I think that a least some external speakers "pass muster".

I think that digital pianos are made up of three major "systems" -- action, DAC, sound-amplification.

There is no need to re-invent the wheel when it comes to the action of the piano. Do what Yamaha does in their AG -- use a real grand action.

Present-day DAC is also, IMO, very good, but a final tube pre-amp in the DAC to create the line-level output just may improve (make even more realistic) that signal's ultimate potential a bit.

IMO, THE major shortcoming in modern-day digital pianos is their sound-amplification systems. I don't think that DP manufacturers should (necessarily, anyway) attempt to provide their customers with a solution to that "problem".

Remember the old, all-in-one "stereo systems" that were made in the 1950's and early 1960's? Most of them had a radio, turntable and amplification system all in one big, long box (some even had a TV in there).

Consumers soon turned to so-called "component" systems that had "separate" turntable, radio, amplifiers (or "receivers") and, finally, speakers. All of these things could be mixed and matched according to the taste of each customer.

Forcing customers to buy a "built in" sound system in a DP makes the DP much more expensive, bulky and heavy. I think the manufacturers should allow customers the option to decide that particular part of "the digital piano" for themselves, but if a customer wants a complete package, an all-in-one model should be available, too, as several already are.

IMO, something similar to the following is what's needed:

http://www.pianoworld.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/1982704/Re:%20Presto:%20From%20a%20Kawai%20MP10%20.html#Post1982704

Again, just as we do when we decide how we're going to reproduce the sound of a symphony orchestra or a pipe organ in our living space from the output of any digital or analog source, we customers should be allowed to decide for ourselves how to reproduce the sound of an acoustic grand piano from the output signal of the digital piano.

(Dear Kawai, please put your GF action in your next version of the MP10. Dear Yamaha, please market an AG WITHOUT the on-board sound system.)

I think the amplification systems are fine. It's hard to build a poor amp these days.
The speakers leave a LOT to be desired.
And the samples are worse. This is the weakest link right now.

Not so long ago I listened to a concert of a singer with band in which the pianist played a Nord (Stage, I think, or perhaps Piano). The PA and the speaker installation in the room (a medium sized venue that takes both classical and modern performances) made this sound brilliant (in an amplified context, that is), I was quite surprised. There were some solo passages of the piano with clear and transparent sound, and while these did not sound quite as a mic'ed acoustic (and even less as an acoustic without amplification), I was seriously impressed. But this experience was quite singular, all too often the piano sound with large speakers and PA's is quite ugly.

Was it the room? An excellent speaker setup? The art of the sound engineer? Probably a bit of all. The quality of input from the Nord was sufficient I'd say, and certainly not the bottleneck in the chain.

Do you know what speakers they were?

toddy, this is the venue:

http://www.centralstation-darmstadt.de/vermietung/saal.html

You can see a few speakers hanging in front of the stage. I believe there were more on stands when I listened. Unfortunately I did not check the speakers (was enjoying the music...).

I think the sounds of software pianos are already excellent. If I find a DP action I love, that isn't limiting in any way, then the 'perfect' DP already exists. I don't even care about onboard sounds anymore, because I'll just change the sounds by running software anyway.

....well I see a suspended (wedge shaped?) speaker....could be EV.....well could be anything, actually!

Perhaps they are already "good enough" to "replace" most APs ?
In the "replace AP" sense they have been "good enough" to replace many/most APs for a few decades already.

Realistically I am not "replacing" a Steinway or Bosendorfer in my living room.
If it hadn't been for electronic imitations I may have bought an old Chickering, Story and Clark, or perhaps just not have had any "keyboard instrument".
Most of our parents/grandparents probably had generic uprights in the parlor, some may have been tuned/adjusted/regulated from time to time, others not.
From what I remember of my parents' upright - it had a worse action than my (now ~30 year old) Yamaha KX88 and poorer sound than the SGUs of the 1980s, even the FB01 (-:
The eternal search for a perfect concert grand (or several) in a box may be unrealistic.

We HAVE electronic instruments that we can make music on.
That they don't perfectly imitate instruments that we (MOST of us) would never find the money or physical space for seems irrelevant - lets just make music on what we DO have.

Perhaps DPs have to disassociate themselves from APs. They have come of age, methinks. There are many features on the AP which compromise it`s playability which the DP should be (but isn`t for marketing purposes)free from. Start with the action. It does not need, nor is it desireable to feel like any acoustic piano. Even the best are compromised by design and construct/ functionability constraints.

It would take a brave or stupid manufacturer . . .

Except that people actually want to play piano music on these things. The music that was written for piano is directly related to its action. Have you ever tried to play demanding piano music on an unweighted keyboard action? It's terrible. The action of the piano is a desirable thing to anyone who plays piano. You spend too much of your time trying to reason things in a vacuum. If you are any sort of player yourself, you shouldn't be dismissing the piano action as easily as you do. There's a reason the big DP manufacturers have put so much effort into the actions of their products. And it's not just some misguided need for approval. They are trying to make these things feel like real instruments. The action needs to feel mechanical in nature, it needs to respond to nuance and touch. A swinging hammer provides such feedback.

I understand your point from a sound generation/technology point of view, but your comments on the action side of things miss the point: the interface between the human being and the technology needs to be something that feels real and right. The pianistic action is a proven winner - there's no reason to ditch it. People like it - heck, they need it.

I can see your points Ando. I`m not being dismissive; just putting forth suggestions and hypotheses. I`m not an accomplished pianist; more a piano-player. But I have found that some touch sensitive non weighted keyboards were superior to the weighted variety when it come to a speedy and intricate passage. Far superior.

And it set me thinking . . . people like the piano keyboard, I do myself. But one can soon adapt to a sprung action, as long as the keys aren`t short like they are on the portable keyboards they have now.. . . imo! The best I came across was on a digital organ with a piano setting which I was employed to play. The action was superb (should be; the organ cost as much as a house when first built) but the piano on it was total crap . . . .