Getting the Tyros4 was a big decision at the time, Donny, considering my finances, and retirement looming ahead, and I am glad I took the plunge and went for the Tyros4 instead of the S910 or something else.

There comes a time to get off the "buying the latest" merry-go-round and spending more time digging in to the keyboard, and, of course, more time with improving my playing.

You can rest assured I won't be buying anything new...at least another arranger, in any case.

Ian

Hi Ian

I always thought that the Tyros FSX keyboard is not semi-weighted keys. I actually tried to find this out for sure, but not much information in internet searches.

My local music store rep was surprised to hear about the 76 note version Tyros 5, but agreed with me that the current Tyros 4 or 3 models are not semi- weighted keys.

My understanding is a keyboard bed and action in- between an actual piano and synth action. It would have weight to the keys like a piano, but somewhere in between. I remember trying out a 76 note midi controller keyboard with semi-weighted keys which I would find perfect for piano, but were a lot closer to an actual piano action.

I might still be incorrect, but maybe someone knows for sure. I do like the FSX action, coming from an organist background, and work very well for after touch control.

For me I would certainly go for the 76 note FSX version for home, and maybe in the future a 61 note version for gigging and backup.

Regards, Marcus

I can understand if finances are involved these KBs arent cheap by any means.....but sometimes the Latest & Greatest gets the best of us and wheeling and dealing & juggling makes it happen even if its two years from now....off to a gig now.....keep the fun going!!

It's really hard to say, Marcus...I've always regarded Yamaha's FSX keybeds as semi-weighted, although Yamaha just calls it "FSX".

The FSX feels very much like the action in DX-7, DX-7II, DX-5 etc. so I tend to refer to it as such, as the latter were often called semi-weighted by Yamaha.

I really liked the DX-7, and the related synths, style action.

Whatever we call it, I find the FSX works very well for acoustic and electric piano (although I still prefer weighted 88's for solo piano work) and is a nice happy medium for covering all the sounds present on the Tyros.

I come from a piano and organ background, and I'm very pleased with the way the Tyros4 feels under my fingers.

I'm tickled to hear you're going for the new one...it's always a great joy buying a new instrument. Congratulations.

Ian

HaHa! You sound a lot like me in waffling over the next big buy. I missed the boat on the Pa3X thinking that I'd hold on as the Pa900 was on the horizon. That didn't quite do it for me, and now it won't be too long before a Pa4X comes along. I must be some sort of masochist.

At the time, finances were very involved, but I was able to sell my house quickly, and some very kind people helped me through a rough spell until it did (you know who you are...thank you), and then I took the chance and invested in the Tyros4. Now that I'm on a fixed income, and on a self-imposed gigging sabbatical, it appears I made the right decision.
I'm in the process of working on some very interesting projects for next spring, and I'm pretty sure the Tyros4 will handle anything coming up.

At that time, my pension will also change for the better...more loot! Yippee!

If I do get another keyboard, again, depending on what develops, it will quite likely be a programmable synthesizer (I've been very interested in Casio's 88-note PX5S) to use in conjunction with the T4.

But, a Tyros5 is not in my plans, regardless.

You probably will go for the next PSR-S series? They seem to work best for you, and give you the best bang for the buck.

Ian

I think the terms weighted, semi-weighted, synth weighted etc., are VERY loosely thrown around. And quite often engender an argument that bears no basis in fact. I am pretty sure that the 'weight' to press a key down between a PSR and an FSX varies so little, it would be hard to tell with a blindfold...

There are four or five factors in the 'feel' of a key. Yes, the mass of the key itself (highest in real piano keys), the strength of the spring, the tightness of the hinge (how much play there is) and the feel of the key as it comes to the end of its travel. And maybe the speed of return of the key to its resting state.

While some think weight alone is the factor they can perceive when playing, to be honest, for me, I think the spring rate and the 'stop' are very discernible, but the accuracy of the hinge, its tightness (lack of play) is what I tend to feel the most when I'm judging 'quality'.

In this regard, the sort of 'wobbly' feel from the PSR's is what puts me off the most. Play a real piano, a B3, any decent synth, and that 'wobble' is almost entirely absent. There's a LOT more going on than simple weight...

But Ian... I'm pretty sure the action from my G70, which was pretty heavy just by itself, would mean a heavier case to support it, and then the BK's weight balloons. Which given how aging and weak the arranger playing demographic appears to be (strange how the aging WS playing demographic seems much stronger!), would seem to be the kiss of death to sales. Not to mention, the G70's action, being longer, means a bigger case there too.

I think the thing which peeves me most about Yamaha's decision to remain with the sub-par PSR action is the decision to put a MUCH better one in WS's costing MUCH less. Yes, obviously, you don't necessarily get the TOTL action in the MOTL keyboard. But, OTOH, you shouldn't really put the BOTL action in the MOTL either!

It's a question of respect... Do Yamaha consider their PSR customers either incapable of needing as good an action action than their WS playing brothers do, or do they consider them so gullible that tossing them this awful apology of an action won't be noticed? Or do they simply rely on the rabid defensiveness of Yamaha users to refuse to make any honest criticism of their purchase to protect them from any comparison when making this decision?

I am convinced that if Yamaha PSR users actually made a fuss, and demanded an action the equivalent of similar priced Yamaha WS's, it would be on next year's model. But keep telling the world how HAPPY you are being shafted like this, what is Yamaha's incentive..?

Well, since Roland has now relented and finally covered the geriatric set, meaning the over 50, which includes you, perhaps a real G-70 replacement is in order...even if the BK-9 "ballooned" up to 30 lbs with the addition of the G-70's action (and perhaps screen as well), it still probably would only weigh as much as a PA3X 76 or a Tyros5-76 (approx 32 lbs), and we know most of Yamaha and Korg arranger buyers/users are over 50, and how successful these products are for their respective companies.

Personally, I think Roland dropped the high end arranger ball just when a real flagship model might have instilled more buyer confidence in the company.

As you say, it's a question of respect...so, do Roland consider their now top range backing keyboard customers either incapable of needing as good an action action that was highly loved (and constantly boasted about) by their G-70 playing brothers? Or, do they consider them so gullible that tossing them this excuse of a high end action won't be noticed?

Or do they simply rely on the rabid defensiveness of Roland users to refuse to make any honest criticism (top line with no aftertouch? Come on!) of their purchase to protect them from any comparison when making this decision?

Perhaps that is just one of the reasons behind the Italian Division being sacked. Probably not, but it was bound to have some kind of influence.

Another thing to consider...Roland appears to take the initiative and introduces a 76 note very light weight, relatively cheap arranger that has been moaned and cried for by some individuals on SZ, ever since G-70 was dropped, and yet, when the BK-9's release is posted, interest in the instrument barely raises a blip on the interest/buying scale compared to the overwhelming response given to Yamaha's Tyros5-76, which, strangely enough, is far more expensive and weighs considerably more.

Rather curious, eh?

Ian

Other than no aftertouch (which I hardly use on my G70), this 'excuse' of an action is easily as good as the T5's, at nearly $3000 more, Ian.

Still far too few recognize that the BK-9 is the successor to the E60, NOT the G70. Number or Parts is the same, action quality is the same, price is about the same. A bit more to account for the ten faders missing from the E60. And the action on the E60 had no aftertouch either, along with the S950. Oh, and neither the S950 or the BK-9 have a touch screen.

Roland have yet to come out with a TOTL arranger, and given today's iffy market, probably not a bad idea. Personally, I don't need Ford to make a GT car just so they have 'credibility' for a family saloon..! If that family saloon is the best in class, who CARES if they make a supercar? LOL Likewise, if Roland don't yet feel it is the time to make a TOTL arranger, that has ZERO impact on whether the MOTL model is competitive or not.

You can get a BK-9 at only a couple of hundred bucks more than a PSR S950. THAT is its competition, and as such, the BK stacks up VERY well. 76 high quality action vs. a spongy BOTL 61. Audio loops that, well, loop! Punchy, live sounding drums without a proprietary system that covers less than 10% of the total ROM (and that you can easily edit). A Hammond to die for, a chord sequencer, some great new SA type sounds...

Shop around, you can get a BK-9 at LEAST $2000 less than a T5. The ONLY fair comparison to make with Yamaha is the S950. Now tell me how bad it is, Ian! You are going to have to actually include some real facts before you can get a rise out of me, Ian!

I wonder, by the way, if Brooster is reading this... If you want an example of someone using offshoring to bolster an untenable position, here it is. You won't find anyone as HAPPY about this issue when Yamaha moved production to China as you do here...

TBH, if you are looking for petty 'trashing' of something simply due to spite, look no further.