Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Digital Pianos - Electronic Pianos - Synths & Keyboards The Emperor's New Clothes and the sound of DPs

To me most DPs of today sound fantastic. I absolutely love the sound of my new DP. However, are we DP owners biased when listening to DP sounds (our own in particular)? What do you think?

Yes we are biased. Once you have spent a lot of money on something there is an incentive to feel that you made the right choice. When I try to be more objective I have to conclude that digital pianos are just toys in comparison to the real thing.

I spent a lot of money on a Clavinova ... and I think the sound stinks. So I use piano libraries instead. The $2500 I spent on the piano has not convinced me that it (or any) digital sounds good. Rather, I'm convinced that no digital sounds at all like a piano (save for the AG and other high-priced units that I've never tried).

which model of clavinova u are using?

It's fascinating how polarized people are about the AG. It's fair to say it sounds 99% like the $100,000 9-foot grand it emulates. Digital fans find it crazy to not plunk down a mere $12-15K to get very close to that $100,000 sound, and with a real grand action to boot!

Acoustic fans are totally turned off by that other 1%. They hear it as a RECORDING of a fancy piano, which of course is technically what it is. They find that sound unacceptable.

There are, indeed, certain imperfections in the sound of an acoustic that cannot be digitalized. Whether those minor mysteries are irrelevant (as is true for most AG fans) or the very soul of a piano sound (as is true for those turned off by the AG) is a matter of subjectivity and not science.

Acoustic piano players do, it's true, tend to look down on digitals. When one compares a good acoustic to a bad digital, that's not a hard call to make. A bad acoustic to a good digital? Different story.

But I'm more bemused by the fact that THE most scathing attacks on AGs come from owners of other DPs, especially Rolands. The reverse is also true -- more than one troll thread attacking Rolands has popped up here.

I'll be leaving the world of DPs for the acoustic world in about 90 minutes. Maybe I'll be able to send back messages from the other side.

IMO 99% is too fair.


It's not a mystery as to what is wrong with the AG sound. They chopped off the decays and replaced them with short, overprocessed loops. And the sympathetic resonance could be improved. At this price point, and particularly with the way Yamaha markets it, expectations tend to run higher than normal. It's probably fine for a lot of folks and a lot of situations, but you can't use it for serious solo recording.

My main issue with the AG sound is that Yamaha overpromises and underdelivers.

As there are a skillion threads about AGs, I'm not sure how I can readily find these comments. Can you (or anyone else) summarize the gist of Roland owners criticisms of the AG?

On the contrary I am convinced that every digital piano that I have heard sounds like a piano (not necessarily one that I like or would want to own) but very few play like one.

Having a realistic piano action and 'realistic' samples and/or modelling is not enough. The way the two interract is everything and the best and most responsive of the current DPs really do get it right and are very good musical instruments in their own right, but not direct substitutes for an excellently constructed and prepared acoustic grand.

First, I confess I'm on the same basic side of the fence as you are, dewster, though clearly you have a much better grasp of the technical differences separating AG sound from the real thing than I do.

Let's say you're right. Let's call it arbitrarily 89% instead of 99%, OK? If someone (clearly not you or me) isn't bothered by that "11%" separating the AG sound from the YIIS 9-foot grand, then doesn't it make for a good choice for that person? It would save them at least $85,000!

That said, I admit I'd much rather the sound of a real U3 than the almost-real sound of a 9-foot grand, as produced by the AG. Yet, I consider those who hear it differently kind of lucky!

Two varieties: Sampled sound of AGs said to be inherently inferior to modelled sound of Roland V-Pianos; and second, that using a Roland (or other keyboard) to drive certain computer pianos produces better sound than the sound from AG speakers.

Whether this might reflect the sort of "selection bias" mentioned by an earlier poster on this thread I'll leave to you to consider.

Thank you.

Are you referring to the technical details regarding the sampling (which would sail over my head) or to the acoustic pianos that are being sampled? If, by chance, it's the latter, it begs the question, what monster acoustic piano is the Roland sampling?

Both, I think, but more the former than the latter. Roland V-Pianos, as I understand them, do not rely on sampling at all -- but I'll let a Roland defender with more knowledge them mine address that point.

I don't think we are biased in favor of our digitals. If anything, I think I'm biased against it. Whatever instrument I play frequently (whether acoustic or digital) I start to find all the flaws with it and I really notice them when I play.

The upright I play most frequently almost can't play pianissimo at all, the key depth is very shallow, and it has a terribly harsh tone and keeps a tune for about 5 minutes (it's an older Yamaha). The grand I play most often isn't very responsive and its tone is very closed and ill (it's an older Kawai RX3). My digital has a too-heavy action that makes me tired and the onboard sounds sound synthesized (Kawai MP8).

The only thing I haven't found a problem with is my current sound generator, Vintage D. I've found problems with every set of speakers and headphones I've used, but the tone itself is almost perfect for my taste if you look past the limitations of the speakers or headphones.

I've played pianos with actions that truly satisfied (acoustics) but not regularly. I am beginning to wonder if I would change my opinion about them if I played them more frequently. Eventually I'll get to that greener grass on the other side of the fence!

Well I guess if I really expensive acoustic piano cost $2,500 and weighed 50 pounds there's a lot more folks hereabouts would be suffering from "grass is greener" syndrome. If you fall out of love with that Steinway you bought last month that weighs a metric boatload and cost most than your car...well, you don't usually end up switching to a different brand very soon.

That's a very good point, Brent. The cheap-and-easily-replaced aspect of digitals kind of drives our ability to want to upgrade all the time.

My parents bought a yucky little spinet for $200 at least 35 years ago (they have pictures of me in front of it as a newborn) and said they would just keep it for a year or two until they could buy a nicer piano. Guess what's still sitting in their living room after having 7 kids learn to play on it?

CLP240.

Sign me up for one of those!

And if DPs had sound generators more on par with VSTs there would be even less suffering here.

[.

Question, Dave: What is your impression of the sound of AvantGrands in that regard? Toy? Sort of toy? OK? Not OK?