Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Digital Pianos - Electronic Pianos - Synths & Keyboards Yamaha CP4 vs Roland RD800?

Nord specs it at 40 stereo, 60 mono.

I think I just found the matching video demo. Again, sorry a bit OT, but still helpful:

Thanks for clarifying.

Interesting that the mono count is only half as much again as the stereo.

Showing once again that Nord has their own ways of doing things!

No, the mono need is 2/3 of the stereo need, if the ratio is 40/60, stereo/mono. That actually means, that to get from mono to stereo, it's 50% increase of used polyphony.

I always thought that stereo took up twice as much of the polyphony, as compared to mono. That is, if you play one note in mono, the piano has one less notes of polyphony at the disposal. If you play one note in stereo, it's two less notes of polyphony you have left.

P(after) = P(before) - notesPlayed(mono)
P(after) = P(before) - 2*notesPlayed(stereo)

Am I misunderstanding something, or Nord, and the latter on purpose maybe?

Edit2: About that video, soundwise, of the three, I liked the Yamaha CP4 most.

Same thing. "50% increase" means the same as "half as much again."


In most cases, yes. Nord is obviously doing something differently. That's why vox called it "interesting" in the first place.

To get back to the actual issue of polyphony limitations, Nord's approach of separate polyphony for the separate "engines" also has an advantage over some others. 40 stereo piano plus 18 synth (say, strings) means you can layer the two, and still have 40 piano notes available. On a typical board with 64 polyphony, which sounds like more, if you layered stereo piano and stereo strings, your piano polyphony would be reduced to 16!

Even with today's more common 128 polyphony boards, if you layered stereo piano and stereo strings on most boards, your piano polyphony would be down to 32, compared to the 40 you would still have on the Nord that, at first glance, appears to have less polyphony. Though of course, you'd be able to have 32 notes of strings sustaining, instead of only the last 18. Now, how beneficial it really is to have 32 notes of sustaining strings under your piano rather than 18 (and whether that's worth cutting your piano polyphony from 40 to 32) is a different question. ;-)

Anyway, the fact that Nord dedicates 40 notes of polyphony to the stereo piano may be why there are no real world complaints about it, as so many other boards that look more impressive on paper actually drop you to less than 40 once you go stereo and/or add more sounds with splits and layers.

Well, voxpops said that mono uses up half as much as stereo. He was not talking about increase, but decrease, because mono uses less than stereo. Sorry, but this confused me, my understanding of "half as much" is, that if I eat half as much of nuts as John Doe, it means, if John Doe eats 60 nuts, I eat 30.

But at least we were talking about the same thing, I see that now, and thank you for your further explanations of polyphony, anotherscott.

I see you're from Sweden, so maybe this is a language issue, but voxpops didn't say "half as much" - he said "half as much again" which is entirely different. "Half as much" means 50%. "Half as much again" means 50% more. (Or, if you prefer, 150%.) It's not the most common way to say it, but it is correct. Hopefully that clears it all up. Glad I helped on the polyphony!

Thank you, anotherscott, didn't realize that the "again" changed the meaning. Actually I'm from Iceland, but living in Sweden.

CP4 has music rest option. What do you do with RD800? No rest option, same as 700NX? Just curious what Roland owners do. I know it's not necessarily a significant feature for some. But it's a fairly important option on my checklist while shopping for my second DP.

Decent music stands placed behind the keyboard work well and won't shake the music when you dig into the keyboard. I have a CP4 but prefer to use music stand.

I can understand that. I just hate to bring additional gear to a gig. All Kawai and Yamaha have music rest option, why not Roland?? I know, Im getting OT.

Very good side-by-side comparison. Both sound very nice. Tough choice for some.

Strewth, the guy likes to jabber doesn`t he? But he eventually got the job done.

Both sounded well. But did they sound even the least like an acoustic? No. Do we want `em to? Speaking for myself, maybe now and again. The Yammie was sweeter. Can you de tune it? For Joplin . . .

I must admit I liked the Yamaha a bit better on the acoustic pianos. However, the Studio on the Roland was nice too. What is he trying to show at 9:02? Damper/string resonance comparison?

It has a "ragtime" setting on the S6 sample, but you could probably go beyond even that if you wanted.

I tried the CP4 today and was very impressed. Loved all three piano sounds. Action was good.Good Ep sounds. Weight is much less (17.5kg) than the last generation of Stage Pianos. Interface was simple, and has has enough features for everything I really need. This will probably be be the one. Not to mention the price is much less than even the RD700NX (RD800 not yet in stores in Australia).

That was an excellent demonstration video. Both keyboards sound great.

My personal preference for acoustic pianos is the Yamaha.

I liked the other non piano sounds on the Roland maybe a little tiny bit better.

I am probably going to go for the CP4 because I mainly use AP sounds, but I am waiting for the MP7 to come out just to be certain.

I hope he will do a video comparing the CP4 and MP7.

I went to GC midafternoon yesterday for something non-keyboard related. Of course I had to visit the keyboard area regardless. They had the CP4 and RD800 side by on a lower lever rack with bench and pedal on each. VERY rare for GC!! So I ran out to my car and grabbed my headphones (HD380). Timing was perfect because the place was dead midafternoon and I had quick 20 minutes to spare.

So here are my brief findings on both. However, probably nothing that hasn’t already been said on the forums:

Action: Both very good and enjoyable to play. RD800 seems to be the same as RD700NX just a bit les thumping and faintly softer touch. IMO it feels like same mechanics of RD700NX with additional felt and changed the name from PHA3 to PHA4. That’s fine. It’s still great action. CP4 feels slightly lighter than RD800. Both very similar except that you can somewhat sense the let-off in the RD800. I want to say I prefer the CP4’s action a bit more due to the wooden keys. Wood keys seem to make it more realistic but I’m not convinced that’s only in my mind. Again, both very nice feel, but neither match the authenticity of the RM3 or GF if thats what you are expecting.

Sound: I mostly played the default APs this go-round and quickly tried a few voices. Both APs very good, but different for sure. RD800, despite what some say, I found the default Concert Grand to be quite good with some minor adjustment on the EQ and tone color. The sound seems to be “cleaner” and more dynamic than the CP4 but not as rich and a little plinky. I don’t hear the metallic-like sound as much as I did in the RD700NX somewhere between C4-C6. The CP4 CFX was full and rich. At default it’s just slightly over processed with reverb with some compression perhaps and not as “clean” as RD800 but still a little more authentic. The best way I can describe “clean” is that the RD800 was very clear and dynamic with wide stereo balance. The CP4 sounds very rich and authentic but it not as clean meaning that it almost sounds like a thin sheet of cloth is covering the sound or I need a swab to clean my ears. I just could not EQ that hint of muffled-like tone out of it. Yet, I still preferred the rich tones over the RD800. Truly a matter of taste. Keep in mind that everything I say means nothing when it comes to live performance. Im demoing with flat studio headphones and these are stage pianos designed to be played live with proper amplification.

Navigation/layout/esthetics: As good as Yamaha improved it’s navigation, I think RD800 would be better for live situation. RD800 quick and easy to use. No manual needed. I found everything I was looking almost instantly. CP4 took me a bit to figure out, yet much better that the previous CP5. Does not really matter which one you buy. You still will want to study and program it before you go live. Both are built with heavy duty plastics/polymer. IMO CP5 and RD700NX were much better looking and significantly more solid. I know, but heavy. Does it matter? Not really as long as they are roadworthy which they certainly are.

Conclusion: Not easy to give a definitive conclusion after 20 minutes, but I can say that both are suited very well for any professional for live performances. The RD800 offers more in features, editing, and “usable” voices in addition to great APs and good EPs. CP4 nicely covers all the bases for great APs and great EPs with a few “usable” voices. Many of the additional CP4 voices are drum sets and way too many IMO. One thing for sure is that these upgraded models will not blow you away from the previous version. The updates are almost disappointing if you had high expectation for a big change from the CP5 or RD700NX.
My final thoughts. I would be pleased with either one. The both have plenty to offer for stage and studio. However, If I was a CP5 or RD700NX owner, I would not race out to sell or trade for either one of these unless I really needed go with a lighter DP. The upgrades seem miniscule in the big picture of what we really want or would like to see in an upgrade. Will these upgrades make your life a little easier? Maybe. Will they sound and play significantly better than predecessors? Not by much. Is this another instance of planned obsolesces? Perhaps

Very thoughtful evaluation. Thanks, Marko.