Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Digital Pianos - Electronic Pianos - Synths & Keyboards All about Roland FP-80 & FP-50!!!

I read Tim Praskins review, and would say that it is one of the least biased and most objective reviews he has put out there, given that he usually tries to steer you toward the brands/models he can (presumably) sell and make the most profit from.

I totally agree with him about the issue with the accompaniments, which are generally superb, but which use the lowermost note you play to compute the bass note on the first beat (rather than analyzing the chord/inversion and providing an option for the system to select the root). Fortunately, I don't need accompaniments, but their overall sophistication surprised me.

The only phrase I would take issue with is this one: "I wish Roland had put their best PHAIII key action (which has some upgraded improvements) on the FP80" This strikes me as flannel, and indicates that the writer lacks any real knowledge in this area. What "upgraded improvements" are there in PHAIII? Has he swallowed the Roland marketing pill? Doesn't he know that Ivory-S is a version of PHAIII? Unfortunately, it's statements like this that are shot through Mr. Praskin's reviews and make me doubt his claim to be an "expert piano adviser." I would trust the opinions of many forum members before that of a salesman.

That aside, I would say that, if you're not interested in an analysis or comparison of the actual piano sounds and their technical implementation, the review is fair and balanced.

I agree, the actions' statements are sketchy and perfunctory. IMHO he also exaggerated the -G action disadvantages by that "it is sluggish & noisy and it's better to spend more money (or even less) on something that will be a better longer term investment"
Gosh...Longer term investments?

I haven't tried the FP-50' for long enough to observe it thoroughly, but it is anyway not worse than ... say PX-5S' + Roland' usual price&quality.

He makes it pretty clear that he like the ES7 over the FP80 if you read the comments below under the ES7 review:

-

Yes, I was a little surprised that he thinks the G action is noisy; I don't think it's much worse or better than most DP actions in that respect, and it feels a little better cushioned than the FP-7F's action (I haven't played the 80). As for the sluggishness that some describe, the G action requires more effort to play than some actions, and doesn't feel quite as fluid as the action in the PX-5S, but it actually responds better/faster, IMO. It's not my favorite action, but it's not a bad compromise for a smaller, lighter chassis.

As for the "longer term investment", I didn't spot that first time around, but yes, if only! Lol!!! Actually, given the relative demand for the old FP-4 over the FP-7, I would say the reverse is true. The lightweight FP-4, with its compromised "alpha" action still commands a good price, whereas you can hardly give the FP-7 (with PHAII) away.

I think that's OK if it's in the comments section, and he's expressing an honest personal opinion. Everyone's bound to have a preference. You just need to be aware of the sales-driven bias that creeps into most of his reviews. As far as this one goes, it's really not too bad.

Praskins is not always so kind of competition to his favorite pets, Kawai and Casio. He trashed the Korg SP280 in a review in april.

I think folk were expecting more from Korg with the 280. . .

Todd, I am not saying that the website owner (Praskins?) doesn't have biases. I am just saying that the particular review that you selected does not support your claim of a negative bias against Roland. In fact, this specific review is quite positive of the Roland FP-80, and gives it a glowing recommendation.

Certainly, there may exist other reviews on his site in which a case might be made against Praskins's objectivity and impartiality...but this is not one of them.

In England the Fp-80 is nearly £400 more expensive than the ES7. The Fp-50 costs about the same as the ES7. Yamaha P-155 also costs about the same as the ES7.

There all Japanese companies so not sure why it is that Kawai's prices over here are so much better than Roland and especially Yamaha compared to the US.

This coincidence obviously means the fact FP-80 is just great )))
Really, whats bad in there against the ES-7? It is not easy to be biased here...

I spent lots of time hesitating between those two, and the difference in action weighed down the balance even with EU prices, but... I think for the price difference I would go for ES-7 if the action was the same with no look to SN and VH and more styles and whatever.

After reading all 13 pages in this thread .... I'm getting a little curious for this 'metallic overtone'.

So is there an example of 'the roland metallic overtone' on youtube ??

Good deal on a used if you live in California

http://www.guitarcenter.com/In-Store-Used-USED-ROLAND-FP80-109329159-i3329174.gc

I love the FP-7's action and sound, so I couldn't just let you throw out this comment without responding. PHAII is somewhat similar to grands I've played, if not better! The speakers are quite good too, surprising in their bass response. And as far as I know, its resale value is holding up well, thank you.

Darn, I thought I'd got away with it!

I, too, very much like the sounds of the FP-7/FP-4, and found the PHAIII action (pretty much the same as PHAII except for the extra sensor) to be a fine action. I was basing my comments on what I'd seen in terms of resale on Craigslist and eBay - however, I haven't been keeping a close watch, and it's perfectly possible that what I've seen is not a representative sample.

My take: FP7 feels a lot better than the FP4 (which still feels better than the FP4F)... but FP7 is way to heavy to gig with.

lol. I take it to a gig every now and then, and it's definitely a workout at over 50 lbs! That's one big reason I'm interested in the FP-50.

I won't hold it against you.

That, plus the wide range of useful functions/features, is why I think there is still a demand for the FP-4 - it's just so easy to tote.

The FP-50 is good, if not earth shattering. I haven't gigged mine yet, and that will be the acid test. I was expecting very little difference between the RD-64 and FP-50 in terms of basic sounds, and sold my original RD-64 to get the FP-50 (wanted a few more keys!). However, there is definitely more punch and sparkle to the RD, and so I ended up with both.

You list the Nord Piano. What are your thoughts on it compared to the Rolands? I like the idea of downloading new piano sounds, but the cost is prohibitive, isn't it?

The Nord and the Rolands are just so totally different, it's actually quite difficult to draw comparisons - however, I'll try!

I just love the three newest Nord grand pianos (Yamaha Bright Grand, Fazioli and Bosendorfer). They do actually sound like real pianos. They all seem to have quite long attack samples, but the decay loop can be obvious, and a little unappealing, once it kicks in. When I first started using the Nord V5 pianos on an Electro 3, I was put off by the rather odd-sounding release samples. Later models of Nord instruments had the option to use "Long Release," which smoothed out the release, rather like worn dampers. However, on these latest samples, and using the Nord Piano (Mk1), I find the original release samples more authentic.

As many have attested, the Nord pianos sound quite raw (unprocessed), and if you're used to highly processed samples (such as Roland's APs) these sound almost stark. They have a little bit of a problem when you hit the top octave or so, in that they seem to thin out markedly. This is very noticeable when playing them live. They also require excellent amplification, and I've had to tweak quite a bit to get the right stage sound. At home, running them through Yamaha HS80Ms, they sound great, and they record beautifully.

The Nord's EPs are getting long in the tooth, and I think Korg and Yamaha (with their SCM EPs) have surpassed Nord. However, I still like the original Nord MkI and MkV EPs, and think the Wurlitzer is remarkable for such a small sample. The interface helps here, too, in that you can add effects and EQ immediately. I also like the "LIVE" function, which stores tweaks as you go.

The Fatar action on the NP is underwhelming. For a $3k board it stinks, to be quite honest. But you can get the job done with it. As for the free downloads, yes, that's a major feature of the Nord range, and with the NP2 you gain access to a vast library of sounds in addition to the pianos (as long as you're OK with a single layer and very limited filter control).

On the other hand, the Roland AP sound is rich, thick, dark and quite processed. It can also be a problem amplifying the Roland pianos in a band setting. The sound can be woolly/bassy and get lost among other instruments, but the smoothness of response make them delightful to play. The SN pianos seem to use the same base samples that have been around for some years, but they've been fattened up, and the SN unlooped decay sounds way more authentic than most of the competition's pianos. There is a slightly dull quality to the sound, that then becomes metallic at high velocities, but velocity layer switching is inaudible. Both of Roland's current actions are better, IMO, than the Nord's Fatar, although the Ivory-feel G can feel a little "ponderous" - not bad though for the size and weight of the G boards.

Roland's EPs have been questionable for some time, and although the FP-50/80 EPs are much better than before, they don't rank with the best. Panel controls are now pretty limited on the FP range, but you can menu-dive and do some fairly extensive tweaking of the APs. EPs, however, are WYSIWYG except for being able to alter the rate of modulation. They tout these EPs as being "SuperNATURAL based," but they don't have any SN-type control, and they seem to be watered down generally - at least in the FP-50.

The older FP4/7 have thinner and, arguably, easier to amplify sounds. They sound very similar to the later SN models, but have noticeable layer transitions and looping. They don't respond quite as smoothly. Some of the older EPs have a distinctive and rather attractive sound. For band work, these instruments still have a lot going for them.