Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Piano Forum Hybrid piano NU1 VS GP300 (or 400, 500)?

I am currently looking for hybrid piano to rent. I learned that Yamaha NU1 has rental option (from their website) so tested the piano at the store and was really pleased about the action. Unfortunately, the piano that I tested was not for rental so I made phone call to several other piano stores and found out that there is new hybrid piano, Casio GP 300. I will know better when I go to test next week, but is there anyone who played both pianos and share some thoughts? Both piano cost same for rental although they recommended Casio than Yamaha. The store said they have GP400 and GP500 for rental as well.

I am biased, I own an NU1 and have played a GP300 in a store. If you want a realistic feeling piano action, upright or grand, the NU1 beats the GP300 easily. The GP300 action is, ugh, well, what to say kind of boring, soulless, average. The two piano voices on the NU1 are good enough for piano practice, and you would have to compare them against the voices available on the GP300 versus your requirement.

Hi, there is a big differenze on the action of the two DP. NU1 has an upright piano action, the Casio GP series has got instead a Grand Piano action developed in collaboration with Bechstein.
I would not say which one is best, both models are top of their range on their brand and it's personal preference on touch , sound that would make the difference.
I own a Kawai CS10 and I personally preferred this to the Yamaha NU1. But again this is only my opinion.

Hi there-

I'm on a similar hunt to you and playing the same instruments. As you'll hear a lot on this forum: the right one for you is the one that clicks with you when you play it. Ignore the sales talk and confirmation bias.

That said: I have to say I found the Casio GP quite impressive, both action and sound. In particular the ability to virtually change the acoustic "surroundings" (opera house!) is great fun and actually useful rather than just a technical toy.

I know the NU1 is very popular here, but I found the action very shallow and "clicky". I felt a bit like I was typing on a netbook keyboard while the Casio GP felt like a proper desktop keyboard.

One thing worth considering, though: the Casio GP is new, the Yamaha has been around for ages. If something goes wrong, which has the better guarantee (fix on site, send in)? I imagine Casio have done a lot of testing but perhaps things will emerge in the coming months of real world use that need fixing. If the Casio retailer is further away than the Yamaha dealership, that might be worth consideration.

Finally, have you played the Roland Hybrids Lx 7/17? I played them and found them muddy in sound, then, on my second visit, another employee showed me the setting to "virtually" open the lid, changing the sound coming from the speakers. The sound was wonderful then. (I'm holding out to test the Roland Kiyola before I make a final decision).

Anyway, do your budget calculations, sit down, play with your eyes shut and your ears and fingers will make the decision for you!

D

Why buy an upright-emulating action when there are great grand-emulating hybrids?

I would also consider the Kawai CA97.

I can appreciate you having a preference for your purchase. I am super amused by the melodrama.

So if the grand action in the Casio is boring, soulless, average...the action from a Yamaha B1 entry level upright is what?

Between the two, Yamaha NU1 no doubt. Dont think further.

I don't know, but to my (very limited but in few stores) experience with that thing on Y, it would better served in a winter as wood for heating than a piano

Regarding Casio action, it is nice, but quite light. I was thinking of purchasing it, but during fast playing there was something strange with the action.
Still not better than Kawai GF and I think also, That current Roland pha50 is better.

Also, you should absolutely try Roland LX7 in your price point and Kawai ca97.

Can you tell us how the CA97 action feel compares with the Avant hybrids?
I assume, from what you've written, that it has a "grand emulating" action which would mean perceptible after-touch and ability for fast repetition to me (among other things).

I found the sound of the Yamaha instruments convincingly authentic, and the action feel, very close to that of an acoustic instrument.
If the CA97 truly equals (or betters) performance of the Yamahas in those areas at a lower price point, it would certainly be worth considering.

FWIW - this is not entirely an academic question for me. The practice pianos at the university where I teach are, for the most part, ready for replacement. The recurring costs for tuning and repairs are something we're trying to minimize, so, of course we're looking at hybrid instruments with Yamaha topping the list at the moment.

Good Day to All.

Seeker, did you were thinking about Roland lx17? In Canada they are (if I am not wrong) ABRSM certified instruments for exams.

I have owned an N1 and have played the NU1 multiple times in the store.

For the first time yesterday, I played the GP-500 and was very very impressed with the action. The keyboard felt absolutely amazing and very grand piano like. Both the NU1 and GP-500 have slightly plasticky keys but the GP-500 definitely felt better, but then again, it's comparing an upright action to grand action. I definitely prefer the GP-500 to the NU1 in terms of action and keyboard feel. However, in terms of sound, the NU1 is leaps better.

I felt the GP-500 was quite flat sounding and lacks timbral change. All 3 grands, the Berlin, Hamburg and Vienna all sound similar lacks depth. Whereas the NU1 sound is much clearer, with a deeper crisper bass and singing treble.

However, I think the action is the foremost priority for me, so in that I would pick the GP-500. I haven't tried the 300 as our store didn't carry it so I can't comment directly on the GP-300, however, I thought I read the action was the same. I could be remembering wrong..so don't quote me on that.

As for the LX-17, I didn't like the action as much as either the Avant Grand or the Casio hybrid. The keys felt too bouncy, especially in the bass, and especially the bass region sounded very very hollow and muffled. That being said, I didn't tweak the many settings of the modelled sound engine, so I suspect it could be changed.

I believe the N1 is also certified for something, maybe GR10 or ARCT RCM system, I can't remember. Not sure about the NU1 though since it's an upright instead of grand action.

I did not playe NU1, because it's not in my interest. However, based on your post, I see that you want that ungly Yamaha clear bright and harsh sound. Casio's Berlin is a piano of great timbre change. It's not a problem with Casio, it's your taste which is accepting that kind of sound.

Both Casio and Roland have a great sounds. Roland is not, by any means, hollow and muffled. It is at the region, where it is nice to play and listen for hours. Unfortunately, Bechstein can be too harsh if played aggresively in the top to octaves, to the poing of making pain in the ears.

Both of them are still far away from muffled and hollow. It is just yamaha which you like, that is set on the extreme bright with their acoustics (not CFX) and you think it's medium or normal. They are rather on the edge than in the middle.

This what is singing for you, is most probably very bright. I was listening NU1 a lot via YouTube, and it has it's typical Yamaha ugly overbright ear bleeding sound.

Muffled can be Bluethner

I disagree with your comment. If you have read my other posts, I actually like a very mellow/dark sound and have had my own Yamaha C3 voiced down extensively. other than the C3 we have owned a Bosendorfer concert grand and Steingraeber A170, all having been voiced down to be more mellow.

I am judging the quality of the sound, not the sound itself. While the Yamaha is bright, the sound depth and 3 dimensionality is much better than the Casio or Roland in my opinion. I actually much prefer a Bechstein and Hamburg (Steinway) sound to a Yamaha piano sound, however in my opinion, both pianos are very very poorly represented by Casio's sampling. The Vienna sound (I'm assuming Bosendorfer) is nothing like our Bosendorfer Imperial we used to own. I'm saying Yamaha has done a much better sampling/layering of their piano than Casio's sampling/layering of the pianos they represent.

I have played many many Steinway Hamburg Ds including a documentary of my day spent at the Steinway Hall in London playing 3 brand new Ds and 12 concert fleet Ds. Never once have I complained that their bass is muffled or tone unclear. I much prefer them to the Yamaha sound signature.

Like I said, I haven't played around with the sound settings on the Roland other than the default, but I am unfortunately not satisfied with it. This could be from the lack of tweaking, or the speakers in the LX-17, I can't say since I didn't try with headphones. But personally, I find its qualities inferior to the NU1 sound.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GPJP65EMK50

Even watching this video of what I presume is a tweaked version of the LX-17 sound, I find the bass to be severely lacking in resonance, depth and power. Although it sounds better than the speakers on the LX-17, however, even compared to some smaller inexpensive grands like Johannes Seiler that I played yesterday, Yamaha, Ritmuller, Young Chang of a 5'5" to 6'6" size, the bass is lacking, therefore in my opinion, it's not the most realistic representation of a grand piano in general even taking in the differences between pianos, prepping, quality, etc.

At any rate, even the N1 which I liked more than the Roland LX15e/17 was not as realistic in touch or sound as a grand as I would've liked so I ended up selling it within 5 months of buying it. The Casio wasn't released yet at the time, but if it had been, I think it would have been a contender for me because of the touch, while the sound to me wasn't as well sampled, the price and touch would have been a strong factor for me.

Edit: I'm not bashing any of the brands as touch/sound is very personal, I'm only giving an account of my personal experience. However, I don't want to be misinterpreted in what I say either. To say my normal/stand is a very bright Yamaha sound, is not what I was trying to say with my original post comparing the 3 models. To the OP, please go out and try all the pianos! I've had people recommend me models only to see that I hated the sound/action in the end even though on paper it sounded good! I didn't care for the Yamaha CLP5xx series at all that I had also been recommended, so go and do some test runs on the prospective pianos!

Michiyo-Fir,

Sorry than, too much reading of digital forum, where most people have no idea how acoustic works.

I agree than Roland is their own representation of acoustic, and this is their line - we want to build a Roland piano, not a Steinway, Yamah or whatever it is. You can feel some slight tone of artificiality in it. However, compared to sampled pianos, full modeled Rolands are much more alive and vibrant. It's impressive for me.

I am just somewhere at your point, but lower in price, thinking between GP300, HP605/LX7 or Kawai CA97. Hard choice, but given everything together I think Roland will be my winner. I just can't go with Kawai sampling. Bass is one big booming if you will play some serious classical reportoire, and I am not fond of it's pianos. They just dont click with me. with Casio there is some stragness in their action. Is light... but light in some weird way. And I like the Hamburs sound the best, even though it's their old sound, but now they probably give us far better samples.

And, as you probably know, they all sound different in reality comapred to YouTube

I don't know whether you agree with me or not, but I see talking about digitals is also worth coming here on acoustic section.

Regarding Yamaha, I never clicked with that company and never could like both their actions and sound in Clavinovas, even the most expensive ones. Was happy when they presented the 5x5 line, but after Kawai, Roland and Casio presented their new pianos and IMO Yamaha is at the last position, both in action and sound - I am talking about CLP line.

Not sure about how in reality behaves NU1, but I know its the sound I couldn't live with.

About the bass, indeed, there is something with Roland, but again, in Clavinova CFX (don't remember how the Boesendorfer was behaving) IMO the bas is over exaggerated, I do not like it. In Kawai is not so roaring, but it's boomy. Casio seemed to be somwehere in good middle.
But I like the Roland sound.

Tomorrow I am going on whole day test plaing all top digitals so I may come with some new or changed opinions though

If I would ask you, which digital you would chose (besides NU1), what would be your choice?

To clarify, I would not choose the NU1 because I don't like the upright action. At the time I chose Yamaha N1 (grand action) over the Roland and owned it for a while. We also don't have many Kawais in the area, but I did remember liking the sound on the Kawai grands but not the vibrating soundboard. I didn't like the vibrations on the higher Avant Grand models either because both the Kawai and Yamaha vibrations were quite fake feeling to be but a lot of people seem to enjoy it.

Right now, I would probably choose the Casio GP-300 if it has the same action mechanism as the GP-500. The sound of the N1 imo is not worth the money over the GP-300, plus the GP-300 has a much more streamline look whereas the N1 was really deep/large and took a lot more space. The LX7 wasn't bad either but I prefer the GP-300 action. And unfortunately I haven't tried a CA97 that I can recall.

I didn't feel the GP-500 was too light (providing the GP-300 is the same), I liked the action, maybe even more than the Yamaha but I haven't compared them side by side since they are at different stores so maybe my opinion would not hold if I had them together. However, there is no let off on the Casios, that bothers some people, but I was surprisingly fine with it, paired with a VST, I would probably buy the Casio for the price/value.

To be honest though, I liked the LX7/17 way better than the previous pianos namely the LX15e. I hated hated hated the action on that thing and the other Roland high end piano I like prior was the V-piano action but it bottomed out a bit harder than I'm used to so the LX7 imo is a big improvement over their previous generation action, and the modelled sound is a really amazing feature because of unlimited polyphony and the ability to greatly adjust resonance and sustain. My biggest complaint of all digital pianos is that the sustain is very poor and overtones are usually poor compared to an acoustic but the modelling system could fix that. However, as my preferred action is very important to me, I probably would have gone with the Casio over the Roland, if their price point is similar (can't remember how much either one is right now).

Thank you for your deep answer.

GP 300, 400 and 500 have the same action. However, I had at my previous home upright with too light action, which was not good for me technique. It is just worn out and very very light.

Thus I am looking for a heavy action, and therefore Casio is bit too light for me. When playing fast music, or passages, I don't what, but I remember I was not fully fond of that, besides it was very nice. NEvertheless, I will give it a change at Monday once again and have to decide on one of then and will update my opinions her.

And,indeed, PHA50 is a great improvement over the PHAIV, I do agree. I neved had a Chance to play Vpiano, but played other Rolands with the same action, and indeed, it was hard bottoming.

However I see some similarities in how we recognize tchem, but difference may be in some specific qualities, which we are looking for currently.

And, Indeed Casio looks very nice. What is bad with Roland it's their sheet music stand on LX7, not too good.

About the overtones, I think Roland is years ahead of other sampled DP's, because of their pianos being 100% modelled.

Thanks for the tip. No, I wasn't thinking of the Roland, wasn't aware of its existence.

Ten minutes of internet searching has not revealed the price point to me. Can you tell me what they sell for in Canada? USA?

If close to the Yamahas in price, they'll certainly be something we look at on the way to a purchase decision (if the $ ever materializes).

Hi Neighbor (I'm near BWI Airport.)

To clarify my point, most major manufacturers design their better digital pianos to feel and sound as close to a grand as they can get, given the price point. The engineering trys to capture as much of the nuances of a grand as possible. Some models do better than others.

The NU1 is an exception in that it emulates a quality upright piano. While it does so very well, I question why a shopper would prefer the feel and control of Yamaha's good upright emulation than the feel of the better grand emulating digitals on the market, the Kawai CA/CS Series being only one of them.

Please read the digital section more in that case. There are plenty of topics regarding those top digital pianos. There are only for manufacturers in the game: Roland, Kawai, Casio and Yamaha. Yamaha is mostly described as the least modern, while all other have made impressive improvement during last years. Finally, it's always your choice, but you have to play them in reality, because they sound different than on Internet videos.

Regarding the price, if you want it buy for the school, the best way for you would be to contact user Jay Roland, he has a lot of posts in digital piano section here, so you will find him easy, usually on first page. He is working as sales representative for Roland Canada, so that may be your best choice to try.