Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Digital Pianos - Electronic Pianos - Synths & Keyboards Ready to buy: Kawai CA63 vs MP10

Yeah, unfortunately at times like this specs won't help. It's like comparing two acoustic pianos of the same size from different manufacturers. They will have different sounds and different actions, and the marketing will point out different features, but those features just have different names in the other piano. There's no way to rank them except by personal preference (and price).

The problem is that the available technology is currently ahead of what's offered in the digital piano market. The memory is cheap and you can easily put few GB of sample memory with fast enough CPU to cope with huge data manipulation yet nobody does it (except for Nord Piano to some degree but they have low-grade piano actions). This creates frustration in the users. You know you could easily have a digital piano with gigabyte samples and different sets to choose between, coupled to an excellent keyboard, yet nobody offers it. I am exhausted by that and can't understand why is that happening. Unless I miss some simple point why digital piano manufacturers are technologically handicapped in using large memory and fast CPU-s in a digital piano. But then again, a PC worth 200$ can play GB sample libraries. So, it's matter of integration only. Or it's the market who dictates that.

You might be describing a cartel. I'm not one for conspiracy theories but there is something very fishy about the technological state of DPs relative to the technological state of every other computerised device on the planet. I think they all benefit from their backwardness, that's why they are all doing it - whether it's by collusion or emulation, they are all getting something out of this. Cheap hardware, premium prices and marketing: it's a recipe for profiteering. What is surprising is that a smaller player hasn't realised that they could produce a far superior product for the same or less money. Or maybe they have but the big manufacturers have stitched up all the distribution. Still, in time this will bust open and the real potential of DPs will start to be realised. I actually think the action is the single biggest impediment to a new company entering the market. It's easy enough to throw some computer hardware together in a nice box, but developing an action is very challenging. Companies like Fatar are still well behind Roland/Yamaha/Kawai in that respect. There must be quite a bit of R & D involved in producing an effective yet durable action.

I'd say "it depends". All of this boils down to what is important to the primary player of the DP. Though you probably shouldn't let others steer you based on their own personal preferences, there are many technical things to be aware of when choosing. The aesthetic things are also very important, though they often originate more in the mind of the beholder, so you're on your own there.

I think it would be fair to say that many people here prefer the CA63 key action (RM3) over that in the HP-307 (PHAIII). I don't have an opinion because I've never touched a CA63 or any Kawai with the RM3 action inside, though the pictures of it are fairly persuasive. The PHAIII is the same as that in our RD-700NX, and it feels on the light side of DP actions. The grading isn't too noticeable, but it seems grading isn't very prominent on any DP. Not sure about the fake ivory tops giving you trouble, ours seems to be holding up OK, but it doesn't get heavy use.

As far as technical aspects of the tone goes, I'd say listen to the comparisons at this post, where two notes of a fully sampled Yamaha are compared to both the Roland SuperNATURAL and to Kawai UPHI. To my ears, the Roland SN sound is technically closer to a that of a real piano, particularly in the decay portion. The looped Kawai decays in comparison sound dead to me. Here is another post where a chord of C notes on an SN equipped DP is directly compared to one of the best loopers out there, the Yamaha AvantGrand N3.

If you can handle the often dull decay sound of looping and are pretty sure that it will never get on your nerves in the future, then the DP world is your oyster and you should find models out there that should more or less satisfy you sonically. If not, then I'd recommend something with Roland SN, or a DP connected to a PC running fully sampled piano software. Those are pretty much the only things that are currently unlooped.

By the way, the RD-700NX has three distinct SN pianos, two of them fairly usable ("Concert" and "Studio") whereas all other DPs with SN only offer a single SN piano, which is the "Concert" in the NX. And the NX sells for around $2.5k here in the states. It has no internal speakers and no music rest, and would require you to purchase a stand.

Good luck!

And if you think about it the action (and eventual speaker system) is probably the most expensive part of the DP by far. The MP6 retails at 1400€ around here, and I bet the action and casing alone is worth close to 1000€, if you look at "similarly" specced midi controllers.

You also have to take into account the fact that developing for embedded, robust things like DPs is not the same as developing for a computer. I'm not giving them excuses, but I think they're still riding on old developments, and Korg is the first to tend to a "modern" computing approach, embedding Linux and streaming samples from a SSD. Nord have developed something along the lines of this same technology, but I bet it's still not a general purpose microprocessor nor a general purpose OS that's running the stuff. Reliable and fast Flash ROM is also expensive still, as is reliable and fast RAM. You can't compare what is asked of these DPs in terms of latency/robustness to your run of the mill netbook, or even Mac Mini. It's really not the same thing Give it some time, they'll get there.

Edit : and the margins on consumer computing equipments are far, far lower than on these low volume manufactured products DPs are, especially the high end ones.

I tend to agree. I think DP makers have put some good work into the action, because that's what is the barrier to entry (along with name recognition), but they have cheaped out on the electronics and sounds. I suspect there are a few things that contribute to this:

1. Most buyers of digitals are not super-discriminating. Otherwise they would likely have gotten acoustics instead. So why spend the money and time to make digitals sound great?

2. If digitals really sounded great, they would compete with the bigger ticket items at least Kawai and Yamaha make: acoustic pianos. Roland doesn't make acoustics so it has less incentive to dumb down its sounds. And what do we observe? Roland typically has the best sounds.

3. This is a durable goods oligopoly. So the main competition new digital pianos face is not new companies entering, it's the older pianos (acoustic and digital) that people are satisfied with and don't feel the need to replace. They have to put out new models every once in a while that are enough better that some people will upgrade (just like Microsoft does). If they were to put all the good stuff in now, people wouldn't want to upgrade for a long time--until technology had actually progressed. Instead they artificially slow down the technological progress so they can put out "improved" models year after year.

People won't over pay as much for a DP as they will for an acoustic. The one upside to DP makers is that DP's don't last as long, so they get replaced more frequently than acoustics do. But in order to cash in on this, they have to build in obsolescence.

We as consumers could help the situation somewhat by being more open to new brands, but we aren't. If it's not from one of the major manufacturers, we just don't trust it. That fact prevents new brands from entering.

1. For new brands, I think there's a different barrier to market entry: the high cost.

Forget the cost of keyboards and circuits. Consider the costs of engineering, distribution, and marketing ... especially marketing. It's not that you might not want to buy a new brand piano. It's that retailers don't have room for a new brand. This is true of all manner of goods.

In general, a retailer can only stock large varieties/brands when the goods move in high volume. The piano market is very low volume. It won't sustain many brands.

2. I agree that people are likely not very discriminating about the tone of digital pianos. I don't have any tally of peoples' preferences. But it's clear that if Y/R/K can successfully sell the same old pianos year after year, there's little reason to change.

3. I doubt that Y/K are concerned that better digital pianos would cut into their acoustic piano sales.

First, digitals aren't even close to competing with acoustics, except on price.

Second, sales of pianos to institutions (where the big money pianos are sold) aren't yet influenced. Concert halls and conservatories aren't champing to switch to digitals. The latter lack quality and prestige. (I surely wouldn't pay to see a concert pianist playing on a digital. And, would any serious student attend a conservatory that had replaced it's Steinways with digital Y's, K's, or R's?)

I agree with all that you state ando.


I read an article lately on the young woman who was tapped to lead the Yamaha AG design teams, and she said she really had to work at bringing the DP and AP divisions together, which I found somewhat surprising. It was kind of an AG puff piece though, so who knows how much of it was accurate. And why, after all that effort, they decided to loop the AG sound is beyond me. They had an opportunity to create something that might have actually lived up to the sky high levels of hype spewed by the Yamaha hype machine and in that way at least they punted.

If I were assembling a DP engineering team, I think it would be difficult to find the kinds of highly competent cross disciplined designers needed to do these kinds of products really right. The computing and interface hardware wouldn't be too much of a challenge, but getting someone to program it would be another matter. As you say the key action design would likely be very difficult because how many physical designers out there have even thought about this sort of thing? I suppose one could fall back on copying a lot of it, as I imagine even the big players in the industry tend to do, but that only gets you so far.

Then again, this bulk of this stuff isn't exactly rocket science anymore, and there's really no excuse for those with the teams already assembled and up to speed to not give us more for our money, particularly at the high end. A lot of it is probably just old engineers not keeping up with the incredible pace of computing and digital hardware lately. A lot of it is probably just simple indifference. It seems we're long overdue for something to come along and at least somewhat alter the dynamics of this market. Meanwhile we essentially have stasis with the occasional baby step or two.

Do you have a link or reference for this article, dewster? I'd be interested to read it, even if it s a puff piece.

Interesting notion. Institutions and conservatories do buy a lot of pianos--although they all seem to be the same model almost. They are expensive, durable, high quality pianos.

I guess my thought has always been that they were still only a moderate to small portion of the overall market. I don't have any inside info, but my perception is that the market for new uprights is crumbling to nothing, particularly the market for lower end uprights (the ones bought for homes and non-musical institutions). Baldwin is now gone, along with so many other earlier brands. When I go to piano stores they have fewer uprights than they used to...replaced with digitals. Essentially every digital bought means that home will not buy an upright.

The part of the market that remains (the uprights you see at piano stores) are the tall, high quality, durable ones that more affluent households (but not super affluent) and institutions buy.

As a side note, I think the situation is changing for institutions as well. Not conservatories, of course, because they are specialists--they and concert halls prefer grands anyway. But for example, much of my experience playing piano comes from the various pianos in churches I have attended as I've moved around. In my last church, the piano the children sing along with was a Kawai ensemble digital. If Yamaha and Kawai made some digitals that were light years better than the one that was already bought, these churches and other institutions (as well as more households) would buy them and then the acoustics would be firewood.

Churches, civic centers, nursing homes, elementary schools, etc. are much less discriminating than universities and there are a lot of them out there. And they don't care as much about prestige.

I guess I agree that digitals haven't displaced acoustics in many of the most important parts of Y/K's range, but it's sort of a matter of time. And if they did a truly great job on their digitals, the transition would happen faster.

I think this has already been done somewhere, but what about an "Open Source Community Driven Digital Piano Project"? There are some really smart guys to work on embedded controllers programming and circuitry and regarding keyboards, maybe Fatar can be used at first and then if the project gains popularity and possibly donations, keyboard designs can be done and even manufactured. I, for one, am ready to donate say $1000 in such a project if it's serious. Of course, it will start mostly like a home assembly kit for nerds buying some controllers and flashing them, putting everything in a home made wooden box but it could make an impact anyway. What do you think about that?

That already exists. Buy any suitable keyboard. Hook up a computer and run a piano library. And you don't have to donate $1000. You can own the complete setup for under $2000.

Don't like boxes and wires? Want an all-in-one solution? No way will that ever come from open source. They know software, but they don't do hardware.

It is suggested here, and I have seen it suggested before, that AP makers wouldn't want to cannibalize that market with DPs that are too good.

What is the relative profit margin on a DP vs. an AP? I would assume that the competition wouldn't be so much vs the higher end APs, but the lower end ones. It is not obvious to me that these manufacturers would make so much more on their APs, which also probably last longer/are resold more, that they would want to cripple the DP market for its benefit.

UPDATE #2 FROM POST AUTHOR

My partner and I just checked-out the Roland HP-307. He loved the piano ("That was way nicer sounding and feeling than I imagined it could be."), but he agreed with me that the "satin" finish was nasty.

We made an offer on the polished ebony and had to leave to get back to work. I await the phone call on whether our offer was accepted. They quoted us $4571 + tax. We offered WAY less. If they don't accept our offer (or something close), he will check out the Kawai tomorrow morning (CA63).

Thanks to everyone for a lively discussion. I am enjoying the latest twist to this thread -- we are stuck on getting something "furniture like" for our small condo, so we will be putting up with the plastic cabinet and mediocre sound system of one of these off-the-shelf DP solutions. For us, for now -- this will be just fine!

Yeah, if the piano is going to be out in the living room, you have to make it look nice. Slab style pianos can look ok, but they usually don't look like what we call "furniture".

So it sounds like you and your partner liked the Roland's feel AND touch better than the Kawai?

+1

The matte-finished Roland cabinet work looks really cheap. I suppose the PE finish is better?

I didn't like the feel of the HP series. And others here seem to like it even less. (Thunk thunk.)

I especially really really disliked the sound.

So ... the choice of Roland over Kawai is very surprising.

Not really so surprising, since not everyone shares your view! We're all looking for slightly different things from our DPs, and since Roland and Kawai are very different, in feel and tone, opinions will be divided. I appreciate certain aspects of both, and find that I prefer my Kawai for ensemble playing, and my Roland FP-7F for solo performance.

I looked like the dickens for it a few days ago to no avail. Found it just now almost immediately:

http://spectrum.ieee.org/at-work/tech-careers/dream-job-hiroko-ohmura/0

Presented without comment: "Her name appeared on several patents, including one for a keyboard display that rendered a bouncing ball above the keys, showing players which ones to press."

"She held hundreds of meetings to champion the project and build consensus." Oy, some days I'm actually glad that I'm an unemployed engineer.

"Whereas a 2.75-meter-long concert grand sells for over US $100 000, Yamaha's digital grand costs $20 000 and is just half the size. What's more, it never has to be tuned, and players can lower the volume or use headphones to avoid annoying the neighbors." Utterly unlike all other DPs with their smaller-than-a-concert-grand cases, lower-than-a-concert-grand price tags, always-in-tune crystal time bases, adjustable volume controls, headphone jacks, and other neighbor annoyance minimizing features.

Hmmm. Thanks for sharing.

I am a bit surprised that the AG is always touted as such a new concept. I mean, it's unique in that it doesn't have any current competitors--and it's a cool concept--but I don't easily see the major difference between the AG and its predecessor of many years, the GranTouch.