I Don't recall reading about this subject...I remember just a few years ago I purchased the first FantomX 76 Key Synth From Piano and Stuff in Pittsburgh, Pa...I was always kind of a Roland Guy owning the the XP-80 Synth before with the stock "Nice Piano" with the Lots of Reverb,etc. Then adding The "Session" Expanion Board to get The Stereo GrandPiano.

In the 88 Boards I had the Rolland A-90 EX controller with the Piano Exp Bd...Also the RD-150 Stage Piano along the way..(Very Warm,Jazzy)

My point is when I played the New FantomX The Ultimate Grand Piano was Completely Different sounding...It was beautiful but different!...I've known the Salesman(musician) for quite a while. He Told me 2 Possibilies of Piano's being used to sample...Both being rumors...Roland is very secretive!

Well...All those keyboards are Gone, But I have the Roland RD-300gx Stage Piano with The Beautiful Ultimate Grand X Piano My Wife plays...I always bring the high down a bit and the low up a bit on the eq to warm it to my taste.(It has the 3 EQ knobs on the Piano,nice)...

I have a E-60 Roland and a Tyros2 arranger as well...MAYBE some Interesting comments to come after hearing some others!

Have a Great Day ....Harold

You can be sure it wasn't a Yamaha, at least!

I don't think it is a Steinway, to my ears it sounds a BIT like a nice Kawai, but it is hard to really know. Roland have NEVER (AFAIK) acknowledged which piano it was.

But it remains, to my ears, the finest ROM piano available in an arranger (being the one in my G70).

Wasn't it some behemoth Fazioli grand?

Don't worry Fran will have an answer soon

Meanwhile read this...
http://www.roland.com/piano/grand/benefit.html

[This message has been edited by Dnj (edited 01-06-2009).]

It is well known that Roland samples several different brands of pianos, which results in an inconsistent tone...they always seem to have notes that just don't belong.

They attempt to represent an instrument that doesn't really exist...it's very obvious when you play them...with Yamaha and Kawai digitals, at least you know precisely where the samples came from and the quality of tone doesn't change as dramatically between notes.

Personally, I would feel more confident in a digital piano that came from an actual piano manufacturer.

BTW...it was Technics that made use of Steinway samples.

Ian

Geeez, and the conjecture BS continues....

Well known? Sure, Ian

Roland may pick different pianos for different products (unlike Yamaha, who probably HAVE to sample theirs, no matter that many of their customers MIGHT like a nice Steinway, B'dorfer or Kawai!), but I haven't heard of different pianos being assembled into one. Rumor and innuendo do not a FACT make, Ian...

But you know the strangest thing? Yes, you WOULD think that a piano manufacturer would make the best sampled pianos.... But P.Creek is the proof in the pudding (or lack thereof).

IMO, Yamaha sampled pianos, especially those relegated to the arranger line, are some of the nastiest, brittlest, tinniest, thinnest pianos it has ever been my displeasure to listen to. Which their REAL pianos are NOT.

How do you account for this?

Your hearing is going bad?

Ian

Posted by Diki:
--------------------------------------------
IMO, Yamaha sampled pianos, especially those relegated to the arranger line, are some of the nastiest, brittlest, tinniest, thinnest pianos it has ever been my displeasure to listen to.
-------------------------------------------

AMEN TO THAT DIKI!!!!!!!!!!!!! Ha! Roland using multiple pianos in one sample.... That's a load of crap.

You surprise me Diki...being a Roland fan, I thought you were aware they used different pianos.

My buddy, who is a Roland rep, told me this gem....it must be true?

I find their pianos very inconsistant from note to note.

Ian

Roland does not use different piano samples in ONE sample. They do however use different sampled pianos on various instruments. Any Roland rep who says Roland uses multiple pianos on one sample is falling asleep in meetings and missed a few interoffice memos.

Just because a company makes acoustic pianos doesn't automatically make them "masters" of a digitally reproduced version. I think Yamaha's an excellent example. I actually like the sound of a REAL Yamaha acoustic grand, but IMO their digital sampled versions don't even sound like they come from their acoustic line. Even the new Motif XS piano is lacking IMO.

[This message has been edited by squeak_D (edited 01-06-2009).]

With all the inconsistency between notes, it would hardly be surprising they sampled different pianos for each note.

Look, I'm not saying Yamaha makes a better digital piano sound than Roland...sound is very subjective and personal...but there is no denying the inconsistancy between notes that plague Roland DPs.

Sit down at one and try each note...you'll hear what I'm talking about.

[This message has been edited by ianmcnll (edited 01-06-2009).]

Ahhh... the manufacturer rep... The paragon of accurate information, and deep insider knowledge

I ALWAYS believe everything they say, don't you, Ian?

Just find ONE piano that sounds remotely like any Yamaha arranger sampled piano... and I'll show you a piano that ought to be condemned! No, I take that back... the Western is making a comeback. There's GOT to be a need for a bar-room tack piano sound in an arranger (I know there's one of those in a Yamaha, too, but I bet they use the same samples!)

Listen Ian, it's quite simple. You work at Yamaha dealers. Go play a CFIII, then play the S900... If you think there's ANY resemblance, it's not MY ears that need looking at

Wait until NAMM. Roland Piano division SHOULD have a bit of a revolution (or so I am told) as far as the structure of digital pianos goes.

And some big changes to the KR series pianos to do with their arranger side.

They may not release full details and specs, but the word I hear is they will.

Dennis

The best piano from Yamaha (at the lower end of the price scale) I heard was the one on the S90ES. Directly sampled from the Yamaha S700 Grand. S90es had 74mb of sample data JUST for that one piano.

Mind you the rest of the pianos were pretty ordinary.

Dennis

Have you tried playing the G70 and a Roland acoustic piano?

Good example Dennis.... The S90ES's piano was very much liked by many. Didn't Yamaha offer that particular sample as a download for the Motif XS too (due to how popular it was with S90 owners)?

My favorite is Grand Piano 1 in the Yamaha CP-300...stunning, and works terrific either solo or in a mix.

I've heard that as well Dennis...again, from my buddy, the Roland rep...he was also very evasive about a G70 replacement, but apparently the E-series will still continue.

Maybe it will include a 76 note model...the E-90 perhaps?

Straining just a bit hard, there, aren't you, Ian You can do better, mate!

But it IS telling how you pick a CP series piano, and NOT the T3 or S900, which you currently have...

Me, I'll take the G70 piano over anything... Just MIDI it to a wood 88 if you GOT to have the action and you're in business

After all, this IS an arranger forum, ain't it?

Squeak, as far as I know, they didn't.

I do remember on the forums though, the Motif owners commenting (complaining??) on why the S90es got it but none of the Motif ES line did. And questions asked of Yamaha as to would made available.

I also think one of the stumbling blocks was the actual sample size of that piano and the available (at the time) memory capacity of the Motif line.

The XS of course has no problem with the memory capacity but I suspect Yamaha have moved on.But I have heard that some owners of the XS STILL think the S90es piano is better.

It was (still is) a great piano sample.

Dennis

EDITED: Sorry Squeak, misread your post. You asked about the XS, I thought ES. My comments above are directed at the ES line.

As for it being available for the XS line, I don't know.

[This message has been edited by miden (edited 01-06-2009).]

And is all up at Purgatory Creek.

Make your OWN minds up....

Dennis,

Yeah..., I do remember seeing the posts about this piano sample and requests for it. Wasn't sure if Yammie offered it up or not.

In reality, they're all pretty damned good--some are slightly better than others, but only slightly. A piano is probably among the most complex of all musical instruments, and duplicating the sound of an expensive Grand Piano from top to bottom is nearly impossible, especially in the higher range. Lets be honest. Very few players play the upper octaves, and very few play the extremely low octaves, including individuals that play piano. I find it amazing how quickly this thread turned into an instant pissing contest, and it's equally amazing at the number of so-called experts on the subject. Fortunately, I'm not an expert on anything, plus I'm old, feeble and somewhat deaf, therefore, I no longer have to rely on piano sounds alone on my 700-voice arranger keyboard.

Rant On!

Gary

You don't seem to mind compromising, Diki...but I'm not...I like a piano to actually feel like a piano.

I need/want 88 hammer action keys...the G70, T3 and S900 don't have them...they are fine as arrangers, but woefully lacking as a piano substitute.

I can only imagine how weary one would get dragging around a big heavy G70 AND a weighted action 88 note controller/keyboard.

I'll stick with the S900 and the P85, thank you very much.

And yes, this is an arranger forum, but the topic included digital pianos.

Ian

Gary this is one of the few times I disagree with you.

As far as I can tell NO-ONE on this thread has called themselves an expert,and I don't think this thread is in anyway a "pissing contest".

Why does it have to be called that, anytime two or more folks here have a differing opinion.

So if someone thinks its a cool day, and someone thinks its a warm day, is THAT a "pissing contest" too?

I think the term "pissing contest" is thrown out there far too easily and glibly, and sometimes applied to threads (and not just this one either) where it does not belong.

Dennis

Agreed! It seems that every time members here disagree it's labled a pissing contest. Sure we do our share of "making rainbows" on this forum.., but not all the disagreements are reduced to that.

And the rumor mill grinds on. There are NO inconsistent notes on my G70, the same piano was used for them all.

'It is well known' that Yamaha uses child slave labor in their factories. Hey, I heard it from a Roland rep, so it MUST be true, eh Ian?

'It is well known' that all Canadiens are incestuous wife beaters... I heard it from a guy that heard it from a guy that used to watch Fox News. So it MUST be true

"It is well known' that Ian doesn't exist at all. It is merely Donny using a different ISP and handle, just to drum up drama. Fran told me personally, so it MUST be true

Posted by Diki:
--------------------------------------------
'It is well known' that Yamaha uses child slave labor in their factories. Hey, I heard it from a Roland rep, so it MUST be true, eh Ian?
--------------------------------------------

That's a good one Diki!!!!!!

One, Two, Cha, Cha, Cha,

Donny, you got to learn some newer dance steps!

How about 'Cha cha now y'all!' from time to time?

Sure doesn't sound like the same piano was used...I wasn't impressed at all.

Mid-range notes are the worst culprits.

Are you sure you listened to each note carefully in relation to the others...especially in the middle?

Some of those notes were awfully tight and had different decays...I remember how surprised I was at hearing them, especially after all the hype.

I don't know Dennis. Diki says Yamaha pianos are all thin, Roland is much better, and the beat goes on. From my perspective their is not a lot of information here that arranger keyboard players can apply to their keyboards to make them sound better. It's kind of like the post a few months ago where someone asked for members to post their grand piano sounds using a particular midi file. I emailed mine to Diki and never heard a word one way or another. No constructive criticism, no anything. I guess I must be missing the point, or maybe I've been here too long. Time for a margaretta.

Gary

Best thing about this thread, at least, Gary, is unlike every other pissing contest here, you can go to Purgatory Creek and actually LISTEN to all the examples. You can HEAR what each one sounds like, and then decide if you agree or not with a poster.

Unlike most pissing contests here, where NOBODY is willing to illustrate their points with any actual audio...

Play the FantomX Ultimate Grand file. Play the PSR S900 file.

I rest my case.

[This message has been edited by Diki (edited 01-06-2009).]

[This message has been edited by ianmcnll (edited 01-07-2009).]

And sorry, Gary, but I don't recall getting any file from you. Maybe my spam filter caught it? Did you follow up?

Maybe you assume if you don't get a reply to an email, the other person is simply ignoring you. Me, I'm not that paranoid I simply assume they never got it...

Diki,

I sent it, then waited a week and emailed you a follow-up, and still didn't get a reply, so I figured you just didn't care to respond. I had no idea that you didn't get the emails because they didn't come back to me as rejected.

Cheers,

Gary

Sorry, Gary... I checked and haven't found it. I guess my spam filter got you.

Sorry. Ian and chas etc. will tell you I reply to things when I get them...

Thankfully we Canadians are unlike those awful "Canadiens" who are rumored to live much further south, past the border.

BTW...how are things in Floride?

Ian

The problem is NO ONE can without a doubt claim universally any particular piano brand is better then any other whether wood or digital. Yet many try even with the forceful statements are followed by or lead with "IMO" "to my ears" and the rest of the disclaimers. May as well use the word "virtually"

Its all a matter of personal taste. Even those far far more successful then anyone on this board with multi Platinum decades of world renown success has an "opinion" and chooses a particular brand. Any brand they want and manufacturers are doing back flips praying to be the chosen one either for an endorsement deal or just free provision.

The problem comes when someone's opinion gets trashed, because someone else wants the edge on credibility, He with the most credibility is "right" The most vocal and vitriolic need the cred more than others.

Does Elton "Yamaha" John have any more credibility than Billy "Baldwin" Bosendorfer" Joel? These guys get their pianos pretty much donated or have endorsement deals and they can chose any brand they want to play in front of 30,000 or on Multi Platinum recordings.

I wonder if Billy and Elton have pissing contests on Baldwin vs Yamaha. I seriously doubt it.

Some major players choose the Motif some Choose Roland other Korg. Many can get any manufacturer's instrument they want. Apparently one believes there is no single leading brand. Especially in the digital world.

EVERY manufacturer makes the BEST board for someone. Those who don't are rarely seen on major tours.



[This message has been edited by Kingfrog (edited 01-07-2009).]

I completely agree... it's ALL subjective. But at least, just this ONCE, all the discussed sounds actually are available for comparison on identical files. Rather than piss and moan about pissing and moaning , the members here FINALLY have an opportunity to actually hear for themselves every single piano discussed. Whereupon they could return and add their voice to the discussion with a little bit more than conjecture (which half the postings seem to be!).

There's NOTHING wrong with opinion... it might lead to a consensus (which is NOT everyone agreeing to the same thing, just a knowledge of what the majority opinion is) for once around here!

At the very least, rather than arguing manufacturer vs. manufacturer in a blind loyalty test, you have an opportunity to download all the files, and set up your OWN "blind taste test' by listening and judging the pianos without a knowledge of which is which (set up your own 'random' playlist, then sit away from the screen and make notes).

FINALLY, a way to find out whether what you post IS how you feel!

I don't expect anyone to agree with me. It's only MY opinion (as is everyone else's too!). But for once, here is the perfect way to ILLUSTRATE that opinion. If I say something sounds brittle, and something else sounds warm, I can then say 'play file x then file y' to show what I'm talking about.

How often, here, do we get the same opportunity..?

And yes, I've heard REAL pianists (classical stars) argue one manufacturer's piano over another nearly to the death

It's not just US who hold our opinions dearly!

Step over to Pianoworld.com You will see you are not alone in holding opinion dearly among classical players. Classical players are like Ophthalmologists, They don't deal with life and death situations but still hold themselves in higher regard then a General Surgeon.

I know its just me. but music, sound, recordings, songs, trends, Revered "guitar "heros" that can only play Drop D riffs on the top three strings,Rap music, Looped music, Award shows in the arts......no roots in the scholarly arena. Feel it, play it, sell it...

When someone comes into the store and asks me which guitar is the best. I don't run to taylor or Martin. I tell them to play a few including the Samicks and Yamahas and TELL ME!! Same with the Pianos and keyboards. I cannot possibly know what is best for someone else. thats why the debates/pissing contests are emotional and circular. No one hears with my ears. My ears hate multi million selling Hip Hop songs. What do I know? LOL

I went to that Piano shootout site and listened to many of those pianos. I found the Softsynth pianos were noticeably rich, But they did not use loops and sampled every note multiple times.But maybe I read that and assumed they were better....... The major digital keyboard pianos seemed far more hairsplitting in differences, My first thought was one could make the Korg sound like a Yamaha sound like a Roland using some Para EQ and/or compression.

I'm sure I'm just, thankfully unsophisticated aurally, so as not to become creatively paralyzed by seeking the Holy Grail with every voice. I know those who are and they do great work but much of it is not as appreciated as expected considering the time and effort they put into it.

Its like the classical pianist who has trained for 30 years and put all the time in and pain of endless hours playing Hanon exercises, learning great and very technically difficult classical works.....watching a self taught pianist make a living with great success and accolades playing things he was taught to be theoretically or technically wrong. The frustration has to be immense.

We all know the guy who can read down a chart the first time perfectly, but cannot play anything unwritten or improvise. I worked with people like that. I also worked with those who only read "Nashville charts" who could play off the cuff with great technical prowess and fervor. The best players are the rare ones that can do both equally well. I only had the pleasure to work with one of them. Mark Owens in Branson. But I also worked with and am a good friend of Judy Dozier (keyboardist for Billy Idol-Rebel Yell) a long time friend of my classically trained wife) who had far greater success with far less formal training whom I met when she worked for Legends in Myrtle Beach awhile after the glory days.




[This message has been edited by Kingfrog (edited 01-07-2009).]

Good points, but don't get into the middle of two guitarists talking guitars...

They make us arranger players seem like wimps! Pre-CBS, post-CBS, plastic winder covers, metal winder covers, Seymour Duncans vs. DiMarzios... and that's just for ONE specific guitar!

All we do is Yamaha vs. Korg, etc.!

THOSE guys are SERIOUSLY fanatical!

Best of luck with that one, mate! Sure, you could make a Roland nasty, thin and brittle. But it would still sound like a nasty, thin Roland, NOT a Yamaha! You can't EQ a SteinwayD into a YamahaCFIII, and you can't DSP a Korg into a Kawai. It's kind of like saying you could EQ and compress Frank Sinatra into sounding like Tony Bennett.

I know it's not quite what you intend, but it's funny to see someone who doesn't really play piano wax all knowledgeable... Ask your wife whether she thinks you could do that. Make a Steinway sound like a Yamaha.

The thing is, if you ARE a pianist, the sound of the piano is VERY important. It's kind of like your voice. You want it to sound a certain way. But it doesn't. It sounds like it sounds. It's YOUR voice. A piano, to a pianist, is kind of the same thing. Only, unlike the voice, you CAN change it. Finding the piano sound that YOU like, that makes how YOU play sound it's best, is not the search for the Holy Grail. THIS search is reachable...

I'm sorry, but only a non-pianist (that doesn't make you a non-arranger player!) would dismiss how important the sound of the piano is. Just as a non-singer would dismiss how important the singing voice is... For those of us raised on the piano, it's impossible to think that they are all the same, give or take a few EQ tweaks or so!

You might soften the brightness and punch of the Yamaha with EQ and/or compression, but I seriously doubt if you can fix the inconsistent notes in a Roland.

I haven't played Korg, so I can't comment.

Most vital to ALL piano sounds is the keyboard response and feel...synth action, or semi weighted actions are fine for almost every sound but piano...you want to feel like you're playing a piano...it has to have weighted hammer action...like a piano has...nothing, and I mean nothing, comes close.

There is no difference between a semi-weighted and synth action that a bit of time on the keyboard can't eliminate...most pro and/or accomplished players quickly adjust...it's just like the different actions on guitars.

But, the difference a real piano action makes is impressive, and it can make even an average piano sound feel far more satisfying to play.

We could cover this subject for months, even years, and even after listening to the all the samples on Purgatory Creek, there will still be differences of opinion on even the SAME piano.

I know the Yamaha piano sound is what I want to hear coming out of my speakers...I like the tone, the brightness, the presence, the consistancy and the response, but surely, there will be a few who will prefer something else...to each their own.

To get back on topic, the Roland rep I spoke to yesterday, tells me that Roland used a Steinway as one of the several pianos it employed for creating it's piano tones.

True or not? Doesn't really matter to me...I'm just the messenger, and I prefer Yamaha.

Ian

[This message has been edited by ianmcnll (edited 01-08-2009).]

The most common problem I find with user complaints that relate to "inconsistent notes" regarding the piano sample actually have nothing to do with inconsistent notes at all (in terms of the raw piano sample). Most often you'll find the difference isn't in the note itself, but in the default velocity settings. These are all multi-layered pianos we're listening to and test playing. They ALL have different levels at which the velocity curves kick in.

The thing to look for is a board that not only allows you to manipulate the patch in the most common ways such as EQ'ing, and basic patch modify.., but to get your hands on one deep enough to allow you to adjust the velocity curve itself. I have yet to get my hands on any board (that allowed the user to adjust this setting) that I didn't have to adjust. Every Roland, Yamaha, and Korg I've owned needed not only the standard velocity adjusted to my playing style, but required me to go deeper and adjust the velocity curve too.

Many of these digitals out there are very nice and have good samples on them. However, many don't offer much in the area of "shaping" that sound (outside of basic velocity sens. settings, and brightness control). You're pretty much stuck with the way the maker says it's going to sound.

For me if it's gonna be 88 weighted keys bet for darn sure you're going to find the full "workstation" attached to the back end of those keys. Something that's going to allow me to go much deeper into the sound editing to really tailor that patch to my playing style and needs.



[This message has been edited by squeak_D (edited 01-08-2009).]

Sit down, set the curve to your liking, and then play each note up and down the scale, paying particular attention to the range staring at A below middle C, and up to and including the C above.

Then make your own mind up if the transition from notes is consistent or otherwise.

Inconsistency isn't an exclusive trait of Roland pianos...some Casio have the same issues as well...they suffer more in the lower and higher ranges...the middle is actually not bad.

I'm not picking on Roland...Yamaha's Concert Grand on the T3 is lacking in consistency.

I wish I could try a Korg, but they don't carry the brand at my local store.

Ian

I think they ALL to some degree have a certain amount of "inconsistency". However, I often find that user issues most often don't deal with that.., rather the issue lies in the default velocity settings themselves.., and many times those adjustments in this area can make a huge difference.

I grew up on the piano..., so I understand the need for a great piano sound (along with a killer set of keys) to appease those of us who traditionally are pianists. In hardware digital pianos and workstations there's ALWAYS shortcuts taken.., cheating here and there on the piano samples.. stretching here, compressing there, faking the stereo effect a bit. It's also not just the piano patches either as you can literally hear the shortcuts taken in other acoustic emulated instruments on today's keyboards too... I'll even use Roland as an example as in many cases regarding some of their stringed instruments such as violins and cellos you can REALLY hear the cheating. You want to hear inconsistency in a patch example..., have a listen to the default violins and cellos on my Roland RS-70.., but make sure you're sitting on the toilet first as the audio might make you do something involuntary. Gawd awful LFO changes from one note to the next and other disturbing things.

I too am picky about my piano sound. I know that NO digital representation is going to get me to that feeling of real ivory bliss.., but if I'm going to choose one that's digital..., I want as much sound shaping control as possible... That's probably what makes me a bit of a loner in terms of patch control to many users here. I don't look for Out of Box patch quality. I look for good raw samples and the tools onboard to allow me to turn that sound inside out should I feel the need.

**on a side note..., I knew some time ago about Roland's use of Steinway samples..., which is why Roland has always been my choice for piano patches.., I also remember hearing rumors that they were using Baldwin too**



[This message has been edited by squeak_D (edited 01-08-2009).]

Roland didn't have a lot of choices when it came down to pianos to sample...they can't/won't sample Yamaha(except for the CP70/80) and that only really leaves Kawai or Steinway (and maybe Bosendorfer) as Roland do not make their own acoustics.

I doubt if they sampled a Young Chang,a Pearl River or a Samick...

I really liked Roland's SAS pianos...pity they didn't keep it up and delop it further but I guess it may have reached it's potential and was more hassle than sampling...SAS did a great electric piano sound....they also used it on the Roland (Rhodes) VK1000 and it did a great Hammond sim.

Ian

Well, up to this bombshell, you were...

I hate to burst anyone's bubble, but REAL pianos get inconsistent from note to note. Listen carefully from time to time. 'Wolf' notes, soundboard resonant frequencies, changes from different sections of the harp...

I don't know where anyone gets the impression that a piano is smooth from top to bottom. There are at least three distinct sections on the harp (and noticeable transitions from one to the other). Add in the fact that all arranger pianos use stretched samples (not every note is sampled) and I can't understand why anyone expects smoothness who plays a REAL piano.

All we can expect is that the performance be predictable, and responsive. I find this in Roland pianos. As do a very large percentage of pro piano players (look at how many RD series sampled pianos you see in the hands of real pianists.

Thing is, iof Yamaha sampled pianos in arrangers sounded anything like Yamaha's REAL pianos, I would be agreeing with everything that Ian says. But sadly, they DON'T. Listen to all the Tyros and PSR demos at P.Creek. That don't sound like ANY Yamaha piano I ever played... well except for that CP70 I used to play!

We've got Ivory at the studio (check the demos). My producer and I both prefer the G70 to it for many tracks, and it is FAR more responsive to play (virtually ZERO latency). Yes, my tastes are more towards Steinway's than Yamaha's in respect to real pianos. But I'll take a REAL Yamaha over any Yamaha arranger piano. But we HAVE a real Steinway at the studio. On many tracks, we STILL prefer the G70!

You can EQ warmth OUT of a warm real piano (it's what Yamaha must have done with their arranger piano samples!), but you can't EQ warmth INTO a brittle sample. If it's not there, no amount of EQ can bring something in a sample that ain't there in the first place.

The Yamaha Live Grand is consistent from top to bottom...that's what make it my "go to" piano.

I don't like surprises from note to note, one of the reasons I don't have an acoustic....besides the tuning and maintenance issues like regulation etc.

On a digital(or even an arranger), I'd at least like the notes to sound like they came from the same piano...I don't feel that Roland has quite achieved this yet, but they are getting closer.

If having "inconsistent notes" is more "real" to some one's ears, that's their personal perception.

It sure isn't mine.

Sit at Tyros2 or S900 and play the Live Grand...it is wonderfully balanced, consistent and bright and punchy.

I roll off a bit of the brightness for jazz tunes, but otherwise it works perfect for any genre.

Lots of warmth for my needs, yet the right harmonic content to sit well in a mix, or along with a style or SMF.

I always found Roland pianos a little tubby, but you can EQ that out of them fairly easy.

Warm? Not really, but they do have a distinctive tone that some people find pleasing, where others may find it lacks punch and definition, especially in the middle and upper ranges...the lower tones are very nice and broad with lots of clank..they just seem to lose it at the middle, where the inconsistency is most noticable as well.

I'm very impressed with the Yamaha CP-300...very well balanced piano sound in all ranges....terrific action to go with it....but, a little too "unportable" for me....I'm going to get another P85.

Ian

To me a certain degree or (as odd as it sounds) lack of "minute inconsistency" translates into a dull piano patch IMO. Yammie's pianos IMO are an excellent example of "cheating" in terms of the piano sounds. If you find EVERY note to be dead on consistent from step to step that tells you they cheated a bit.., and perhaps that consistency means each note is nothing more than the note you just previously played, but digitally "stretched" and enhanced.

I want the sound to be as natural as possible... Diki's right in that a real acoustic piano is inconsistent too. That's why you can easily tell the difference of a digital and real live acoustic grand. In fairness to Yamaha.., they're not the only ones cheating.. They're all doing it. Some however may be better cheaters

Diki..., on the subject of Steinway pianos I want to share a story with you. It was many moons ago that on a regular basis I played the most beautiful sounding piano in my LIFE and to date have NEVER found another acoustic piano that outperformed this one.

When I was in highschool our school piano was a Steinway. It was an older Steinway too, and if memory serves me correctly it was a donated piano (and in all honesty.., what public school can afford to put a Steinway on their stage). Again, this piano was an older one (can't remember the model number or year it was produced.., but I think it was just around the turn of the 20th century). Man was this thing perfectly AGED too. The sound from this piano was like the finest bottle of wine..., BUT a bottle so perfect where each individual grape was hand selected and went through a strick inspection before being juiced.

I can't even tell you how many times people who played on this piano and even piano tuners who were the one's lucky enough to do the job turned around and wrote letters to the schoolboard in an attempt to buy that piano. People would request special permission to use the schools audit. just to get access to that piano.

I have many fond memories playing on that Steinway. Many skipped classes, missed lunches, missed hallway smooches with girlfriends, all because of that piano. Hell I even made love to a language teacher on that piano my senior year!

Like I said.., to date I have never found another piano like that one. I often wonder if the school still has it and what condition it's in today.

Thankfully I don't consider myself an expert player. I am spared from the frustration of those with "super ears" agonizing over the intricacies of "wolf" notes.

Take a hop over to Pianoworld.com. You won;t find many at all who respects any player who even would hint any digital piano is remotely close to real for serious players. It's all relative how seriously people take themselves and their knowledge based on their "training". And sometimes humorous.

Actually I am thankful I have the ears of Avg Joe. He is the guy who writes the checks. A piano has to be way off not to be a piano,,,,,,,Then to him its just a CP 70 or Wurlitzer 200, Fender Rhodes, DX7......The point is you don't have to be a 50 year classically trained player to enjoy music made with any keyboard. Thats why there is Steinway and Yamaha ,Baldwin, and Pearl River, Dongbei......Everyone has an opinion regardless of their backgrounds and they are all relevant,whether a singer, songwriter or pianist. Success in music has no rules or sound. Even You should know that by now.


[This message has been edited by Kingfrog (edited 01-08-2009).]

Acoustic are inconsistent, to be sure, but they still manage to have the same overall tone(that is if they have been voiced properly).

Yamaha manages consistency without sterility, in my opinion, and every note sounds like was sampled from the same instrument.

We all have a sound in our head that we call "the piano sound" and it surely will differ from one to the other.

That's why these types of discussions rarely solve anything, but they are always interesting, informative and even entertaining, if we don't take them TOO seriously.

The 'average Joe' can't tell a T3 from a Casio, either (or doesn't care that there is one). Doesn't stop YOU from caring about the difference.

That's all I'm saying. You have YOUR set of priorities, and will argue them with anyone. I have mine. And they are no less important to ME, and of no concern to the Average Joe.

As are yours, too.

To be honest, I think the Average Joe DOES care. He just can't articulate WHY... Otherwise EVERYBODY and everything would have an equal value. And we all know it doesn't.

The average Joe buys records you HATE! Still REALLY give a toss what he thinks?

[This message has been edited by Diki (edited 01-08-2009).]

you are not "getting it."

The Avg Joe doesn't know or even care if its Steinway or Kawai...A Motif or a Roland. If he likes the music thts all that matters, Thats the point you consistantly fail to understand. I Understand that he doesn't vare about the hardware. Therefore I don't get all wrapped up in the minutea of differences and argue about spliting hair difference in a single keyboard sound. Jpe doesn't care. The big picture is what Joe hears. Either he likes it or he doesn't. Does't matter wht its played on.
He certainly doesn't care if its a Korg or a Yamaha. He doesn't even care if the performer isn't playing all or any of the parts. If he did many OMBs would be out of business.

And he doesn't care if it's a T3 or a G70...

But YOU care...

Why, if he doesn't?

No great music was ever made with any concern of whether Average Joe liked it or not. But an AWFUL lot of pure drivel WAS.

I guess I'm glad I DON'T 'get it'...

Really? I don't think the greatest of living artists created for Joe at all. They wrote and played long before Joe knew who they were and it wasn't until AFTER Joe accepted them did they have to keep the flame burning. Many could not. I believe a lot of great artists even left behind great works that were not studied and/or appreciated until long after their death.

Yes!!! I care about the T3 vs the G70 in the example you mention.......But only because the T3 offers me more "inspiration". More styles = more choices = more inspiration. If the G70 or PA2x had as many or more i would have one. Nothing to do with "joe".

I guess the difference here is I am about the craft and less about the profit. I write,play and record for me first. I enjoy the process regardless of the result. When the song is finished (or I'm just over it) I move on to the next one. Many people in the arts enjoy the process and are not focused on the acceptance of the result.

Now if art is ones sole source of income , then they have no choice but to follow trends,play the popular songs and succumb to "Joe and Joans's" needs...... Sing Margaritaville for the 1000th time...without being Jimmy Buffet. Push CD's at gigs for extra income.


The focus always has to be on the public acceptance. Mine really never has been. I made my bones doing 15 minutes a night of someone else's music as they did it as exactly as possible. The rest of the time it was all about me what I wanted to do without regard to the audience. I guess it's just a different perspective. I'm a studio rat. I really don't enjoy public performance as much...and would not enjoy being a living jukebox. Thats just not me. Thats the wife. She loves it.







[This message has been edited by Kingfrog (edited 01-08-2009).]