P105 or PX350? Advice and input needed/welcome

Just wondering what people are thinking and maybe what you would do in my situation:

Got the PX130 in April, what I like about it better than the P95 is that it has the lineouts, 4 layers and better speakers. I do like the Rhodes better.

Was leaning towards keeping it and using it for open mics, etc..

*Likely adding the PX350 as I will be able to get it for $679.99. I like the idea of the simulated ebony and ivory, 4 speakers and more sounds to play with.

Now, I do not view myself as someone who will need 3 slab DP's.

So i put some feelers out regarding the P95. I could
a. Just sell the P95 and keep the stand and pedals and replace it with a 105 or
b. Try and sell the whole thing, but I would need to take the stand and pedals apart. Does anyone think it would ruin it?
I sell primarily on Craigslist and will not have any strangers in my home whatsoever.

I could probably get $200 for the P95 at GC, but haven't inquired about the stand and pedals:

*The big question is given I would get a PX350, and have a PX130, would I even want to play a P105? PX350 would be newer (not always better of course) sample, and would offer more variety than the 105.

On the other hand, my cost to upgrade to the 105 would be less than $300.

The PX-350 is still a mystery. The P105 easy to imagine with the same GHS action but Pure CF samples from the higher Yamaha lines. The line outs and now 14 tones are a big plus over the P95 and strong competition for the PX-150, but the PX-350 offers a ton more. I'm excited about the option to record audio to usb thumb drive.

I don't think you can make plans until you play it, but the mystery of the 350 is exciting! That price is cheap, maybe some special pre-order deal?

Hi Sam, I'll probably have to end up waiting to play both; but GC/MF tend to have 15% off coupons. The logical thing would be to sell both current boards and then do the upgrades.

On a side note, I saw rolandconnect.com is claiming new product announcements in 2 days, but I do not know if they are doing any pianos

Hi,

where did you get this price quote from if I may ask?

I am seriously looking for a PX-350 as it looks like the perfect second board combining great action, OK sounds, absolute portability and an unbeatable price tag. I really loved the flexibility of the 330 only did not dig the key feeling, too shiny and slippery.
Really looking forward to the new Casio one!!! But your price looks awesome, way lower than what I saw.

This guy likes the P-105:
http://azpianonews.blogspot.com/2012/07/review-yamaha-p105-digital-piano-very.html

And he seems to REALLY like the new Casios:
http://azpianonews.blogspot.com/2012/07/review-casio-px350-px150-privia-digital.html

But he doesn't exactly put his finger on why the Casios sound better to him, so it boils down to something of a "trust me on this". He has pretty pictures of their corporate offices though.

I just downloaded the P-105 manual and it seems like typical Yamaha: no mention of layers (which can often mean a single layer) and not enough buttons / feedback on the panel which leads to very confusing unlabeled dual use combinations and awkward involvement of the piano keys. One may have to keep a dead tree version of the manual nearby, and it probably forgets the settings once powered off. Their generally horrible UIs are a big reason to stay away from their stuff. That, and their product development for the past several years seems to be in some strange kind of stasis - which in the DP world is really saying something.

Officially and in the fine print, those 15% off coupons exclude Yamaha & Casio in all that I've ever read. Not that it doesn't happen with gear, but try to get 15% off a Mac now that they are Authorized Apple dealers and they'll happily read you the fine print.

More valuable reviews should be available in about a month once they hit the shelves. We'll display those models side by side among others. Until then, it's all IM.

Dewster. It's really frustrating that Yamaha wants to straddle too many price points and ends up not giving their best features in their boards. They could have easily done a lighter and slimmer DGX 640 with their P-105 which would have the same GHS action, better sound? and speakers? as also better polyphony with line outs included.

They could have added the ensemble features and a smaller screen from the DGX 640 (which gives it a better UI) and had a PX-350 competitor at $799. The P-105 already has a few rhythms and pianist styles. Adding an ensemble board / features would not have taken much more space or weight.

It is very possible that, as designed, the P-105 will already be a better piano than the DGX-640.

I would say it's very likely the update to the YPG-640 will have the CF piano sample along with all the rhythms and accompaniment. The P105 seems like it will compete more with the Casio PX-150. Interestingly it does not look like Casio is interested in bringing back something similar to the DGX-640 unless the PX-350 is that answer.

The PX-350 is the answer to the DGX 640 in a lighter chasis. The UI of the DGX is much better though. Whereas, the PX has better connectivity and polyphony.

The P-105 could have been given a small screen and the bells and whistles of the DGX. The chasis would have still been light. It could then have been priced at $799 and would have been a great alternative to the PX-350.

As it stands it still seems a better alternative to the PX-150 (key action being acceptable).

He's just selling but pretending to be an impartial source of advice - ignore this rubbish.

Possum, you say you sell via Craigslist but won't have strangers in your home. How does that work?

Hello, for 4 or 5 things, I would bring the items to Starbucks and plug them in (always with a power strip to protect them) and also bring a video of the item I took the day before.
It worked for some monitors,a digital recorder and a Fatar keyboard (the last one I just showed the video of where the red light was and had the person try the action before taking it out of my car).

I admit I did take less money on my Motif and Triton LE by going with them to GC directly, but I didn't have potential buyers for those.
Also, when dealing with craigslist you are able to tell who is legit and who isnt and you can google names etc.

\\

I agree- he says Yamaha is good but then goes on to push Casio. does this for every piano

For what it's worth the P105 looks like a very decent product to me. If I was in the market for a stage piano in this price range it would be at the top of my list to try out. The new Casios look very good too though. I just think there is an inherent trust or faith in Yamaha quality. We read of almost no problems with their main-stream products like P95, P155 and the Clavinovas (by problems I mean unreliability issues, I'm not saying it it isn't possible to be disappointed by them for any number of reasons!).

One of the big things that bothers me about the P-105 ad copy is the term "Pure CF Sampling". What is it? I mean other than an indication that they sampled a CF piano? It says nothing about layers (which Yamaha used to mention in the past, and when they didn't it often meant single layer), or stretching (which only Kawai seems to mention), or sample lengths (which no one mentions).

Going by the flagship models CP1/50 data, the best we might hope for is 4-5 layers, 2:1 stretching, and really short bland sounding loop lengths. But looking at low end portable Yamahas like the P95 and NPV60/80 we might get one or two layers, 3:1 or 4:1 stretching, and short attack samples to go with those short loops.

Plus no display - is a $1 single line LCD display really too much to ask for when spending $600? Casio can do it at this price point, why can't Yamaha?

Yamaha reliability has been a big plus. Also, the Yamaha universe is bigger and hence if you are using styles / rhythms, it becomes easier to share music.

I don't disagree that he's probably not impartial. But it's getting harder to recommend low-end Yamaha DPs, particularly with Casio's continued innovation and Yamaha's stasis. Yamaha could probably bat Casio away like a fly with a well designed loss-leader down there (but it would likely compete too heavily with their own products - the main reason we can't have nice things it seems).

Pianoteq could murder everyone (in their sleep) by putting PT4 on a small ARM Linux board. Has anyone been watching the small tablet market in China? Check this out:

http://www.alibaba.com/product-gs/363163101/cheapest_and_latest_9_inch_tablet.html

A 9" touch tablet with 1.2 GHz ARM Cortex A8, 512MB DDR3, 8GB Flash, etc. for $60. Those Allwinner ARMs seem like a winner!

I have to admit that his seemingly favoritism for Casio over Yamaha has made me hold off on purchasing a Yamaha and waiting to see how the new Casios compare.

I am strongly turn off by his usual response to any questions via his blog or email: call me to discuss. It smells like the preamble to a sales pitch.

Yamaha can really frustrate you with their product differentiation.

Imagine the 76 key NP-V80 with GHS keys and a lesser layer P-155 sound. Maybe give it a 3 layer sound. Add line outs / MIDI connectors. You'll have a killer combination. Slim, lightweight board which will not cannibalize the P-155 which would have their premium 88 GH keys and 4 layer sound.

I believe your premise is wrong, I don't think Casio has had a $600 piano with an LCD display A $700 model is not at the same price point. Raise the price of the Yamaha 15+ percent to match, and I'm sure they could add a bunch of stuff. But I wouldn't hold my breath for a Yamaha to come out and have more features at a lower price than a Casio.

Though in general, as I said in the Krome thread, I always think "if X can do it, why can't Y" is a poor argument, as there can be many reasons for such things. And if Casio is quicker to put LCDs on their boards than other companies, there could be a number of reasons for that (including, for example, that I believe Casio is actually a manufacturer of LCD displays, where Yamaha is not).

And is the LCD really just a dollar, at the quality and reliability that we would expect to see from Yamaha? I'm not sure. They do have a certain (and well deserved) reputation and can't put the cheapest junk in there.

Regardless of any of that, how useful would an LCD display be on a P105 anyway? The thing has very few functions, and most of them have direct-access buttons. I mean, if you can store and recall different combinations of splits and layers and do other such things, sure, an LCD is helpful for navigation, patch naming, and such. Or if you can edit sounds, so you can view various parameter settings. Or all kinds of other things you can't do on a P105. On such a simple board as this, I just don't see much need for it.

And a dollar is still a dollar. If you want to add a one dollar component to an item that has been designed to a price, you may need to cut a dollar somewhere else, engineers do face those kinds of scenarios. To us, it's a $600 keyboard, but for Yamaha and their dealers and distribution channels to make money on it, I would guess that they have to manufacture it for well under $200, and so even a dollar component may not be entirely insignificant.

Obviously, I have too much time on my hands this morning. ;-)

Oops, you're right, I thought the PX130 had an LCD and I see now that it doesn't. Been a while since I saw one in a store.


Well, there's this (from the P105 manual):

"To turn on/off the Damper Resonance:
While holding down [DEMO/SONG] and [METRONOME/
RHYTHM] simultaneously, press the
G4 key (on; default) or G#4 key (off)."

Quite cumbersomely implemented IMO. The P105 is chock full of this kind of thing. Even a 3 digit seven segment LED display could be a big help here.

[EDIT]To be fair, the PX130 is full of this too, and both have markings above the keyboard to make it a little easier.

Costco was selling the Casio CDP200 with LCD display (plus bench and stand) for $450.

I stopped reading that guy's blog after he continuously recommended the AP620 after practically every DP review he did. Its like "Look at this new model. It looks nice..but...contact me to find out how to get the Casio AP620 at a good price".

Sometimes I like not having a LCD on a piano- in some instances it seems more appropriate on a workstation such as a Juno Gi or Motif type board.

Sometimes if I am playing in the dark at night, I don't mind not having a glowing LCD coming from the piano. Its like a break from the computer.

I think it makes more sense to have it in an item with 100-200 sounds, but not as necessary in a 12-15 sound piano.

On the other hand you have these silly type features like holding down keys and pressing other keys to change reverb.

The one pet peeve I do have sometimes is having to use a piano key to change a patch-

The now discontinued Casio PX-575R had an LCD display and retailed for $599. The display was about the size of the older WK series workstations that this model was based on. The CDP-220 is a cheaper version of the 575 based on the now discontinued WK-500 keyboard.

I haven't come across any weighted action DP with an LCD screen in the $600 price range.

But I agree that a simple LED display would have offered a better UI in the P-105. They have changed the chasis design anyways.

bsl100, I expect an update to the Yamaha P155 will be announced at NAMM or Musikmesse, and will likely include an LCD display to compete with the Roland FP-7F and Kawai ES7.

Cheers,
James
x

Thanks James. The ES7 and FP-7F are two really great boards and Yamaha is really missing out in this segment. These two boards offer a lot of features, whereas the P-155 is priced at a lower category and does not offer the bells and whistles which come with the other two boards. I feel the ES7 is going to be the one to beat in this segment.

I have been considering the P-105 as a lighter option for church use. The few pianist styles and rhythms and line outs are added benefits along with rounded speakers and tweeters.

The P-155 as well as the ES7 and FP-7F are pretty heavy in comparison.

I would be inclined to go with the ES7 myself, as I already own an EP3 which has very good sounds and action, even as an older model from 2008. Looks like the ES7 has the best response (with a triple sensor action) and improved sounds.

For your employer's sake, I hope Yamaha does not come out with a $1000 P155 replacement that can really compete with the $2000 Rolands and Kawais. ;-)

At the moment, I guess their FP-7F/ES7 competitor is the CP-300. It has been a while, I wonder if they will come out with a new high end portable with speakers.

Don't forget that the P155 is far cheaper in the US than other parts of the world. In Europe, for example, the P155 is almost the same price as the ES7. Therefore, I still believe the P155 is Yamaha's closest competitor to the ES7 (outside of the US, at least) - actually, the FP-7F is considerably more expensive.

Cheers,
James
x

Ah!

IMHO the CP300 does not offer the bells and whistles of the ES7/FP-7F. It does have better speakers though. But the weight is a disadvantage.

bsl100, have you heard the ES7's speakers?

No, I haven't. Its the output specs that I was referring to. What I was implying was that the CP300 is in a different category compared to the other two boards.

I'm in the market for a lighter alternative to the P-155 for Church use for my daughter. With a few bells and whistles if possible. The P-105 is an option, though I'll be compromising on the key action. As I had mentioned, we have a Clavinova CVP503PE for home use. Wanted to remain in the Yamaha universe as others also use the same styles and rhythms and practice at home will be easy on the Clavinova. The DGX 640 is a bit heavy to cart around. That's the reason I was hoping that Yamaha can come up with something like the PX-350, which is like a lightweight option of the DGX with better polyphony and connectors.

Ah, I see. Yes, you're right, the CP300 occupies a slightly different category to the FP-7F, ES7, and P155. Actually, it's something of a cult board for this reason.

Cheers,
James
x

Hi everyone!

In your opinion, what is the best buy: Yamaha P105 or Casio Privia PX-150?
Which one has better piano sounds and keys?

Cheers,
Carlos

Good morning Carlos and welcome to the forum!
Although neither board has been out yet here is my speculation:
The speakers on the PX-150 might be better based on the speakers from the previous models.
The PX-150 will have simulated ebony and ivory touch.
In terms of the keys-you would have to try them out yourself and decide- this is the most subjective area.
The PX-150 will offer a few more variations of the main piano sound and a brilliance setting to make it darker or brighter.
The Yamaha will typically offer one piano sound and then a brighter version of it while Casio will offer a bright,mellow,classic,modern and then a 5th one.
*In my opinion though the Rhodes is better on the Casio.

Thanks for the reply, Possum P95! It is a pleasure to be here in the forum. I'm really undecided on which one to buy, so all your opinions are welcome. You're right, the PX-150 has more variations off the main piano sound... +1 for Casio

http://www.casiomusicgear.com/sounds

The sound samples from the Privia sound good. Though they may be samples for the higher end PX-850

No. All of those audio samples are of the current PX-130, PX-330, PX-830.

Hi Mike!

When will be available the new audio samples of the new digital pianos?

Neither model is available to try yet, but the Casio is offering a multi layered paino sample. The Yahama has only a single layer piano sample which will offer less dynamic range. The Casio also has an Ivory matted keys which should allow your fingers to grip the keys better. It seems on paper, the Casio has newer and more technology than the Yahama. Casio tends to offer a lot of bang for the buck. From what Mike Martin of Casio says, the action on their new models is new and is improved over the previous generation of Privias. In the end it all comes down to what you as an individual like so make sure you try before you buy.

I am actually tempted just to order a 350 this week without trying it- but will wait. I think it offers a nice amount of variety and editing functions as well

We don't know that the P105 is single layer. Also, the number of layers, technically, has no impact on the dynamic range, though it does allow for greater timbre variation between strikes at different velocities.


Based on the P95 and PX130/PX330, I'd probably disagree... but it's kinda like disagreeing about which tastes better, worms or maggots. (Actually, the way I remember is is that the Yamaha tone was better, but the velocity mapping made it unsatisfying to play.)

Please sir, I want some more.

Scott,
I'm pretty sure, the P-105 is a single layer sample it's just using a CF sample. I actually like the way a Yahama piano sounds, but unfortunately the GHS action kills this model for me. Yahama could go toe to toe with Casio, I just don't think they care much about the sub $1000 price range. They know they can sell their product line on their name alone, and know they can make more money on their upper end models that have more margin.

In the owners manual though on the description of each sound, it does imply that there are different levels on the grand piano sound- from my recollection it does mention change in possibly timbre was the term they used across different levels.
However, as you said they did not upgrade their action, and I am not sure they upgraded the non AP sounds, it does seem they added perhaps a Wurlitzer as Casio has them.
I am eager to hear how the speakers are.

I don't know where you got that impression, but I just checked the manual, and it clearly says that the Grand PIano 1 preset "uses different samples depending on the playing strength."

http://download.yamaha.com/api/asset/file/?language=en&site=au.yamaha.com&asset_id=57343

RE: Product Support [ ref:_00D105HEf._50010B9IlA:ref ]

The information you are seeking is propriety information and hence we cannot help you with an answer in this regard.

Thank You

Yamaha Customer Support

--------------- Original Message ---------------
Subject: Product Support

Wanted to know how many layers of sound sample are there in the newly launched P-105 and the P-95 digital piano. Is it a single layer or 3-4 layer sample.


ref:_00D105HEf._50010B9IlA:ref


This is Yamaha's reply on asking them about the sample layers in the P-105.

Propriety Information!!!!!! When its available in the manuals and public domain......

Layers is another example where I've come to decide that knowing the answer just doesn't matter. I've played "4 layer" pianos that I thought did not play as well or sound as good as pianos with fewer layers. So while knowing how many layers is of some academic interest to me, the actual knowledge turns out to be of no practical use in selecting a piano.

For example, Dewster says his tests show the P95 to have a single layer, yet even that single layer piano plays better to me than some multi-layer pianos.

Along the same lines, I remember playing a Korg SP-170 and discerning, I believe, three velocity layers... but the shift from the lowest to the second lowest was so abrupt that the piano would have been better if they had eliminated the lowest layer level and simply continued making the next layer up quieter instead!

Good catch!

Cue Sargent Schultz. Honestly, it's like a comedy show every time you ask the simplest questions of Yamaha Customer Support. With a single (non)response to every conceivable question, those guys must have the easiest job in the world.

I don't believe it's fair to criticise Yamaha on this point - I expect asking Roland, Kawai, Casio, Korg, etc. the same question would result in a similar answer. Technical support staff exist to provide usability assistance or resolve issues with a product - not to answer countless queries from tech geeks. Indeed, Yamaha in particular are highly regarded for their excellent technical support.

Cheers,
James
x

Casio is over on another thread telling us how many bits they get from the keyboard action. Roland has entire multimedia extravaganzas telling us that SN doesn't loop and the layers are blended. Korg is pretty up-front about layers and sample size. Kawai is completely sampled (no stretching) and talks about it. It's been my experience as well that Yamaha is particularly bad about clamming up completely when faced with reasonable questions about their technology. From potential customers no less. At this point layers are old hat, I can't imagine they'd reveal anything proprietary by telling us the count in any of their DPs (though for some models it might be embarrassing for them).


Gosh, I think layer count is pretty important and not at all geeky. It's like asking how many pistons are in the car you're considering buying. Synth companies used to shout this stuff (ROM size, layers, etc.) from the rooftops. What changed?

Software pianos.

Not sure I follow.

I'm guessing they don't want you to realize how archaic the on-board stuff is. As a cpu engineer, I badly want to gut one of these slabs, and develop my own dp brains, lol.

The companies that you say are upfront are upfront with the things that they think will show them off, it's usually very selective. Casio will tell you about their layers and bit resolution because it makes their board sound more impressive for the money. But how many megabytes is Casio's piano sample? I doubt you can find out. (They do, however, say that it is 3x what it was before!)

Roland is among the most secretive, Sure, Roland tells you that their modeled piano has no layers and no loops and so forth, but they are not giving you specs, they are telling you why typical specs don't matter. Back when they ostensibly did, I don't think they told you how many layers they had. In fact, even today, they won't tell you which, if any, of the piano sounds on the RD-700NX are on the FP-4F, or Jupiter 80 (among others). Do they have sounds in common or not? The same piano name on two models may not have the same sound; different names on different models may refer to the same sound; who knows? Trade secret, apparently.

Yamaha has promoted how many layers their pianos have numerous times in the past. Probably, they will do it when they think it will give them a competitive advantage, they will avoid it if they think it might not. With Casio promoting 4 layer pianos, it is no longer in Yamaha's interest to publicize that theirs is anything less, regardless of whether it is one, two, or three, as it will prompt someone to look more seriously at their competitor.

Apple doesn't tell you how much RAM is in an iPad, either. They don't need to. It distracts from their strengths (the actual operation of the device) and gives competitors a way to try to convince consumers that their device is better than Apple's. Likewise, if Yamaha has fewer layers than their competitors, it distracts from their potential strength (the actual sound) and gives a selling point to their competitors.


I actually do think that, for most who are not geeks like us, the information really isn't all that useful anyway. As I always say, specs don't matter, sound does. It helps Casio to promote some of their specs because it may prompt people to take an extra look at them. But often specs are provided to convince you something is good. If it really is, you'll know when you play it. Maybe the new Casio will sound better than the new Yamaha, maybe not... but either way, the fact that it may have, say, four layers instead of three, would not be a reason to buy it, although Casio may like to persuade you otherwise!

edit: I do think that, all else being equal, more layers should be better than fewer, but all else is never equal. If a new Yamaha piano has more layers than its predecessor, it will probably represent an improvement. But whether it has more or fewer layers than some other brand's pianos is where I feel the comparison is pretty meaningless, in that there are likely so many other kinds of sonic differences between the different brands' pianos, that the difference between, say, three or four layers would probably not be among the biggest causes of differences in how they sound.

To be clear, I personally am a keyboard geek so I do like to know this stuff! But I don't think most of it is really relevant to a buying decision, and I do understand why sometimes companies are shy about releasing the info.

Whatever specs Yamaha will give you will sound lame compared to software pianos.

I think I've almost got it:

1. Software pianos
2. ???
3. Yamaha is forced to treat their customers rudely.

How's that?

Now just gotta figure out step 2...

anotherscott: You drive directly to the point ...... though, I presume, you would willingly add touch to the list.

For my part, I don't care what's inside. There are no means for modification, customization, or upgrades. The box is what it is. So whether they tell you the specs (which are often faked or "massaged") or not, you're still left to judge for yourself the sound and touch. Many of the specs just don't matter.

Keep thinking it over - I'm sure you'll find the answer in the end!

James
x

No, thank you, Sir, none for me

Would you not like to get an answer from a Medical, Car or Electronics company asking for routine info about its product. Info which is commonly put in their brochure or packet inserts.

Am I going to make a copy of their product with this information? Is the info a cause for litigation?

How many keys does your product have?.... Well it's propriety information!!!!
What's the weight of the keyboard? ......!!!!!!!!

I'm going to be shy asking questions?

MMM, I agree that I will not be able to change anything, but the sheer placebo effect that information can have is something which cannot be undermined. Thats the reason even subjects taking placebos in a blinded drug study show improvements.

The experts will be able to make use of each bit of info about a DP and point out any flaws or put all its functions to the best use. But to the lay person, it's info which drives one to a product.

Really, I'm still confused. This, after having bought a $4200 Clavinova a couple of months back.

1. Software pianos have great specs.

2. Yamaha realizes that their specs will sound lame when compared to 18 layers, no loops, x gigabytes, etc.

3. Yamaha decides it's not in their interest to make it so obvious to potential customers that, spec-wise, their pianos are so far behind what they could get by connecting any keyboard to a computer.

Though personally, I don't think the answer needs to be so specific. Regardless of whether you're comparing to software or not, I think it's simpler: the kind of specs we're talking about are likely to be trumpeted if the manufacturer thinks it will persuade someone to take a closer look at their product, and is likely to be kept quiet if it probably won't.

The purpose of many specs is to sell, not to inform.

Mais oui!


Exactly. Academically, it can be interesting to consider, for example, whether a given spec or feature implementation is the reason something sounds as good as it does... but even then, it's no assurance that something else with the same spec or feature will sound as good (or that one without it won't sound better). Conversely, one might consider whether a particular spec contributes to something sounding as bad as it does.

I happen to be interested in the technologies (obviously), but the knowledge is of pretty much no use in actually picking out an instrument. These understandings may help explain why an instrument sounds the way it does, but that's how I see them, as possible explanations, but not predictors.

I generally agree that one can't make sweeping spec-based statements that apply to all DPs. But there are very strong tendencies at work that one can't ignore.

The low end of sample set sized DPs tend to sound worse than those on the high end of sample size. Since manufacturers are loath to tell us this single number anymore, we have to look at attack and loop sample sizes, stretching ratio, and layer count to estimate it.

Can a DP with a smallish sample set sound as good or better than one with a largish sample set? Sure, but the odds are against it. When they start really hacking on a sample set they tend to do it in ways that are fairly audible.

Where sample set size becomes relatively moot (all other things being equal) is maybe around 4 GB. Until the day when all DPs - including those skirting the toy category - have this large of a sample (it will happen) then artifacts that are directly related to the crude reduction of sample size will likely remain a strong determinant of the potential basic sound quality.

For example, I loved the sound of my Korg SG Rack and it was 24MB in ROm with 15MB being the main piano sample.

Its not just specs though it is also the normal marketing propaganda like "Samples taken painstakingly from a concert grand"- Well I should hope its a concert grand updated!

Also, I still to this day do not know if Pure Cf Sampling on teh 105 is really that much better than the "Un-Pure" Cf sampling on the 85 and 95

Heres the answer to how many samples for th p105 (did not see a listing in this thread for it):

http://faq.yamaha.com/us/en/article/musi...p-155/318/7263/

3 it is.

Interesting. From the P-105 DPBSD review:

- This is a smoothly blended multi-velocity layer sample set (two steps visible @ v=72,90).

So I concur.