Welcome to the Piano World Piano Forums
Over 2.7 million posts about pianos, digital pianos, and all types of keyboard instruments
Join the World's Largest Community of Piano Lovers (it's free)
It's Fun to Play the Piano ... Please Pass It On!

SEARCH
Piano Forums & Piano World
(ad)
Best of Piano Buyer
 Best of Piano Buyer
(ad)
Piano Life Saver - Dampp Chaser
Dampp Chaser Piano Life Saver
Find a Professional
Our Classified Ads
Find Piano Professionals-

*Piano Dealers - Piano Stores
*Piano Tuners
*Piano Teachers
*Piano Movers
*Piano Restorations
*Piano Manufacturers

Advertise on Piano World

(ad)
Accu-Tuner
Sanderson Accu-Tuner
Who's Online Now
123 registered members (AnthonyPaulO, AAC127, andrea monza, Bean23, agraffe, AWilley, Beardog, 32 invisible), 1,647 guests, and 4 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
(ad)
Estonia Pianos
Estonia Pianos
Quick Links to Useful Piano & Music Resources
Quick Links:
*Advertise On Piano World
*Free Piano Newsletter
*Online Piano Recitals
*Piano Recitals Index
*Piano & Music Accessories
*Live Piano Venues
*Music School Listings
* Buying a Piano
*Buying A Acoustic Piano
*Buying a Digital Piano
*Pianos for Sale
*Sell Your Piano
*How Old is My Piano?
*Directory/Site Map
*Virtual Piano
*Music Word Search
*Piano Videos
*Virtual Piano Chords & Scales
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 62 of 95 1 2 60 61 62 63 64 94 95
Re: New Series of HP and LX Pianos from Roland [Re: Nordomus] #2515647
02/28/16 12:13 PM
02/28/16 12:13 PM
Joined: Oct 2015
Posts: 40
London, UK
C
CPShines Offline
Full Member
CPShines  Offline
Full Member
C

Joined: Oct 2015
Posts: 40
London, UK
Originally Posted by Nordomus
Originally Posted by Hendrik42
If 10% of the keys, i.e. nine, make a significant different sound than the others, I would consider this a quality issue.

In fact, I had an issue with 5% of my CN35 keys and contacted Kawai. They sent a technician who fixed it: it was about adding lube to the right point in the action.

That's what I think as well, I'd like to know what Roland owners think about this as well though.


I've not noticed any unwanted sound from the keys on my HP605.


HP605
(ad) ROLAND

Click Here

Re: New Series of HP and LX Pianos from Roland [Re: yb] #2515652
02/28/16 12:24 PM
02/28/16 12:24 PM
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 1,217
Vancouver, BC
JayGVan Offline OP
1000 Post Club Member
JayGVan  Offline OP
1000 Post Club Member

Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 1,217
Vancouver, BC
Originally Posted by yb
Originally Posted by Statue

Given the above I'm not sure if I'm missing your concern or not


Probably, but neither of us are going to gain anything by another long post.

It's moot anyway now. I spent a long time looking at Roland's products and their guy just sighed so I went somewhere else smile


I regret you felt like you had to go somewhere else.

I sighed because your point, although fervently made, is not a new one. It has been addressed several times in the course of this thread. By myself and others.

Jay


Formerly in the business. Now just a piano fan.
Re: New Series of HP and LX Pianos from Roland [Re: CPShines] #2515670
02/28/16 02:21 PM
02/28/16 02:21 PM
Joined: Mar 2014
Posts: 699
N
Nordomus Offline
500 Post Club Member
Nordomus  Offline
500 Post Club Member
N

Joined: Mar 2014
Posts: 699
Originally Posted by CPShines
Originally Posted by Nordomus
Originally Posted by Hendrik42
If 10% of the keys, i.e. nine, make a significant different sound than the others, I would consider this a quality issue.

In fact, I had an issue with 5% of my CN35 keys and contacted Kawai. They sent a technician who fixed it: it was about adding lube to the right point in the action.

That's what I think as well, I'd like to know what Roland owners think about this as well though.


I've not noticed any unwanted sound from the keys on my HP605.

OK, thank you for the info, someone else?

Re: New Series of HP and LX Pianos from Roland [Re: JayGVan] #2515676
02/28/16 02:43 PM
02/28/16 02:43 PM
Joined: Jun 2013
Posts: 1,304
P
Pete14 Offline
1000 Post Club Member
Pete14  Offline
1000 Post Club Member
P

Joined: Jun 2013
Posts: 1,304
A yamaha-guy recently took a swing at me, so I went somewhere else.
Turns out, I also managed to annoy that other (kawai) guy.
I'm now left with a few piano-guys to try; if they sigh, or worse, take a swing at me, I will have no choice but to go back to the yamaha-guy!

(ad)
Piano & Music Accessories
piano accessories music gifts tuning and moving equipment
Re: New Series of HP and LX Pianos from Roland [Re: yb] #2515680
02/28/16 02:49 PM
02/28/16 02:49 PM
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 368
Greenwich, London, United King...
D
DazedAndConfused Offline
Full Member
DazedAndConfused  Offline
Full Member
D

Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 368
Greenwich, London, United King...
Originally Posted by yb
Originally Posted by mcoll
He may be right in many ways, but he is still missing the point. They are home pianos. Not a v-piano for artists, professional.
You want to keep it simple with them. Just being a great piano is the goal here, not ultimate customization.
Sure, there are some users which would like those options (and I believe the people of the forum don't very well represent the general population), but for most people, more options would just be confusing and would complicate things in an unwanted manner.
You should keep this in mind.


But this, to me, is why it's so illogical.

If I'm going to buy these because I'm actually googling for "physical modelling" and I care about changing these parameters then I'm out of luck. If the message is, as you seem to be implying "these pianos are dumbed down for Roland's customers" then fine - I think that's just insulting their customers though because, as I said, if someone buys a real acoustic piano and they want, say, a mellower sound, they get a piano tuner to come and he or she physically changes their piano. Roland, you're suggesting, would sell this customer a tambourine to avoid them having to make a decision about hammers laugh

I think a pianist who has played a real piano would relate perfectly to many of the parameters you can change in a physically modelled virtual piano.

It's like an arcade racing game might have a slider that says "oversteer" at one end and "understeer" at the other. A better simulation with a physical model would talk about tyre material, tyre pressure, suspension yadda yadda yadda - the end result of changing these parameters would be a car that tended towards oversteer or understeer. But trying to say "Well, car drivers don't really understand these things" is not really true. Most car drivers know what tyres are.

You could argue that it's simpler to move a slider, but I would argue that's just at the expense of actually being able to use the physical model.

The other point I tried to make is , if I'm this supposed naive customer who doesn't care how the sound is made or who doesn't want to sit and change parameters, well, then why only configure 4 piano sounds for me?

Surely one of the main aspects of a physically modelled virtual piano is the ability to sound like myriad different pianos? So why doesn't it? You know, for guitar players they are doing this kind of thing now, and they model amps and a couple of companies are trying to model guitars. So you get a box and it's trying to sound like Marshall, Fender or mesa boogie amps etc and a guitar with some kind of digital interface to sound like les paul and fender and a banjo and an acoustic guitar, 12 string, and also to let you change the tuning to drop D or whatever without having to actually tune the guitar.

How well do they do? Well, it's early days. They sort of sound a bit like a les paul, in the same way that some of the physical modelled pianos sort of sound a bit like a Steinway D. There might be something a tad artificial about them. Getting an electric guitar to sound like an acoustic or a banjo is a stretch. But you can see where they are going and why - and you can also see why a guitar player might think "This is great technology" - not because he has a degree in physics or comp sci - but because you put a box and guitar in his room that makes a passable attempt at imitating tens of thousands of pounds of real guitars and amps.

My question is, if these pianos are physically modelled then why don't they act like it?

Saying "it's because our customers don't care" seems flawed. They'll care about something that physical modelling can offer them otherwise, if they don't then physical modelling is an expensive waste of time researching and developing.

They don't appear to be trying to sell the piano to me, nor to this hypothetical customer who just looks at the spec sheet on digital pianos. I gave one example where for every other model of sample-based Roland piano from FP30 upwards, the more you pay, the more piano sounds (and other sounds) the piano has. Perhaps there are some other changes too like a more expensive action or bigger speakers, more polyphony and so on, but watch any video of a roland employee on youtube doing a demo and they are going through the different sounds. More is always better right in the eyes of this naive consumer. That's why the F130r is now the F140r. Or the LX15 is the LX17.

When the guy from Roland just sighs at you when when you tell him "I can't see the point in spending the money on this product" I suppose I have my answer.


The V-Piano and V-Piano Grand have not been discontinued. You should demo one of those.

Re: New Series of HP and LX Pianos from Roland [Re: DazedAndConfused] #2515693
02/28/16 03:17 PM
02/28/16 03:17 PM
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 5,638
Hobart, Australia
A
ando Offline
5000 Post Club Member
ando  Offline
5000 Post Club Member
A

Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 5,638
Hobart, Australia
Originally Posted by DazedAndConfused
Originally Posted by yb
Originally Posted by mcoll
He may be right in many ways, but he is still missing the point. They are home pianos. Not a v-piano for artists, professional.
You want to keep it simple with them. Just being a great piano is the goal here, not ultimate customization.
Sure, there are some users which would like those options (and I believe the people of the forum don't very well represent the general population), but for most people, more options would just be confusing and would complicate things in an unwanted manner.
You should keep this in mind.


But this, to me, is why it's so illogical.

If I'm going to buy these because I'm actually googling for "physical modelling" and I care about changing these parameters then I'm out of luck. If the message is, as you seem to be implying "these pianos are dumbed down for Roland's customers" then fine - I think that's just insulting their customers though because, as I said, if someone buys a real acoustic piano and they want, say, a mellower sound, they get a piano tuner to come and he or she physically changes their piano. Roland, you're suggesting, would sell this customer a tambourine to avoid them having to make a decision about hammers laugh

I think a pianist who has played a real piano would relate perfectly to many of the parameters you can change in a physically modelled virtual piano.

It's like an arcade racing game might have a slider that says "oversteer" at one end and "understeer" at the other. A better simulation with a physical model would talk about tyre material, tyre pressure, suspension yadda yadda yadda - the end result of changing these parameters would be a car that tended towards oversteer or understeer. But trying to say "Well, car drivers don't really understand these things" is not really true. Most car drivers know what tyres are.

You could argue that it's simpler to move a slider, but I would argue that's just at the expense of actually being able to use the physical model.

The other point I tried to make is , if I'm this supposed naive customer who doesn't care how the sound is made or who doesn't want to sit and change parameters, well, then why only configure 4 piano sounds for me?

Surely one of the main aspects of a physically modelled virtual piano is the ability to sound like myriad different pianos? So why doesn't it? You know, for guitar players they are doing this kind of thing now, and they model amps and a couple of companies are trying to model guitars. So you get a box and it's trying to sound like Marshall, Fender or mesa boogie amps etc and a guitar with some kind of digital interface to sound like les paul and fender and a banjo and an acoustic guitar, 12 string, and also to let you change the tuning to drop D or whatever without having to actually tune the guitar.

How well do they do? Well, it's early days. They sort of sound a bit like a les paul, in the same way that some of the physical modelled pianos sort of sound a bit like a Steinway D. There might be something a tad artificial about them. Getting an electric guitar to sound like an acoustic or a banjo is a stretch. But you can see where they are going and why - and you can also see why a guitar player might think "This is great technology" - not because he has a degree in physics or comp sci - but because you put a box and guitar in his room that makes a passable attempt at imitating tens of thousands of pounds of real guitars and amps.

My question is, if these pianos are physically modelled then why don't they act like it?

Saying "it's because our customers don't care" seems flawed. They'll care about something that physical modelling can offer them otherwise, if they don't then physical modelling is an expensive waste of time researching and developing.

They don't appear to be trying to sell the piano to me, nor to this hypothetical customer who just looks at the spec sheet on digital pianos. I gave one example where for every other model of sample-based Roland piano from FP30 upwards, the more you pay, the more piano sounds (and other sounds) the piano has. Perhaps there are some other changes too like a more expensive action or bigger speakers, more polyphony and so on, but watch any video of a roland employee on youtube doing a demo and they are going through the different sounds. More is always better right in the eyes of this naive consumer. That's why the F130r is now the F140r. Or the LX15 is the LX17.

When the guy from Roland just sighs at you when when you tell him "I can't see the point in spending the money on this product" I suppose I have my answer.


The V-Piano and V-Piano Grand have not been discontinued. You should demo one of those.


Probably time for an update though. You'd think the V-piano could benefit from the latest PHA50 action at the very least.

Re: New Series of HP and LX Pianos from Roland [Re: ando] #2515704
02/28/16 04:06 PM
02/28/16 04:06 PM
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,369
Twin Cities
T
TonyB Online content
1000 Post Club Member
TonyB  Online Content
1000 Post Club Member
T

Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,369
Twin Cities
Originally Posted by ando
Originally Posted by DazedAndConfused
Originally Posted by yb
Originally Posted by mcoll
He may be right in many ways, but he is still missing the point. They are home pianos. Not a v-piano for artists, professional.
You want to keep it simple with them. Just being a great piano is the goal here, not ultimate customization.
Sure, there are some users which would like those options (and I believe the people of the forum don't very well represent the general population), but for most people, more options would just be confusing and would complicate things in an unwanted manner.
You should keep this in mind.


But this, to me, is why it's so illogical.

If I'm going to buy these because I'm actually googling for "physical modelling" and I care about changing these parameters then I'm out of luck. If the message is, as you seem to be implying "these pianos are dumbed down for Roland's customers" then fine - I think that's just insulting their customers though because, as I said, if someone buys a real acoustic piano and they want, say, a mellower sound, they get a piano tuner to come and he or she physically changes their piano. Roland, you're suggesting, would sell this customer a tambourine to avoid them having to make a decision about hammers laugh

I think a pianist who has played a real piano would relate perfectly to many of the parameters you can change in a physically modelled virtual piano.

It's like an arcade racing game might have a slider that says "oversteer" at one end and "understeer" at the other. A better simulation with a physical model would talk about tyre material, tyre pressure, suspension yadda yadda yadda - the end result of changing these parameters would be a car that tended towards oversteer or understeer. But trying to say "Well, car drivers don't really understand these things" is not really true. Most car drivers know what tyres are.

You could argue that it's simpler to move a slider, but I would argue that's just at the expense of actually being able to use the physical model.

The other point I tried to make is , if I'm this supposed naive customer who doesn't care how the sound is made or who doesn't want to sit and change parameters, well, then why only configure 4 piano sounds for me?

Surely one of the main aspects of a physically modelled virtual piano is the ability to sound like myriad different pianos? So why doesn't it? You know, for guitar players they are doing this kind of thing now, and they model amps and a couple of companies are trying to model guitars. So you get a box and it's trying to sound like Marshall, Fender or mesa boogie amps etc and a guitar with some kind of digital interface to sound like les paul and fender and a banjo and an acoustic guitar, 12 string, and also to let you change the tuning to drop D or whatever without having to actually tune the guitar.

How well do they do? Well, it's early days. They sort of sound a bit like a les paul, in the same way that some of the physical modelled pianos sort of sound a bit like a Steinway D. There might be something a tad artificial about them. Getting an electric guitar to sound like an acoustic or a banjo is a stretch. But you can see where they are going and why - and you can also see why a guitar player might think "This is great technology" - not because he has a degree in physics or comp sci - but because you put a box and guitar in his room that makes a passable attempt at imitating tens of thousands of pounds of real guitars and amps.

My question is, if these pianos are physically modelled then why don't they act like it?

Saying "it's because our customers don't care" seems flawed. They'll care about something that physical modelling can offer them otherwise, if they don't then physical modelling is an expensive waste of time researching and developing.

They don't appear to be trying to sell the piano to me, nor to this hypothetical customer who just looks at the spec sheet on digital pianos. I gave one example where for every other model of sample-based Roland piano from FP30 upwards, the more you pay, the more piano sounds (and other sounds) the piano has. Perhaps there are some other changes too like a more expensive action or bigger speakers, more polyphony and so on, but watch any video of a roland employee on youtube doing a demo and they are going through the different sounds. More is always better right in the eyes of this naive consumer. That's why the F130r is now the F140r. Or the LX15 is the LX17.

When the guy from Roland just sighs at you when when you tell him "I can't see the point in spending the money on this product" I suppose I have my answer.


The V-Piano and V-Piano Grand have not been discontinued. You should demo one of those.


Probably time for an update though. You'd think the V-piano could benefit from the latest PHA50 action at the very least.


I have no problem with the PHA-III flavor keybed on my V-Grand. It works well, doesn't seem to have any issues, and has been field proven for several years of hard use as Jay mentioned about Roland pianos with that keybed in the schools across Canada and some here with V-Pianos have commented about.

It may well be that you are correct in that these newer keybeds would be an improvement. However, I find no fault with mine as it currently is.

Tony


Re: New Series of HP and LX Pianos from Roland [Re: yb] #2515720
02/28/16 05:12 PM
02/28/16 05:12 PM
Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 597
Usa
G
Grandman Offline
500 Post Club Member
Grandman  Offline
500 Post Club Member
G

Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 597
Usa
Originally Posted by yb
Originally Posted by mcoll
He may be right in many ways, but he is still missing the point. They are home pianos. Not a v-piano for artists, professional.
You want to keep it simple with them. Just being a great piano is the goal here, not ultimate customization.
Sure, there are some users which would like those options (and I believe the people of the forum don't very well represent the general population), but for most people, more options would just be confusing and would complicate things in an unwanted manner.
You should keep this in mind.


But this, to me, is why it's so illogical.

If I'm going to buy these because I'm actually googling for "physical modelling" and I care about changing these parameters then I'm out of luck. If the message is, as you seem to be implying "these pianos are dumbed down for Roland's customers" then fine - I think that's just insulting their customers though because, as I said, if someone buys a real acoustic piano and they want, say, a mellower sound, they get a piano tuner to come and he or she physically changes their piano. Roland, you're suggesting, would sell this customer a tambourine to avoid them having to make a decision about hammers laugh

I think a pianist who has played a real piano would relate perfectly to many of the parameters you can change in a physically modelled virtual piano.

It's like an arcade racing game might have a slider that says "oversteer" at one end and "understeer" at the other. A better simulation with a physical model would talk about tyre material, tyre pressure, suspension yadda yadda yadda - the end result of changing these parameters would be a car that tended towards oversteer or understeer. But trying to say "Well, car drivers don't really understand these things" is not really true. Most car drivers know what tyres are.

You could argue that it's simpler to move a slider, but I would argue that's just at the expense of actually being able to use the physical model.

The other point I tried to make is , if I'm this supposed naive customer who doesn't care how the sound is made or who doesn't want to sit and change parameters, well, then why only configure 4 piano sounds for me?

Surely one of the main aspects of a physically modelled virtual piano is the ability to sound like myriad different pianos? So why doesn't it? You know, for guitar players they are doing this kind of thing now, and they model amps and a couple of companies are trying to model guitars. So you get a box and it's trying to sound like Marshall, Fender or mesa boogie amps etc and a guitar with some kind of digital interface to sound like les paul and fender and a banjo and an acoustic guitar, 12 string, and also to let you change the tuning to drop D or whatever without having to actually tune the guitar.

How well do they do? Well, it's early days. They sort of sound a bit like a les paul, in the same way that some of the physical modelled pianos sort of sound a bit like a Steinway D. There might be something a tad artificial about them. Getting an electric guitar to sound like an acoustic or a banjo is a stretch. But you can see where they are going and why - and you can also see why a guitar player might think "This is great technology" - not because he has a degree in physics or comp sci - but because you put a box and guitar in his room that makes a passable attempt at imitating tens of thousands of pounds of real guitars and amps.

My question is, if these pianos are physically modelled then why don't they act like it?

Saying "it's because our customers don't care" seems flawed. They'll care about something that physical modelling can offer them otherwise, if they don't then physical modelling is an expensive waste of time researching and developing.

They don't appear to be trying to sell the piano to me, nor to this hypothetical customer who just looks at the spec sheet on digital pianos. I gave one example where for every other model of sample-based Roland piano from FP30 upwards, the more you pay, the more piano sounds (and other sounds) the piano has. Perhaps there are some other changes too like a more expensive action or bigger speakers, more polyphony and so on, but watch any video of a roland employee on youtube doing a demo and they are going through the different sounds. More is always better right in the eyes of this naive consumer. That's why the F130r is now the F140r. Or the LX15 is the LX17.

When the guy from Roland just sighs at you when when you tell him "I can't see the point in spending the money on this product" I suppose I have my answer.


The Roland pianos are more customizable than any other home DP of the major makers. None of the others allow for individual key tuning and voicing for all 88 keys. With the other makers, if you want to adjust the sound, you do so for all 88 notes simultaneously. Roland lets you do this for individual notes. And the point of a modeled piano is the behavavipr of piano's sound and not just the ability to customize. I agree, there is a lot of room to customize on the new Rolands.

As to all this talk about key noise, I experience no problems with noise whatsoever. The keys are quieter than other DP's I've tried. The new keybed is improved.

Last edited by Grandman; 02/28/16 05:13 PM.
Re: New Series of HP and LX Pianos from Roland [Re: Grandman] #2515744
02/28/16 06:25 PM
02/28/16 06:25 PM
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 3,302
UK
S
spanishbuddha Offline
3000 Post Club Member
spanishbuddha  Offline
3000 Post Club Member
S

Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 3,302
UK
Originally Posted by Grandman
Originally Posted by yb
Originally Posted by mcoll
He may be right in many ways, but he is still missing the point. They are home pianos. Not a v-piano for artists, professional.
You want to keep it simple with them. Just being a great piano is the goal here, not ultimate customization.
Sure, there are some users which would like those options (and I believe the people of the forum don't very well represent the general population), but for most people, more options would just be confusing and would complicate things in an unwanted manner.
You should keep this in mind.


But this, to me, is why it's so illogical.

If I'm going to buy these because I'm actually googling for "physical modelling" and I care about changing these parameters then I'm out of luck. If the message is, as you seem to be implying "these pianos are dumbed down for Roland's customers" then fine - I think that's just insulting their customers though because, as I said, if someone buys a real acoustic piano and they want, say, a mellower sound, they get a piano tuner to come and he or she physically changes their piano. Roland, you're suggesting, would sell this customer a tambourine to avoid them having to make a decision about hammers laugh

I think a pianist who has played a real piano would relate perfectly to many of the parameters you can change in a physically modelled virtual piano.

It's like an arcade racing game might have a slider that says "oversteer" at one end and "understeer" at the other. A better simulation with a physical model would talk about tyre material, tyre pressure, suspension yadda yadda yadda - the end result of changing these parameters would be a car that tended towards oversteer or understeer. But trying to say "Well, car drivers don't really understand these things" is not really true. Most car drivers know what tyres are.

You could argue that it's simpler to move a slider, but I would argue that's just at the expense of actually being able to use the physical model.

The other point I tried to make is , if I'm this supposed naive customer who doesn't care how the sound is made or who doesn't want to sit and change parameters, well, then why only configure 4 piano sounds for me?

Surely one of the main aspects of a physically modelled virtual piano is the ability to sound like myriad different pianos? So why doesn't it? You know, for guitar players they are doing this kind of thing now, and they model amps and a couple of companies are trying to model guitars. So you get a box and it's trying to sound like Marshall, Fender or mesa boogie amps etc and a guitar with some kind of digital interface to sound like les paul and fender and a banjo and an acoustic guitar, 12 string, and also to let you change the tuning to drop D or whatever without having to actually tune the guitar.

How well do they do? Well, it's early days. They sort of sound a bit like a les paul, in the same way that some of the physical modelled pianos sort of sound a bit like a Steinway D. There might be something a tad artificial about them. Getting an electric guitar to sound like an acoustic or a banjo is a stretch. But you can see where they are going and why - and you can also see why a guitar player might think "This is great technology" - not because he has a degree in physics or comp sci - but because you put a box and guitar in his room that makes a passable attempt at imitating tens of thousands of pounds of real guitars and amps.

My question is, if these pianos are physically modelled then why don't they act like it?

Saying "it's because our customers don't care" seems flawed. They'll care about something that physical modelling can offer them otherwise, if they don't then physical modelling is an expensive waste of time researching and developing.

They don't appear to be trying to sell the piano to me, nor to this hypothetical customer who just looks at the spec sheet on digital pianos. I gave one example where for every other model of sample-based Roland piano from FP30 upwards, the more you pay, the more piano sounds (and other sounds) the piano has. Perhaps there are some other changes too like a more expensive action or bigger speakers, more polyphony and so on, but watch any video of a roland employee on youtube doing a demo and they are going through the different sounds. More is always better right in the eyes of this naive consumer. That's why the F130r is now the F140r. Or the LX15 is the LX17.

When the guy from Roland just sighs at you when when you tell him "I can't see the point in spending the money on this product" I suppose I have my answer.


The Roland pianos are more customizable than any other home DP of the major makers. None of the others allow for individual key tuning and voicing for all 88 keys. With the other makers, if you want to adjust the sound, you do so for all 88 notes simultaneously. Roland lets you do this for individual notes. And the point of a modeled piano is the behavavipr of piano's sound and not just the ability to customize. I agree, there is a lot of room to customize on the new Rolands.

As to all this talk about key noise, I experience no problems with noise whatsoever. The keys are quieter than other DP's I've tried. The new keybed is improved.

That's partially incorrect. Certainly the top end Kawai have individual note voicing for each of the 88 notes. See the CA67/97 user manual for example. Maybe other stage models have individual note tuning?

Re: New Series of HP and LX Pianos from Roland [Re: spanishbuddha] #2515757
02/28/16 07:25 PM
02/28/16 07:25 PM
Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 597
Usa
G
Grandman Offline
500 Post Club Member
Grandman  Offline
500 Post Club Member
G

Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 597
Usa
Originally Posted by spanishbuddha
Originally Posted by Grandman
Originally Posted by yb
Originally Posted by mcoll
He may be right in many ways, but he is still missing the point. They are home pianos. Not a v-piano for artists, professional.
You want to keep it simple with them. Just being a great piano is the goal here, not ultimate customization.
Sure, there are some users which would like those options (and I believe the people of the forum don't very well represent the general population), but for most people, more options would just be confusing and would complicate things in an unwanted manner.
You should keep this in mind.


But this, to me, is why it's so illogical.

If I'm going to buy these because I'm actually googling for "physical modelling" and I care about changing these parameters then I'm out of luck. If the message is, as you seem to be implying "these pianos are dumbed down for Roland's customers" then fine - I think that's just insulting their customers though because, as I said, if someone buys a real acoustic piano and they want, say, a mellower sound, they get a piano tuner to come and he or she physically changes their piano. Roland, you're suggesting, would sell this customer a tambourine to avoid them having to make a decision about hammers laugh

I think a pianist who has played a real piano would relate perfectly to many of the parameters you can change in a physically modelled virtual piano.

It's like an arcade racing game might have a slider that says "oversteer" at one end and "understeer" at the other. A better simulation with a physical model would talk about tyre material, tyre pressure, suspension yadda yadda yadda - the end result of changing these parameters would be a car that tended towards oversteer or understeer. But trying to say "Well, car drivers don't really understand these things" is not really true. Most car drivers know what tyres are.

You could argue that it's simpler to move a slider, but I would argue that's just at the expense of actually being able to use the physical model.

The other point I tried to make is , if I'm this supposed naive customer who doesn't care how the sound is made or who doesn't want to sit and change parameters, well, then why only configure 4 piano sounds for me?

Surely one of the main aspects of a physically modelled virtual piano is the ability to sound like myriad different pianos? So why doesn't it? You know, for guitar players they are doing this kind of thing now, and they model amps and a couple of companies are trying to model guitars. So you get a box and it's trying to sound like Marshall, Fender or mesa boogie amps etc and a guitar with some kind of digital interface to sound like les paul and fender and a banjo and an acoustic guitar, 12 string, and also to let you change the tuning to drop D or whatever without having to actually tune the guitar.

How well do they do? Well, it's early days. They sort of sound a bit like a les paul, in the same way that some of the physical modelled pianos sort of sound a bit like a Steinway D. There might be something a tad artificial about them. Getting an electric guitar to sound like an acoustic or a banjo is a stretch. But you can see where they are going and why - and you can also see why a guitar player might think "This is great technology" - not because he has a degree in physics or comp sci - but because you put a box and guitar in his room that makes a passable attempt at imitating tens of thousands of pounds of real guitars and amps.

My question is, if these pianos are physically modelled then why don't they act like it?

Saying "it's because our customers don't care" seems flawed. They'll care about something that physical modelling can offer them otherwise, if they don't then physical modelling is an expensive waste of time researching and developing.

They don't appear to be trying to sell the piano to me, nor to this hypothetical customer who just looks at the spec sheet on digital pianos. I gave one example where for every other model of sample-based Roland piano from FP30 upwards, the more you pay, the more piano sounds (and other sounds) the piano has. Perhaps there are some other changes too like a more expensive action or bigger speakers, more polyphony and so on, but watch any video of a roland employee on youtube doing a demo and they are going through the different sounds. More is always better right in the eyes of this naive consumer. That's why the F130r is now the F140r. Or the LX15 is the LX17.

When the guy from Roland just sighs at you when when you tell him "I can't see the point in spending the money on this product" I suppose I have my answer.


The Roland pianos are more customizable than any other home DP of the major makers. None of the others allow for individual key tuning and voicing for all 88 keys. With the other makers, if you want to adjust the sound, you do so for all 88 notes simultaneously. Roland lets you do this for individual notes. And the point of a modeled piano is the behavavipr of piano's sound and not just the ability to customize. I agree, there is a lot of room to customize on the new Rolands.

As to all this talk about key noise, I experience no problems with noise whatsoever. The keys are quieter than other DP's I've tried. The new keybed is improved.

That's partially incorrect. Certainly the top end Kawai have individual note voicing for each of the 88 notes. See the CA67/97 user manual for example. Maybe other stage models have individual note tuning?


My understanding is that the kawai ca series allow voicing of all 88 notes, but done simultaneously. I could be wrong, but I recall that if you choose to make the sound more mellow, you must do so for all 88 notes. The Rolands allow for changes in tonal character of each note individually. Like I said, I could be wrong, but that is what I recall.

Re: New Series of HP and LX Pianos from Roland [Re: JayGVan] #2515774
02/28/16 08:03 PM
02/28/16 08:03 PM
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 14,830
Hamamatsu, Japan
Kawai James Online content
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Kawai James  Online Content
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member

Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 14,830
Hamamatsu, Japan
Grandman, as spanishbuddha notes, the latest CA97/CA67 instruments do allow individual 88-key user voicing, along with 88-key tuning and volume adjustments.

Kind regards,
James
x


Employed by Kawai Japan, however the opinions I express are my own.
Nord Electro 3 & occasional rare groove player.

"I agree that the User Manual is very good." - arc7urus, March 2019
Re: New Series of HP and LX Pianos from Roland [Re: TonyB] #2515808
02/28/16 10:31 PM
02/28/16 10:31 PM
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 5,638
Hobart, Australia
A
ando Offline
5000 Post Club Member
ando  Offline
5000 Post Club Member
A

Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 5,638
Hobart, Australia
Originally Posted by TonyB
Originally Posted by ando
Originally Posted by DazedAndConfused
Originally Posted by yb
Originally Posted by mcoll
He may be right in many ways, but he is still missing the point. They are home pianos. Not a v-piano for artists, professional.
You want to keep it simple with them. Just being a great piano is the goal here, not ultimate customization.
Sure, there are some users which would like those options (and I believe the people of the forum don't very well represent the general population), but for most people, more options would just be confusing and would complicate things in an unwanted manner.
You should keep this in mind.


But this, to me, is why it's so illogical.

If I'm going to buy these because I'm actually googling for "physical modelling" and I care about changing these parameters then I'm out of luck. If the message is, as you seem to be implying "these pianos are dumbed down for Roland's customers" then fine - I think that's just insulting their customers though because, as I said, if someone buys a real acoustic piano and they want, say, a mellower sound, they get a piano tuner to come and he or she physically changes their piano. Roland, you're suggesting, would sell this customer a tambourine to avoid them having to make a decision about hammers laugh

I think a pianist who has played a real piano would relate perfectly to many of the parameters you can change in a physically modelled virtual piano.

It's like an arcade racing game might have a slider that says "oversteer" at one end and "understeer" at the other. A better simulation with a physical model would talk about tyre material, tyre pressure, suspension yadda yadda yadda - the end result of changing these parameters would be a car that tended towards oversteer or understeer. But trying to say "Well, car drivers don't really understand these things" is not really true. Most car drivers know what tyres are.

You could argue that it's simpler to move a slider, but I would argue that's just at the expense of actually being able to use the physical model.

The other point I tried to make is , if I'm this supposed naive customer who doesn't care how the sound is made or who doesn't want to sit and change parameters, well, then why only configure 4 piano sounds for me?

Surely one of the main aspects of a physically modelled virtual piano is the ability to sound like myriad different pianos? So why doesn't it? You know, for guitar players they are doing this kind of thing now, and they model amps and a couple of companies are trying to model guitars. So you get a box and it's trying to sound like Marshall, Fender or mesa boogie amps etc and a guitar with some kind of digital interface to sound like les paul and fender and a banjo and an acoustic guitar, 12 string, and also to let you change the tuning to drop D or whatever without having to actually tune the guitar.

How well do they do? Well, it's early days. They sort of sound a bit like a les paul, in the same way that some of the physical modelled pianos sort of sound a bit like a Steinway D. There might be something a tad artificial about them. Getting an electric guitar to sound like an acoustic or a banjo is a stretch. But you can see where they are going and why - and you can also see why a guitar player might think "This is great technology" - not because he has a degree in physics or comp sci - but because you put a box and guitar in his room that makes a passable attempt at imitating tens of thousands of pounds of real guitars and amps.

My question is, if these pianos are physically modelled then why don't they act like it?

Saying "it's because our customers don't care" seems flawed. They'll care about something that physical modelling can offer them otherwise, if they don't then physical modelling is an expensive waste of time researching and developing.

They don't appear to be trying to sell the piano to me, nor to this hypothetical customer who just looks at the spec sheet on digital pianos. I gave one example where for every other model of sample-based Roland piano from FP30 upwards, the more you pay, the more piano sounds (and other sounds) the piano has. Perhaps there are some other changes too like a more expensive action or bigger speakers, more polyphony and so on, but watch any video of a roland employee on youtube doing a demo and they are going through the different sounds. More is always better right in the eyes of this naive consumer. That's why the F130r is now the F140r. Or the LX15 is the LX17.

When the guy from Roland just sighs at you when when you tell him "I can't see the point in spending the money on this product" I suppose I have my answer.


The V-Piano and V-Piano Grand have not been discontinued. You should demo one of those.


Probably time for an update though. You'd think the V-piano could benefit from the latest PHA50 action at the very least.


I have no problem with the PHA-III flavor keybed on my V-Grand. It works well, doesn't seem to have any issues, and has been field proven for several years of hard use as Jay mentioned about Roland pianos with that keybed in the schools across Canada and some here with V-Pianos have commented about.

It may well be that you are correct in that these newer keybeds would be an improvement. However, I find no fault with mine as it currently is.

Tony



I wasn't implying there is any problem with the PHA-III action, Tony. It certainly served Roland very well for many years. I was just thinking that Roland's flagship piano deserves its flagship action. I don't know if you've played the PHA-50 action yet, but it's really excellent - certainly a notch or two above the PHA-III and IV, in my opinion. Not worth getting too worked up about if you already own the V-grand though.

Re: New Series of HP and LX Pianos from Roland [Re: ando] #2515812
02/28/16 10:46 PM
02/28/16 10:46 PM
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,369
Twin Cities
T
TonyB Online content
1000 Post Club Member
TonyB  Online Content
1000 Post Club Member
T

Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,369
Twin Cities
Originally Posted by ando
Originally Posted by TonyB
Originally Posted by ando
Originally Posted by DazedAndConfused
Originally Posted by yb
Originally Posted by mcoll
He may be right in many ways, but he is still missing the point. They are home pianos. Not a v-piano for artists, professional.
You want to keep it simple with them. Just being a great piano is the goal here, not ultimate customization.
Sure, there are some users which would like those options (and I believe the people of the forum don't very well represent the general population), but for most people, more options would just be confusing and would complicate things in an unwanted manner.
You should keep this in mind.


But this, to me, is why it's so illogical.

If I'm going to buy these because I'm actually googling for "physical modelling" and I care about changing these parameters then I'm out of luck. If the message is, as you seem to be implying "these pianos are dumbed down for Roland's customers" then fine - I think that's just insulting their customers though because, as I said, if someone buys a real acoustic piano and they want, say, a mellower sound, they get a piano tuner to come and he or she physically changes their piano. Roland, you're suggesting, would sell this customer a tambourine to avoid them having to make a decision about hammers laugh

I think a pianist who has played a real piano would relate perfectly to many of the parameters you can change in a physically modelled virtual piano.

It's like an arcade racing game might have a slider that says "oversteer" at one end and "understeer" at the other. A better simulation with a physical model would talk about tyre material, tyre pressure, suspension yadda yadda yadda - the end result of changing these parameters would be a car that tended towards oversteer or understeer. But trying to say "Well, car drivers don't really understand these things" is not really true. Most car drivers know what tyres are.

You could argue that it's simpler to move a slider, but I would argue that's just at the expense of actually being able to use the physical model.

The other point I tried to make is , if I'm this supposed naive customer who doesn't care how the sound is made or who doesn't want to sit and change parameters, well, then why only configure 4 piano sounds for me?

Surely one of the main aspects of a physically modelled virtual piano is the ability to sound like myriad different pianos? So why doesn't it? You know, for guitar players they are doing this kind of thing now, and they model amps and a couple of companies are trying to model guitars. So you get a box and it's trying to sound like Marshall, Fender or mesa boogie amps etc and a guitar with some kind of digital interface to sound like les paul and fender and a banjo and an acoustic guitar, 12 string, and also to let you change the tuning to drop D or whatever without having to actually tune the guitar.

How well do they do? Well, it's early days. They sort of sound a bit like a les paul, in the same way that some of the physical modelled pianos sort of sound a bit like a Steinway D. There might be something a tad artificial about them. Getting an electric guitar to sound like an acoustic or a banjo is a stretch. But you can see where they are going and why - and you can also see why a guitar player might think "This is great technology" - not because he has a degree in physics or comp sci - but because you put a box and guitar in his room that makes a passable attempt at imitating tens of thousands of pounds of real guitars and amps.

My question is, if these pianos are physically modelled then why don't they act like it?

Saying "it's because our customers don't care" seems flawed. They'll care about something that physical modelling can offer them otherwise, if they don't then physical modelling is an expensive waste of time researching and developing.

They don't appear to be trying to sell the piano to me, nor to this hypothetical customer who just looks at the spec sheet on digital pianos. I gave one example where for every other model of sample-based Roland piano from FP30 upwards, the more you pay, the more piano sounds (and other sounds) the piano has. Perhaps there are some other changes too like a more expensive action or bigger speakers, more polyphony and so on, but watch any video of a roland employee on youtube doing a demo and they are going through the different sounds. More is always better right in the eyes of this naive consumer. That's why the F130r is now the F140r. Or the LX15 is the LX17.

When the guy from Roland just sighs at you when when you tell him "I can't see the point in spending the money on this product" I suppose I have my answer.


The V-Piano and V-Piano Grand have not been discontinued. You should demo one of those.


Probably time for an update though. You'd think the V-piano could benefit from the latest PHA50 action at the very least.


I have no problem with the PHA-III flavor keybed on my V-Grand. It works well, doesn't seem to have any issues, and has been field proven for several years of hard use as Jay mentioned about Roland pianos with that keybed in the schools across Canada and some here with V-Pianos have commented about.

It may well be that you are correct in that these newer keybeds would be an improvement. However, I find no fault with mine as it currently is.

Tony



I wasn't implying there is any problem with the PHA-III action, Tony. It certainly served Roland very well for many years. I was just thinking that Roland's flagship piano deserves its flagship action. I don't know if you've played the PHA-50 action yet, but it's really excellent - certainly a notch or two above the PHA-III and IV, in my opinion. Not worth getting too worked up about if you already own the V-grand though.


I did not take your comment that way. It is normal to want the latest and greatest of any technology. My point was simply that the PHA-III is still a good, solid keybed. To me, the big thing was going to the triple-sensor, so pre PHA-III might be worth jumping from and into a newer keybed. Anyone considering a V-Piano/Grand could still be perfectly happy with its keybed.

I do think that I tend to get used to a keybed and then other/newer keybeds will feel different until I get used to them. Some people are probably more picky about such things, but for me, they all feel decent (Yamaha, Kawai, Roland, and Casio). I played a Korg Kronos this weekend and did not really like that keybed as much.

I don't know what Roland's plans are regarding the V-Piano/Grand, whether they will come up with a new version of either, or whether they feel that these stand apart from the constant churn of the consumer lines of DP. I would (like you) think that if they do come up with a "next" version of either, they will use whatever keybed is current in their product lifecycle. I do think these particular models of DP are good enough and expensive enough to be treated like decent acoustic pianos in that owners probably won't flip them as frequently as people might with the consumer line. I could see someone jumping from whatever came before the LX-17 to the LX-17 (but from what I saw of the LX-17, I would want to hang on to that even if something newer comes along later), but I would not be considering flipping my V-Grand if a newer model comes out.

Tony


Re: New Series of HP and LX Pianos from Roland [Re: Nordomus] #2515850
02/29/16 04:30 AM
02/29/16 04:30 AM
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 356
C
Celdor Offline
Full Member
Celdor  Offline
Full Member
C

Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 356
Originally Posted by Nordomus
Originally Posted by CPShines
Originally Posted by Nordomus

That's what I think as well, I'd like to know what Roland owners think about this as well though.


I've not noticed any unwanted sound from the keys on my HP605.

OK, thank you for the info, someone else?

I've bought LX-7. I practice with and without headphones. I practice scales everyday in each key, including chromatic scales, legato, staccato, piano, forte etc. Either I am very lucky or not sensitive to any unevenness. Therefore, I haven't reported any problem with keys. I think the keys are the absolutely best part of these pianos. But this is only my humble personal opinion. I can add that If I have to reduce volume to minimum (aeround 10-20 etc.), then I can clearly hear keys. Even then, I still accept the sound. Probably I realise that when you play on real grand pianos, you can also hear some extra sound, such as dumpers moving away from keys when using a sustain pedal.


Zbigniew

[Linked Image]
Re: New Series of HP and LX Pianos from Roland [Re: Celdor] #2515873
02/29/16 07:02 AM
02/29/16 07:02 AM
Joined: Mar 2014
Posts: 699
N
Nordomus Offline
500 Post Club Member
Nordomus  Offline
500 Post Club Member
N

Joined: Mar 2014
Posts: 699
Originally Posted by Celdor

I've bought LX-7. I practice with and without headphones. I practice scales everyday in each key, including chromatic scales, legato, staccato, piano, forte etc. Either I am very lucky or not sensitive to any unevenness. Therefore, I haven't reported any problem with keys. I think the keys are the absolutely best part of these pianos. But this is only my humble personal opinion. I can add that If I have to reduce volume to minimum (aeround 10-20 etc.), then I can clearly hear keys. Even then, I still accept the sound. Probably I realise that when you play on real grand pianos, you can also hear some extra sound, such as dumpers moving away from keys when using a sustain pedal.

Yea, you can hear on my video that there is this normal sound and abnormal sound. Normal sound is absolutely OK, with it this is truly one of the quietest keyboards. Problem is with those few keys. And on grand piano you can hear something about those normal noise levels in PH-50 and that would be cool enough.

Re: New Series of HP and LX Pianos from Roland [Re: JayGVan] #2515891
02/29/16 09:11 AM
02/29/16 09:11 AM
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 32
S
Statue Offline
Full Member
Statue  Offline
Full Member
S

Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 32
For what it's worth Nordomus, I don't detect a too notable difference in the key sound on my hp605. I say 'too notable' because I can hear differences. There's definitely a difference between all the black keys and all the white keys for example. That's to be expected though. Physics.

But less expected, I can hear a very slight difference on 3 specific keys, middle C and the G and E below middle C. Very slight, but definitely there, and definitely a qualitative difference (different sound as opposed to difference level of noise). It's not discernable when playing, only when off and doing a test. It's not enough of a difference to be a concern to me at the moment.

Last edited by Statue; 02/29/16 09:12 AM.
Re: New Series of HP and LX Pianos from Roland [Re: Grandman] #2515949
02/29/16 12:49 PM
02/29/16 12:49 PM
Joined: Feb 2016
Posts: 13
D
Daryl D Offline
Junior Member
Daryl D  Offline
Junior Member
D

Joined: Feb 2016
Posts: 13
Originally Posted by Grandman
Originally Posted by spanishbuddha
Originally Posted by Grandman
Originally Posted by yb
Originally Posted by mcoll
He may be right in many ways, but he is still missing the point. They are home pianos. Not a v-piano for artists, professional.
You want to keep it simple with them. Just being a great piano is the goal here, not ultimate customization.
Sure, there are some users which would like those options (and I believe the people of the forum don't very well represent the general population), but for most people, more options would just be confusing and would complicate things in an unwanted manner.
You should keep this in mind.


But this, to me, is why it's so illogical.

If I'm going to buy these because I'm actually googling for "physical modelling" and I care about changing these parameters then I'm out of luck. If the message is, as you seem to be implying "these pianos are dumbed down for Roland's customers" then fine - I think that's just insulting their customers though because, as I said, if someone buys a real acoustic piano and they want, say, a mellower sound, they get a piano tuner to come and he or she physically changes their piano. Roland, you're suggesting, would sell this customer a tambourine to avoid them having to make a decision about hammers laugh

I think a pianist who has played a real piano would relate perfectly to many of the parameters you can change in a physically modelled virtual piano.

It's like an arcade racing game might have a slider that says "oversteer" at one end and "understeer" at the other. A better simulation with a physical model would talk about tyre material, tyre pressure, suspension yadda yadda yadda - the end result of changing these parameters would be a car that tended towards oversteer or understeer. But trying to say "Well, car drivers don't really understand these things" is not really true. Most car drivers know what tyres are.

You could argue that it's simpler to move a slider, but I would argue that's just at the expense of actually being able to use the physical model.

The other point I tried to make is , if I'm this supposed naive customer who doesn't care how the sound is made or who doesn't want to sit and change parameters, well, then why only configure 4 piano sounds for me?

Surely one of the main aspects of a physically modelled virtual piano is the ability to sound like myriad different pianos? So why doesn't it? You know, for guitar players they are doing this kind of thing now, and they model amps and a couple of companies are trying to model guitars. So you get a box and it's trying to sound like Marshall, Fender or mesa boogie amps etc and a guitar with some kind of digital interface to sound like les paul and fender and a banjo and an acoustic guitar, 12 string, and also to let you change the tuning to drop D or whatever without having to actually tune the guitar.

How well do they do? Well, it's early days. They sort of sound a bit like a les paul, in the same way that some of the physical modelled pianos sort of sound a bit like a Steinway D. There might be something a tad artificial about them. Getting an electric guitar to sound like an acoustic or a banjo is a stretch. But you can see where they are going and why - and you can also see why a guitar player might think "This is great technology" - not because he has a degree in physics or comp sci - but because you put a box and guitar in his room that makes a passable attempt at imitating tens of thousands of pounds of real guitars and amps.

My question is, if these pianos are physically modelled then why don't they act like it?

Saying "it's because our customers don't care" seems flawed. They'll care about something that physical modelling can offer them otherwise, if they don't then physical modelling is an expensive waste of time researching and developing.

They don't appear to be trying to sell the piano to me, nor to this hypothetical customer who just looks at the spec sheet on digital pianos. I gave one example where for every other model of sample-based Roland piano from FP30 upwards, the more you pay, the more piano sounds (and other sounds) the piano has. Perhaps there are some other changes too like a more expensive action or bigger speakers, more polyphony and so on, but watch any video of a roland employee on youtube doing a demo and they are going through the different sounds. More is always better right in the eyes of this naive consumer. That's why the F130r is now the F140r. Or the LX15 is the LX17.

When the guy from Roland just sighs at you when when you tell him "I can't see the point in spending the money on this product" I suppose I have my answer.


The Roland pianos are more customizable than any other home DP of the major makers. None of the others allow for individual key tuning and voicing for all 88 keys. With the other makers, if you want to adjust the sound, you do so for all 88 notes simultaneously. Roland lets you do this for individual notes. And the point of a modeled piano is the behavavipr of piano's sound and not just the ability to customize. I agree, there is a lot of room to customize on the new Rolands.

As to all this talk about key noise, I experience no problems with noise whatsoever. The keys are quieter than other DP's I've tried. The new keybed is improved.

That's partially incorrect. Certainly the top end Kawai have individual note voicing for each of the 88 notes. See the CA67/97 user manual for example. Maybe other stage models have individual note tuning?


My understanding is that the kawai ca series allow voicing of all 88 notes, but done simultaneously. I could be wrong, but I recall that if you choose to make the sound more mellow, you must do so for all 88 notes. The Rolands allow for changes in tonal character of each note individually. Like I said, I could be wrong, but that is what I recall.


I'm still missing YB's point - while my HP605 is on order, having demo'ed it and done a fair amount of research, it seems like you can fine tune many, many parameters potentially on each note, save the preferences, and essentially create new pianos (if you wanted to imitate a Yamaha, Shigeru, or what-have-you, you'd require a source for comparison purposes, of course). So unless the concern is that Roland doesn't provide more pre-configured piano sounds modeled after other famous accoustics, I'm unclear why YB feels Roland has fallen short of realizing the full potential of physical modeling...? No disrespect at all intended, just unclear as to the actual concern - whether it's legitimate, or simply a misunderstanding of how the new Rolands work. Once my HP605 arrives, I'll confirm my understanding, though, and update this post.

Last edited by Daryl D; 02/29/16 12:56 PM.
Re: New Series of HP and LX Pianos from Roland [Re: JayGVan] #2516214
03/01/16 06:57 AM
03/01/16 06:57 AM
Joined: Feb 2016
Posts: 28
Norway
C
Composergirl Offline
Full Member
Composergirl  Offline
Full Member
C

Joined: Feb 2016
Posts: 28
Norway
What do you think about sound of the new Roland HP6.. models compare to previous HP5..?
Do you think that sound has improved a lot?

I can say for sure I don't like HP504. That was the first digital piano I played in my life and when I touched the keys for the first time and heard the sound, I called the sails person and said that something is wrong with this piano, broken or something laugh After he tested it he said that everything is normal, I got sad and moved to Yamaha… But I didn't like sustain pedal on Yamaha, still don't like.

If some of you here say that HP603 is kind of improved version of HP504 I want to believe the sound system on 603 is better and more authentic…? Do you really feel big difference?
I didn't have a chance to compare the new models with the old ones since they had only the new ones at the store.

Re: New Series of HP and LX Pianos from Roland [Re: Composergirl] #2516216
03/01/16 07:26 AM
03/01/16 07:26 AM
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 7,476
Northern England.
peterws Offline
7000 Post Club Member
peterws  Offline
7000 Post Club Member

Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 7,476
Northern England.
Originally Posted by Composergirl
What do you think about sound of the new Roland HP6.. models compare to previous HP5..?
Do you think that sound has improved a lot?

I can say for sure I don't like HP504. That was the first digital piano I played in my life and when I touched the keys for the first time and heard the sound, I called the sails person and said that something is wrong with this piano, broken or something laugh After he tested it he said that everything is normal, I got sad and moved to Yamaha… But I didn't like sustain pedal on Yamaha, still don't like.

If some of you here say that HP603 is kind of improved version of HP504 I want to believe the sound system on 603 is better and more authentic…? Do you really feel big difference?
I didn't have a chance to compare the new models with the old ones since they had only the new ones at the store.


You were lucky! I tried the 504 after the LX17. They were next to each other . . .


"I am not a man. I am a free number"

"[Linked Image]"
Re: New Series of HP and LX Pianos from Roland [Re: Nordomus] #2516230
03/01/16 08:44 AM
03/01/16 08:44 AM
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 356
C
Celdor Offline
Full Member
Celdor  Offline
Full Member
C

Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 356
Originally Posted by Nordomus
Yea, you can hear on my video that there is this normal sound and abnormal sound.

Can you give a link to your video? Thanks.


Zbigniew

[Linked Image]
Page 62 of 95 1 2 60 61 62 63 64 94 95

Moderated by  Piano World 

Shop Our Online Store!
Shop Our Store Online
Shop PianoSupplies.com

Did you know Piano World has an online store, and that it's loaded with goodies pianists and music lovers want?
Check it out and place your order.

Special Purchase!
Keyboard and Roses Piano Bench Cushion Keyboard & Roses 14"x30" piano bench cushions Regularly sold for $79 to $100, now only $39. (while supplies last)

(ad)
Pianoteq
PianoTeq Bechstein
(ad)
Faust Harrison Pianos
Faust Harrison 100+ Steinways
New Topics - Multiple Forums
What PianoWorld has cost me...
by David B. 03/26/19 07:48 PM
Rock School Breakdown?
by stevechris. 03/26/19 05:07 PM
Which Yamaha model?
by Azzawaba. 03/26/19 04:48 PM
CP88
by quindecima. 03/26/19 04:37 PM
Story & Clark Console - Worth Investing in?
by Bean23. 03/26/19 04:19 PM
What's Hot!!
PIANO TEACHERS Please read this!
-------------------
European Tour for Piano Lovers
JOIN US FOR THE TOUR!
--------------------
Posting Pictures on the Forums
-------------------
Forums RULES & HELP
-------------------
ADVERTISE on Piano World
Forum Statistics
Forums41
Topics191,148
Posts2,811,183
Members92,886
Most Online15,252
Mar 21st, 2010
Please Support Our Advertisers
Faust Harrison 100+ Steinways

Dampp Chaser Piano Life Saver

Sweetwater

 Best of Piano Buyer

PianoTeq Bechstein
Visit our online store for gifts for music lovers


 
Help keep the forums up and running with a donation, any amount is appreciated!
Or by becoming a Subscribing member! Thank-you.
Donate   Subscribe
 
Our Piano Related Classified Ads
| Dealers | Tuners | Lessons | Movers | Restorations | Pianos For Sale | Sell Your Piano |

Advertise on Piano World
| Subscribe | Piano World | PianoSupplies.com | Advertise on Piano World |
| |Contact | Privacy | Legal | About Us | Site Map | Free Newsletter |


copyright 1997 - 2019 Piano World ® all rights reserved
No part of this site may be reproduced without prior written permission
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.2