have both, though? A lot of users on PW own both an acoustic & a DP. Having said that, you'll need to elaborate as Yamaha has a *lot* of pianos in the Clavinova line and they're all different, some radically different from others. Another point is that since you haven't played in a long time, you might not be bitten by the piano bug, so you might want to consider getting a cheaper weighted keys DP if only at 1st and see if you actually enjoy playing to the point where you'd like to invest way more and get an acoustic one, or a much better DP.
_________________________
Started playing in mid-June 2007. Self-taught... for now. :p
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#701556 - 09/21/08 10:01 AM
Re: digital or the real thing
|
Full Member
Registered: 07/31/07
Posts: 340
Loc: Austin, TX
|
To your original question: Acoustic or digital?
If you have the space, can afford the initial price of the piano that will please you for years, will not mind the maintenance, can play whenever you want without restraint (i.e. nobody will complain about the noise) ... don't bother with a digital unless you are looking for recording capabilities (and even there, an acoustic can be equipped to send&receive midi, be hooked to a computer ...).
If you need a silent practice instrument, acoustic can do too.
If you are on a tight budget, digital. A good digital is better than a bad acoustic. but today's Digital pianos are still an incomplete simulation of the real thing - and offer additional features (tones, rhythms, patterns, edition ...) on side, like synthesizers.
Their action and what you can do with it is always limited to the finite software that interprets what the sensors can record. It is limited to what it is designed to produce and nothing more.
The acoustic is capable to produce an infinity of nuances, sometime against your will, i.e. the acoustic is richer but harder to master.
I will dare an excessive analogy: it is like if you visit a park with a video camcorder. what experience you get with your own eyes is richer than what you see through the video screen even if this is HD. (I will be jumped on and beaten up for this one, but I will assume)
I have both an acoustic and a digital. But I appreciate the fact that this is a privilege.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#701557 - 09/21/08 10:01 AM
Re: digital or the real thing
|
Full Member
Registered: 12/03/05
Posts: 109
Loc: UK
|
point taken;) I've edited my original post to contain less irrelevant rubbish
_________________________
My gear: Roland FP4 digi-piano, M-audio A192 sound card , Sennheiser HD580 phones , Synthogy Ivory+ Italian Grand , soft-piano Pianoteq (highly recommended)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#701558 - 09/21/08 10:12 AM
Re: digital or the real thing
|
Full Member
Registered: 08/05/07
Posts: 278
Loc: Glasgow, Scotland
|
A Silent Piano isn't the practice pedal, it an acoustic upright with a digital piano built in. You can use headphones and it often has USB and MIDI connections which means you can also record digitally using PC's etc.
The U3 Silent has all of these features.
You should go look it up - it's on Yamaha's website.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#701559 - 09/21/08 10:58 AM
Re: digital or the real thing
|
4000 Post Club Member
Registered: 04/24/05
Posts: 4521
|
A digital piano is the real thing, so to
speak, because you can work up anything
on it, and it will transfer intact to any
acoustic piano. If you can't, then you're
not playing correctly, because all keyboard
instruments are of the same instrumental
species and are played the same way--this is
why a good organist or harpsichordist can
switch to the piano with no problem. I grew
up with only acoustic pianos, but since 1989 I've
been playing only digitals, and they've
enabled me to make progress that would
have been impossible on an acoustic piano.
Every day now I work on the most difficult
classical repertoire on a digital, and I
feel that I am not missing out on anything
by not playing an acoustic.
Initially, I got a digital only because I live
in an apt. building where the tenants
hate pianos and pianists, but now I see
digitals as equivalent to acoustic pianos,
for all practical purposes. Having
an acoustic upright would be nice, but
the realities of owning one in an apt.
with hostile neighbors make it simply out of
the question for me. If you live in
an apt., condo, or townhouse today, this
in effect rules out an acoustic piano
right from the start.
This can be looked at as a kind of Golden
Age of the Piano. Just as every home
can now have an inexpensive pc with the
kind of computing power that was once
reserved for research labs only, every home
can have an inexpensive digital piano
with grand piano-like performance. You
can get a good, new dp with grand piano-like
performance for less than $1000. You can
of course play much more, but that's
not necessary, in my opinion. My current
digital was $900, and I use it to work
on big concertos and so forth, and it
serves fine for that purpose.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#701560 - 09/21/08 11:01 AM
Re: digital or the real thing
|
500 Post Club Member
Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 561
Loc: Toronto, Canada
|
I'm sure Gyro has this post copies in Notepad somewhere. I must have seen the same story written about a hundred times since I've been a member, here.
Its content is more nonsensical with each reading.
_________________________
Started playing in mid-June 2007. Self-taught... for now. :p
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#701561 - 09/21/08 11:47 AM
Re: digital or the real thing
|
Full Member
Registered: 07/31/07
Posts: 340
Loc: Austin, TX
|
"... all keyboard
instruments are of the same instrumental
species and are played the same way--this is
why a good organist or harpsichordist can
switch to the piano with no problem. ..."
It is because you believe so and can not get over this that you stick to your point that many here, including me, disagree with.
But what do I know about it? I am not a pro - I was trained as an organist for years and now take piano lessons - I own both (Organs, Pianos (Acoustoc and digital)).
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#701562 - 09/21/08 12:55 PM
Re: digital or the real thing
|
500 Post Club Member
Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 561
Loc: Toronto, Canada
|
Doesn't take a pro to know he's wrong on many points.
By his definitions, an acoustic, electric, and classical guitar are the same. Or, even more absurd, that a bass & a guitar are the same.
Why not go all the way and say that all wind instruments are the same. I mean, they all have to blow to make a sound, right? So a trumpet or a flute... it's all the same. Or so says Gyro. LOL!
_________________________
Started playing in mid-June 2007. Self-taught... for now. :p
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#701564 - 09/23/08 08:40 AM
Re: digital or the real thing
|
Full Member
Registered: 04/21/08
Posts: 29
Loc: usa
|
I'm pretty sure Gyro is being sarcastic.
I actually stand on the exact opposite of the ball park, I believe that an upright is a different instrument then a grand in terms of learning.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#701565 - 09/23/08 10:41 AM
Re: digital or the real thing
|
Junior Member
Registered: 09/22/08
Posts: 1
|
I'm having trouble deciding on digital v acoustic piano. It's for my son, age 12, who has played violin (for 3 years) including one year in a youth symphony orchestra.
He just started piano lessons. I am comletely confident that he will stick with it.
His teacher (professor of piano) strongly recommends acoustic from the start. We can get an acoustic piano if that will be an advantage for my son's development, but otherwise we'd prefer the savings and convenience of digital. As for price range, I saw a used Boston baby grand for around $10,000 which is a possibility, although we'd probably want to spend less than that, somewhere between 3-10,000.
Any advice on digital v. acoustic in our situation?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#701566 - 09/23/08 11:12 AM
Re: digital or the real thing
|
1000 Post Club Member
Registered: 10/13/07
Posts: 1239
|
musical9, with your budget you could get both a digital and an acoustic upright.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#701567 - 09/23/08 11:22 AM
Re: digital or the real thing
|
Full Member
Registered: 12/08/07
Posts: 314
Loc: Twin Cities
|
This will probably seem wierd to many here, but here goes...
I have never owned a "real" piano, not that I didn;'t want one but my living situation never really allowed for it. Digital pianos and keyboards have consistently gotten better over the years and are really pretty decent now. I am not saying that digital will ever replace the real thing, but in their own right, these digital instruments are really coming into their own as instruments.
In March, I bought a Yamaha Motif XS (88 key workstation). It has a "balanced hammer action", rather than the typical "graded hammer action" used on strictly digital pianos made by the same company. All this means is that each key presents the same resistance, rather than keys being heavier toward the low end and lighter toward the high end of the keyboard. The Motif XS has very decent piano-like sounds in it, and there are some very nice commercial piano samples for it.
A couple of weeks ago, I played some acoustic pianos in a piano store, and discovered that I actually prefer playing my Motif XS to a real piano. Again, I am not saying that my Motif XS is a better piano than a real one, but instead that I personally have grown to prefer it to a real one.
My main instrument is the guitar. To me, a decent classical or acoustic designed for playing with the fingers is a "real" guitar, and an electric is a simulation at best, much like my Motif XS vs a real piano. But to people who came along later and knew the electric as the most commonly thought form of "guitar", the electric is a "real" guitar.
this doesn't really answer your question, but then I think the answer is really a very personal choice.
Interesting ways of looking ath this stuff...
Tony
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#701568 - 09/23/08 12:10 PM
Re: digital or the real thing
|
Full Member
Registered: 04/21/08
Posts: 29
Loc: usa
|
Originally posted by TonyB:  This will probably seem wierd to many here, but here goes... I have never owned a "real" piano, not that I didn;'t want one but my living situation never really allowed for it. Digital pianos and keyboards have consistently gotten better over the years and are really pretty decent now. I am not saying that digital will ever replace the real thing, but in their own right, these digital instruments are really coming into their own as instruments. In March, I bought a Yamaha Motif XS (88 key workstation). It has a "balanced hammer action", rather than the typical "graded hammer action" used on strictly digital pianos made by the same company. All this means is that each key presents the same resistance, rather than keys being heavier toward the low end and lighter toward the high end of the keyboard. The Motif XS has very decent piano-like sounds in it, and there are some very nice commercial piano samples for it. A couple of weeks ago, I played some acoustic pianos in a piano store, and discovered that I actually prefer playing my Motif XS to a real piano. Again, I am not saying that my Motif XS is a better piano than a real one, but instead that I personally have grown to prefer it to a real one. My main instrument is the guitar. To me, a decent classical or acoustic designed for playing with the fingers is a "real" guitar, and an electric is a simulation at best, much like my Motif XS vs a real piano. But to people who came along later and knew the electric as the most commonly thought form of "guitar", the electric is a "real" guitar. this doesn't really answer your question, but then I think the answer is really a very personal choice. Interesting ways of looking ath this stuff... Tony [/b] I doubt anyone on the planet earth (besides yourself) believe that the electric guitar is attemping to simulate a classical or acoustic guitar. They are used in very different types of music most of the time, and most teachers teach them seperately. The electric guitar is not intended to be a simulation of an acoustic guitar, and it is an instrument in it's own right. And it's also equally as difficult to learn, and has far more to it then an acoustic in terms of tone. Don't get the wrong idea and compare it to a digital piano, because an electric guitar is not digital at all, it is 100% ANALOG, they've tried making digital amplifiers and they SUCK.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#701569 - 09/23/08 12:20 PM
Re: digital or the real thing
|
500 Post Club Member
Registered: 03/24/07
Posts: 683
Loc: Denton Texas
|
Kahliareeah,
I hate to say it, but everyone's right. Gyro is not being sarcastic. He REALLY thinks this way. What's funny is I have actually seen some good advice he gave over in the piano forums.
_________________________
Les C Deal
Kurzweil K2600X Workstation
Kurzweil K2500XS Workstation
Kurzweil K2000 V3 (temporarily retired)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#701570 - 09/23/08 01:12 PM
Re: digital or the real thing
|
Full Member
Registered: 08/06/08
Posts: 57
Loc: Paris, France
|
musical9, in your case I'd clearly go for the acoustic. If you live in an apartment, I'd go either for a silent acoustic or both an acoustic and a cheap digital. Reasons: - Your budget clearly accommodates any of these possibilities.
- Your kid will probably have the time to play during the day, so he'll get some good practice time out of the acoustic even in an apartment (whereas a working adult can't afford this luxury).
- A digital is EXCELLENT for practice, insofar as a good part of the process -- most of it, in fact -- consists in reading, memorizing and overcoming physical difficulties. However, when it comes to controlling tone and pedaling and such things that separate a craft from an art, a digital will be less expressive than a good acoustic and hence, limiting for a budding musician.
Of course, I heard guys in Cuba performing wonders on atrocious pieces of junk, which in a way goes towards Gyro's habitual argument of "everything is the same as long as it got keys". But the specific wonders they were performing were highly limited, and even defined[/b] by the instruments they played. However gifted they were, their Chopin always sounded bad and I venture it would sound bad even if they gave them a Steinway D on the spot.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#701571 - 09/23/08 01:31 PM
Re: digital or the real thing
|
Full Member
Registered: 12/08/07
Posts: 314
Loc: Twin Cities
|
Kahliareeah:
In the early days of the electric guitar and even with much of the music when I was a kid, the electric guitar was largely treated as an amplified acousitc. I agree with everything you have said about the electric guitar for the past 40 years or so, which is why I worded my postas I did.
If that wasn't clear, I accept responsibility for the misunderstanding. From the perspective of people who weren't old enough to be aware of music until after the electric guitar came fully into its own (really, beginning with rock in the late fifties, but much more so in the mid 60s and later), I can see how my comments would not be taken as I meant them.
Tony
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#701572 - 09/23/08 01:40 PM
Re: digital or the real thing
|
Full Member
Registered: 08/20/08
Posts: 126
Loc: Camp Verde, AZ.
|
I played a digital keyboard for 15 years before moving to a grand. If you honestly prefer the touch and action of a digital keyboard, go for it, but to me, nothing, and I mean NOTHING, can substitute for the sound of real strings vibrating and sustaining inside a wooden rim.
Digitals don't even come close. Strike a big fat chord on your grand and listen to the sustain tail off into the sunset....now move over and strike that same chord on a digital...not quite the same, eh?
_________________________
Play skillfully!.....Psalm 33:3
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#701573 - 09/24/08 08:43 AM
Re: digital or the real thing
|
2000 Post Club Member
Registered: 08/17/04
Posts: 2263
Loc: Virginia, USA
|
Originally posted by Kahlaireeah: The electric guitar is not intended to be a simulation of an acoustic guitar, and it is an instrument in it's own right. [/b] Indeed. Rather than treat the digital piano solely as an inferior type of "real" piano, do you think maybe it's time it came into its own like the electric guitar has? In the days when every home had an acoustic piano, only an insignificant fraction of people who owned them ever intended or or attempted to play the classical concerto literature. They were used more like the electric guitar is today. And that's probably a role that the digital piano fills better than the acoustic.
_________________________
gotta go practice
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#701574 - 09/24/08 09:24 AM
Re: digital or the real thing
|
Full Member
Registered: 08/06/08
Posts: 57
Loc: Paris, France
|
Indeed. Rather than treat the digital piano solely as an inferior type of "real" piano, do you think maybe it's time it came into its own like the electric guitar has?
I think that in a way this has already happened with electric pianos and all sorts of electronic keyboards and synthesizers. In the specific case of digital pianos, though, the focus on mimetism might be too strong to allow that. We've had upright pianos for what? Two centuries? And after all this time, they still are "an inferior type of 'real' piano".
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
Del.icio.us
|Contact |
Privacy | Legal | About Us | Site Map | Free Newsletter | Press Room |
Previous Topic
Index
