Welcome to the Piano World Piano Forums Over 3 million posts about pianos, digital pianos, and all types of keyboard instruments. Over 100,000 members from around the world.
Join the World's Largest Community of Piano Lovers
(it's free)
It's Fun to Play the Piano ... Please Pass It On!
Ah, of course, record wave in the DP. Should have thought of that, haven't yet experimented with it.
The resonance is just the given keys, each hit singly and fairly hard. Of course it also happens with other key in combination too, that is how I first heard it.
I'll get a recording today assuming it misbehaves today.
Cynthia
Roland FP-50 Conover Upright, 1888/9, but a very low mileage piano. http://www.pbase.com/schnitz/conover_upright_piano__1888_or_9 . Tuneless = Don't play piano yet but getting there. I'm technically very capable. I love my piano and love tinkering with it.
Hi, this is my first post. I thought I will just contribute my views to this thread. But first a introduction, I self-learned the classical guitar and harmonica. Have been playing mainly classical pieces on the guitar for about 7 years. The blues harmonica is my second musical instrument for 3 years.
I am a newbie to the world of DP. Here are my thoughts:
1) I read through two old manuals: FP-7 and KF-7 in order to understand the general workings of Roland DP better. I am struck by how much clearer the explaination compared to the manual of FP-80! e.g.
i) To delete a saved song, the steps are placed in a different chapter.
ii) I got to understand how to play one finger chord mainly from reading the older manuals. Hints from the FP-7 enabled me to decipher the FP-80 manual better.
iii) The button placement diagrams are quite difficult to see with my aging eyes.
iv) What happened to the tone list from 32 - 296? Just to save a few cents in printing cost, does it mean I have to get a iPad to see the tones in a table format? Anyone have the full tone listing?
Now comes to the technical aspect of the comparsion. I hope you bear with me if you think the questions are dumb as I have very limited knowledge.
1) In FP-7, one can record your own chord progression. I could not find this in the FP-80. Is this present? Or is there a workaround?
2) My wife who is more muscially inclined then me, was helping me to create a riff of a favorite pop song. She commented that she could not find the beat-pattern e.g. "8-beat Funk ", "16-beat Pop" , that is present in the FP-7e manual but not available in FP-80. Am I missing something or is there are workaround?
Generally, on the whole I am satisfied with the FP-80. The sound to my ears are pleasant, it makes practice more fun with a wide range of tones and music accompaniment.
I believe you can also record your cord progressions on the FP-80, but you probably have to stick a USB stick in the back and record as SMF. SMF is only Midi data.
Roland praising their "Super Natural" engine in all their videos, sounds like they were awarded some prize for that technology.
Can anyone confirm this?
I think we all see through the marketing and make a choice for ourselves. Boasting from all the big brands can get a little annoying. For example -
Roland: "Roland’s award-winning V-Piano." "SuperNatural is one of the most profound music technology breakthroughs for electronic instruments." Yamaha: "simply the best stage piano Yamaha has ever made." "The Ultimate Luxury in Piano Performance." Kawai: "The most authentic keyboard, the most realistic sound, and the most articulate control." ( at least the keyboard might actually be true!)
Can anyone tell me if the second and third pianos on the FP-50, Ballade and Bright, are stereo? When I switched from Concert to Ballade, there seemed to be some kind of change to the sound in my ear phones, but I couldn't tell if it was going from stereo to mono. I guess I am just not that sonically sensitive or educated to tell.
The resonance that blooms at about a half second into the sound and then rapidly fades on B1 is missing on the Ballade and Bright, so, since I really can't see a lot of difference in the sound between Concert and Ballade, I will use Ballade, but not if it is Mono.
Cynthia
Roland FP-50 Conover Upright, 1888/9, but a very low mileage piano. http://www.pbase.com/schnitz/conover_upright_piano__1888_or_9 . Tuneless = Don't play piano yet but getting there. I'm technically very capable. I love my piano and love tinkering with it.
If it's a similar sound engine to my piano (HP 302), then yes, the Ballade and Bright pianos are stereo - and SN generated, I'm almost sure, but 'Rock Piano' and 'Honky-Tonk' are mono.
Concert Grand is the most realistic in my opinion - extremely lively and '3 dimensional'. Ballade is actually better - sweeter - in the usual melody-playing region, so suits romantic pieces such as Schumann and Chopin.
Bright is bright - not so subtle, but with a stronger presence especially in the mid - mid-high regions.
Roland praising their "Super Natural" engine in all their videos, sounds like they were awarded some prize for that technology.
Can anyone confirm this?
I think we all see through the marketing and make a choice for ourselves. Boasting from all the big brands can get a little annoying. For example -
Roland: "Roland’s award-winning V-Piano." "SuperNatural is one of the most profound music technology breakthroughs for electronic instruments." Yamaha: "simply the best stage piano Yamaha has ever made." "The Ultimate Luxury in Piano Performance." Kawai: "The most authentic keyboard, the most realistic sound, and the most articulate control." ( at least the keyboard might actually be true!)
I always appreciate your diplomatic approach.
Saying your the "best," is not bringing up any technology achievement and any co. could use same slogan.
Saying "SN is one of the most profound music technology breakthroughs," gives me the impression that independent research was done and it was deemed a "techno-logic breakthrough," or it's a reach, IMO, the way they portray it.
I'm discussing this cause I liked the pre-SN sound. I don't hate the new sounds with SN but I haven't been able to warm up to them as much.
Like I've talked about in previous threads, I changed back to Yamaha only cause Roland doesn't market a DP that fits my needs, but I'm still interested in staying up to date with all DP's.
Anyone can confirm whether Digiscore Lite works on the FP-80? Is it a worthwhile investment to buy the iPad for this particular app if it works?
The DigiScore Lite function doesn't work on the FP-80.
DigiScore Lite is dependent on the DigiScore Processor being present as hardware on the piano. So while The new HP series and LX, F130R and RP401R have the chip on board, the FP Series (being a couple of years old) Do not.
One thing Piano Partner does REALLY well on the FP Series though, is arranger control for the built in styles.
Roland praising their "Super Natural" engine in all their videos, sounds like they were awarded some prize for that technology.
Can anyone confirm this?
I think we all see through the marketing and make a choice for ourselves. Boasting from all the big brands can get a little annoying. For example -
Roland: "Roland’s award-winning V-Piano." "SuperNatural is one of the most profound music technology breakthroughs for electronic instruments." Yamaha: "simply the best stage piano Yamaha has ever made." "The Ultimate Luxury in Piano Performance." Kawai: "The most authentic keyboard, the most realistic sound, and the most articulate control." ( at least the keyboard might actually be true!)
I always appreciate your diplomatic approach.
Saying your the "best," is not bringing up any technology achievement and any co. could use same slogan.
Saying "SN is one of the most profound music technology breakthroughs," gives me the impression that independent research was done and it was deemed a "techno-logic breakthrough," or it's a reach, IMO, the way they portray it.
I'm discussing this cause I liked the pre-SN sound. I don't hate the new sounds with SN but I haven't been able to warm up to them as much.
Like I've talked about in previous threads, I changed back to Yamaha only cause Roland doesn't market a DP that fits my needs, but I'm still interested in staying up to date with all DP's.
-- Ha! I try to be diplomatic because the big brand's technology and marketing are very similar. No one big brand is better or worse than the other IMO. We are the ones that scrutinize the heck out of them in every way down to every detail. So, badly that aside of sound alone some make a decision on their purchase because one board might be an inch or pound less than the other, or sliders vs knobs, or keyboard action slightly to fast or slow, etc, etc. You know what I mean. No one brand is going to be the best of ALL features for every musician. Like you say, I'm still interested in staying up to date with all DP's. So, I guess im just diplomatic by default by seeing the best and worst of each brand equally.
-- I get what you say about "SN is one of the most profound music technology breakthroughs," gives me the impression that independent research was done". Well, there might be some breakthrough technology in there but Roland can not claim it all. That's like saying Al Gore single-handedly invented the internet. Roland did not invent sound sampling or modeling. If anything, Yamaha probably spearheaded modeling technology and Kurzweil on the sampling. Roland just new how to use it and market it best IMO (I can be completely wrong here). Regardless, Roland gets a lot of millage out of that SN branding. "SuperNatural" reads better than "Semi-Sampled Semi-Sound Modeling Hybrid Engine".
-- Somewhat like you, I must admit Im not a huge fan of the SN "NX" APs sounds. Im not sure if the FP80 shares that same AP sound. Regardless, I was not blown away by the FP-80 sound in the video, but still sounds very good. However, I am extremely fond of the latest SN Concert Grand and EPs.
-- Somewhat like you, I must admit Im not a huge fan of the SN "NX" APs sounds. Im not sure if the FP80 shares that same AP sound. Regardless, I was not blown away by the FP-80 sound in the video, but still sounds very good. However, I am extremely fond of the latest SN Concert Grand and EPs.
Fair enough. I could easily live with the Roland sound, not like my experiences with the mighty Red DP. When I owned a FP7, I believe it was a step behind the latest RD700, so you're probably right that the FP-80 has the NX sounds. I do think the RD800 is an amazing board and if they made a strictly DP model without the added 5" pitchbend section and more traditional case with a place for a music rest, I might of thought about it. The FP7 bottoming out and weight was the main reasons I downsized to the FP4, so I hope that's better on 800.
But How I understand It is not compatible with FP-80! (At the same time compatible with RD-700, RD-300, FP-50) Why Roland has not thought about FP-80 customers by this way?
It has been a good month since I received my FP-50, so now I will give my thoughts on the FP-50. I am very happy with the clean look of the DP and really like the white. I chose that color because my cataracts are getting a bit worse and the lighting is really important to see good contrast. The dark lettering on the white keyboard is much easier to see in good or bad lighting.
My initial feel that the base end of the piano was too loud has been remedied with the use of the EQ. I could use some kind of primer on this, but my crude understanding has at least made things fairly usable. I am currently using the following settings and any comments would be appreciated: LO Gn -5 , Fq 100 LM Gn -2 , Fq 200 , Q 20 HM Gn 1 , Fq 500 , Q 20 HI Gn 1 , Fq 80K
The odd resonances in the B1(piano 1)/C2(piano 3) notes at fff are not troubling, so I can just ignore the fact that it can happen occasionally if I am beating on the keyboard too hard.
However, something else really does bother me. There is a hard knocking sound in the samples for a number of the notes around B4/C5. and it is there in all 3 of the first AP sounds, it is just stronger on different notes for each of the pianos. It sounds as tho there was a problem with the key bed of the original acoustic piano used for the recordings. This problem is a very clear finger print of the original piano, so I will steadfastly claim that the recordings are of the same piano, but probably with some hammer voicing in between the recording sessions of each.
If you have an FP-50, F20, and probably an FP-80, tho also probably other Roland DPs, and you have not heard this, I can tell you how to make it easier to hear. But I warn you, like the centipede that was asked which foot it moved first couldn't walk thereafter, you may not want to have this sound pointed out to you. One needs only to run the reverb up to 10, and the initial knocking sound will be heard as slightly delayed due to the echo of the reverb.
I am quite shocked to be unable to find any reports of this on Piano World. Maybe I am not using the right key words. So please point out any discussions of this I may have missed. I would chastise Roland for allowing this to remain in their sound samples, but at this point I suspect that they are between a rock and a hard place, as so many say they are really fond of the Roland sound, and how can you correct this without going out and doing a whole new sampling set. The piano may not be around anymore, and messing with the hammers for voicing will mean that there may not be the ability to capture the same sound, and of course just recording the individual bad notes is out of the question since the piano cannot be expected to sound the same generally with the passing time or voicing. Adding a truly independent acoustic piano to the set of sounds would have been appreciated.
So why do I see it and not other people? Probably because I am playing very few notes at a time (easy piano) and play them slowly so that I hear almost all the notes very clearly. They are not masked by multiple notes or the speed of flying fingers. I have made do so far by turning the reverb off completely, but this is not 100% effective, and I still get a little annoyed at times. And it does not take fff to hear it, so my normal playing intensity causes me to hear this sound.
This is annoying enough that I went back to my spread sheet to review my possible choice of DP, but nothing on the sheet comes close to checking off all the required boxes, so I am going to live with this. And maybe the problems I know are still better than the problems yet to be discovered in another DP. I will eventually be getting a Surface Pro 3 and will be adding some software pianos. I hope that I can do so and still use the built-in accompaniment and especially the adaptive accompaniment while using the software pianos.
I bought the Kaces 15KB bag for the keyboard but have yet to pack the dp into it.
Addendum: I have mentioned it elsewhere, but for completeness I will put it here, the amplifiers for the speakers have way more power than is usable for the speakers, and over driving will happen in the upper end. Combined midrange and tweeter is no doubt the cause of the distortion. The FP-80 solves this problem by having separate tweeters. But the weight of the FP-80 is beyond what I can handle. It has been noted by another that trying to use the left side of the key board of the FP-50 for a base accompaniment on stage just does not work because of the distortion. http://www.pianoworld.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/2247359
Cynthia
Roland FP-50 Conover Upright, 1888/9, but a very low mileage piano. http://www.pbase.com/schnitz/conover_upright_piano__1888_or_9 . Tuneless = Don't play piano yet but getting there. I'm technically very capable. I love my piano and love tinkering with it.