|
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!
|
|
68 members (aphexdisklavier, bobrunyan, anotherscott, AaronSF, apianostudent, beeboss, brdwyguy, benkeys, 17 invisible),
2,192
guests, and
372
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2016
Posts: 397
Full Member
|
Full Member
Joined: Aug 2016
Posts: 397 |
I would not recommend the LX-17 for exam preparation, it plays very nice and high quality, but IMO too easy to play compared to real acoustics. You should however not take this from me but try it to be sure.
GFII action is very good for moving to real acoustics, very similar to N1, but to my feeling a small bit heavier.
While gfII is sightly heavier than pha50 I'm not sure I'd consider it that significant for exam prep. My main piano when prepping for exams as a child/teenager was my mum's acoustic upright and that was significantly lighter than either of those. By contrast my tutors and most of the ones I used for exams were much heavier. Feel in acoustic pianos varies hugely, particularly with smaller, cheaper grands which often tend to be on the heavy side due to either poor maintenance or poor quality. The problem here is that almost all DPs aim for the feel of a top end concert grand which is usually relatively light so no dp will completely prepare you for an exam on some 'not very nice' baby grand, ultimately you just need to be able to deal with it. Saying that I do think having some kind of escapement/let off simulation is useful as I found that was the trickiest thing to adapt when transitioning (uprights of course don't have/need it). I used to get non sounding notes by trying to go too quiet and getting caught by the escapement. And that was the reason the Casio got struck off my options fairly early (that and the massive brass plate on the right front looks a bit ugly to me). It came down to ca67 vs hp603/5 for me and ultimately action tipped me towards the kawai, mostly because of the key length than the weight, lack of travel at the top of the keys particularly bugs me apparently. I thought the sound on the Roland had the edge though. Particularly the lx 17 was very nice but out of my price range (not played a ca97 for comparison either so no idea how much the better speakers and sound board add). To the OP, surely there must be some kawai dealer in HK? The action in the ca97 is also found in the ca67, cs8 and cs11 if that helps.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2015
Posts: 2,558
2000 Post Club Member
|
2000 Post Club Member
Joined: Oct 2015
Posts: 2,558 |
The human brain is deceptive, when a product is more expensive it automatically assumes it must be better and will therefore be perceived as better. Marketing experts know this very well and always use it to maximum effect. A company can introduce a new product a year later and sell it for a higher price even when it is the same cheaper product sold earlier with a new appearance.
I have read all manuals and spec sheets for all CA and CS models, A-Z and there is absolutely no difference! the idea that one model would produce a better sound for a certain venue is just plain false. I also suspect that a psychological effect is happening for those who hear a substantial difference between the CA and matching CS models (if settings and room acoustics are the same). Also the last part you mentioned: Not only are the specs the same in all manuals/spec sheets, but also there is no claim at all anywhere by Kawai (that I could find), that the CS has improved acoustics over the CA. I cannot imagine that Kawai would not mention it (most likely prominently) if there were such a difference, as this would be an additional justification for the higher price of the CS that could sway someone who isn't willing to pay the premium just for the looks, but who would be willing, if the higher price would also give you a better sound.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2016
Posts: 912
500 Post Club Member
|
500 Post Club Member
Joined: Jul 2016
Posts: 912 |
The location of speakers are not then same on the ca97 and cs11..the cs8 is denfinately better cabinet versus ca97 with approx. $500 price difference. .however, having played va97 and cs11...paying more than just carpentry delux...imho. ðŸ˜
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2016
Posts: 156
Full Member
|
Full Member
Joined: Aug 2016
Posts: 156 |
While gfII is sightly heavier than pha50 I'm not sure I'd consider it that significant for exam prep. I'm surprised some people only call it a slight difference, because for me the difference was huge. For me the Roland PHA50 was very easy to play, I didn't feel I needed to get used to it at all, it was as if I was already used to it (because of my Roland RD170). So this is why an alarm bell started ringing in my head. The Kawai GFII on the other hand was difficult to play for me just like the Yamaha uprights and Kawai grand in my music school were difficult for me (coming from the Roland RD170). But this was not because I wasn't strong enough my RD170 has 80g downweight and 160-200g downweight at the top of the keys! So anything better than that. The explanation seems obvious, real acoustics and the Kawai CA67 have seesaw mechanisms while most DPs have not. I think the long keys in real pianos cause a difference in key travel that can really confuse your muscle memory and pp playing (regardless of whether they are light or heavy) if you never play on such mechanisms at home. For that reason I hope Yamaha & Roland also start making digitals with more realistic seesaw mechanisms in this price range. If they do I would gladly exchange my Kawai CA67 for Roland modelling piano with seesaw mechanism, because IMO Roland is ahead in sound quality at the moment. The location of speakers are not then same on the ca97 and cs11..the cs8 is denfinately better cabinet versus ca97 with approx. $500 price difference. .however, having played va97 and cs11...paying more than just carpentry delux...imho. If you look at Rolands models which are sold in both polished and non-polished finishes, you will see polished finishes are very expensive and can entirely account for the price differences between the CS and CA models. Call it carpentry deluxe if you will.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2016
Posts: 912
500 Post Club Member
|
500 Post Club Member
Joined: Jul 2016
Posts: 912 |
Hey pocmoto..completely agree with u on action between gfII and pha5o, huge difference. Had u played on cs11 and ca97? Curious on your view, as I played the whole ca and cs11 family, tried roland ebony and matt finished dps..on one of my mega trips...paid more attention to kawai gfII family, after not liking roland keyboard yes, I sure one day kawai will come with its on modelling..
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2016
Posts: 156
Full Member
|
Full Member
Joined: Aug 2016
Posts: 156 |
I have played the CA97 not the CS11, I decided to buy the CA67 because the room it will stand in is not very large and I will play with headphones at least 50% of the time. It also annoyed me CA97 comes in one piece and I noticed the CA67 has a bookshelf like space above the pedals that might come in handy to place additional equipment without messing up the room.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 19,099
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
|
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 19,099 |
Oh, yes, where did I have my mind: the CA97 and CS11 both have the soundboard. However, I am pretty sure that there was at least some difference. I looked through posts for a while, but can not find it. Probably Kawai James will drop in and make a statement. The CA97 and CS11 are very similar instruments, and utilise largely the same hardware and software. However, it's important to note that both the CS11 and CS8 feature improved amplifier systems compared to the CA97 and CA67. The placement of the speakers and the material of the cabinet itself can also contribute to variances in sound between the different models. I hope this helps. Kind regards, James x
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2016
Posts: 156
Full Member
|
Full Member
Joined: Aug 2016
Posts: 156 |
?? Then why does Kawai list the same amplifiers on their websites, manuals & brochures and make no mention of improved amplifiers. Your forum post seems to me the first statement about CS having improved amplifiers.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 19,099
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
|
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 19,099 |
?? Then why does Kawai list the same amplifiers on their websites, manuals & brochures and make no mention of improved amplifiers. I believe the general specifications (i.e. power) of the amplifier itself are unchanged, however the parts have been redesigned for greater efficiency. While this does contribute to the overall quality and fidelity of sound produced, it is a relatively minor change compared to the improved GFII keyboard, new Shigeru Kawai piano sounds, upgraded speaker system (for CS8), and other new features found in the latest CS Series models compared to the previous generation. Also, while we try to provide as much information as possible in product brochures, owner's manuals, and websites, we also emphasise the importance of customers visiting Kawai dealers to play-test instruments for themselves. Words and specifications are a useful point of reference, however they do not tell the full story. Kind regards, James x
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2016
Posts: 156
Full Member
|
Full Member
Joined: Aug 2016
Posts: 156 |
You seemed to switch comparing the CS8 vs CA67 and CS8 vs CS7 between posts, but I will stop bothering you since it is too late for me anyway to consider buying the CS8 over CA67, because of improved wiring that happened somewhere between 3 models listed with 2x50W amplifiers. Thanks for the info.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 19,099
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
|
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 19,099 |
You seemed to switch comparing the CS8 vs CA67 and CS8 vs CS7 between posts... Yes, I can understand why this might appear confusing, my apologies. Essentially, the point I wished to make is that marketing materials typically emphasise the new features and improvements compared to the previous generation models. In this case (CS11/CS8 vs CS10/CS7), the GFII action, new SK piano sounds, additional speakers (for CS8), improved Virtual Technician functionality, enhanced headphone sound, etc. are considered the feature highlights, and therefore explained in the brochure and website. There are other improvements, such as the ability to edit and re-store Registrations, and the redesigned amplifier, however - for one reason or another - these details are not discussed in our consumer-oriented marketing materials (although they are covered in the dealer sales manuals). it is too late for me anyway to consider buying the CS8 over CA67... Again, I would recommend that you play-test both models and then judge whether the superior cabinet appearance and improved amplifier of the CS8 is worth the additional investment over the CA67. I hope this helps. Kind regards, James x
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2016
Posts: 912
500 Post Club Member
|
500 Post Club Member
Joined: Jul 2016
Posts: 912 |
Thanks Kawai James for clarifying, Just glad the cs are not expensive just because of its pretty face!
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 34
Full Member
|
Full Member
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 34 |
Go for a reasonable board and get a good vst library. Ur not going to find a DP that sounds as good, especially recording. So to save $$, try for example, a Casio 5 or the newer cpg700 and take the clams u saved and get a good vst lib. There r many out there. Ive been using Ivory for years..plus the Casio's play nice w/midi, are reasonable and sturdier than most people think.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 3,868
3000 Post Club Member
|
3000 Post Club Member
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 3,868 |
So to save $$, try for example, a Casio 5 or the newer cpg700 and take the clams u saved and get a good vst lib. The OP said "Pls advise which one (Kawai ca97 or Casion gp500)is the most similar to acoustic piano in terms of hand feel.", I doubt CGP700 or Casio 5 (PX-5S?) are on the same level as the GP500 (I have tried one of the GPxxx piano and one of the Tri-Sensor II pianos..... They were very different from a feeling point.) But with the advice of using a virtual piano, the GP300 would be as interesting as the GP500 since they only differ by the tone generator. (And the price difference covers plenty of virtual pianos). But this works only if the PC is near the piano.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Piano
by Gino2 - 04/17/24 02:34 PM
|
Piano
by Gino2 - 04/17/24 02:23 PM
|
|
Forums43
Topics223,408
Posts3,349,457
Members111,637
|
Most Online15,252 Mar 21st, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|