Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Digital Pianos - Electronic Pianos - Synths & Keyboards Yamaha CLP-600 series release date?

Thanks for posting!
Another good overview from Tony at Bonners.

Cheers,
James
x

After many months of research, deliberation, and several hours of playtesting, yesterday I placed an order for a CLP-645 to replace my current entry level piano. I’m sharing my buying experience in case it might be useful to anyone considering similar options.

Budget: initially around €1.700, eventually €2.000
Pianos considered: Kawai CN27, CN37, Roland HP603, Yamaha CLP-535, -635, -545, -645, -575 (play-tested each at length multiple times)
Final decision: Yamaha CLP-645

Initially, when my budget was around €1.700, I was leaning towards the CN37, which to me was the best option in that price range. It’s only competitor at the price was the Yamaha CLP-535, and the CN was better in nearly all fronts (significantly better sound system, more resonances, more sounds, Bluetooth). The keys were comparable, both plastic, both quite good and solid. Then the CLP-635 came out, and it makes the choice between these two much harder. The 635 has an improved sound engine, with VRM, ie all the modelled resonances of the top end Yamahas, and a far better speaker setup (even though on paper it’s the same as 535). The CN37 still has 4 speakers and Bluetooth which the Yamaha doesn’t, but it’s now a really tough choice between those two.

Eventually I was able to increase my budget to around €2.000, which brought the Roland HP603 and the Yamaha 545, 645, and 575 into the picture. I really love the Roland and I almost bought it, but ultimately I found the NW Yamaha action better than the Roland PHA-50. The Roland action is also noisier than the Yamaha which put me off. I really grew to love the modelled sound of the Roland though, and all its tweakability, and would have been a great choice also.

Unfortunately Kawai didn’t have a competitor in this price range, the CA67 was quite a bit more expensive, and the only dealer in my country did not have it on display, so I could not test it.

Finally it came down to the 645 and the 575, which were at the same price. I had a very slight preference for the action of the 575 (on paper the only difference is linearly weighted keys vs grouped in the 645), and the sound system of the 575 (additional subwoofer). However I wanted to have the more modern piano, the Bösendorfer sound was significantly improved for the 645, and since I use an iPad often the Bluetooth is a nice bonus (so was the improved panel layout).

Looking forward to hopefully many years of enjoyment of this instrument, thanks for all the help on this forum in making my decision.

Interesting video from Tony at Bonners comparing the Kawai CS11 and the Yamaha CLP 685.

The keyweight mirrored my own (very limited) two lunchtimes playing the 685.

It is a bit on the heavy side. The 585 was much nicer feel wise, even though I preferred the sound on the 685.

Never played the Kawai, but now find myself increasingly interested.

Have to say though that every time I watch videos of the Kawaii vs the Yamahas, I always prefer the sound of the Yamahas. They seem to have an extra depth of sound (on the videos at least), that the Kawais don't.

Not sure if that would hold up the same in the real world?

You can find now the CLP-585 for around 2630 € in a GB store... (Polished Ebony... it was nearly 4500 € two years ago !). At this price It's a good deal. 1300 € less than CLP-685 PE.
And 2490 € for CLP-585 black walnut.
I think I will probably buy the CLP-585... But first I have to get rid of my upright piano...

What is the consensus thus far on the new GrandTouch action vs the Kawai GFII?

I have heard that the counterweights on the 685 improve the rapid repetition touch. Is this really true? It's seems a shame they don't use the same action throughout their better product lines like Kawai.

I do like the GFII, even if I didn't manage Caprice Espagnol like repeated notes (perhaps my techniques has become too adjusted to uprights). However, the Chopin double thirds played extremely nicely on it.

The 675/685 are still very new so not a lot of impressions. But from what I've seen so far, the majority of responses seem to be:

1. GrandTouch is heavier than the previous NW-X on the 585.
2. GrandTouch doesn't really feel like a real acoustic piano.
3. Nobody really stresses the effect of the longer pivot point.

To me, this seems like a pretty lukewarm reception, which is unfortunate in that I always have high hopes for further improvement on DP actions. I don't have many chances to try out new DPs but the 675/685 still are high on my list of DPs to try out.

Does the Gran Touch have a longer pivot at all? A similar action on the NU1 and the old CLP990 did not . . . .Diagrams please, gentlemen . . .

Well, Yamaha literally claims that it has the longest pivot point of any digital piano. Longer than an AvantGrand? Maybe. Longer than a silent grand piano? Dunno. But I'm willing to take their word to mean it's definitely longer than the GH3X/NW-X in their prior Clavinovas...

But yeah, I think we're still waiting for some brave soul to post up teardown pics, because curious minds want to know!

Would concur with the 'lukewarm' feel.

To me they have slightly messed up the keyboard on the 685 in comparison to the 585. It wasn't as nice to play.

Sounds better though. Which is kinda annoying, because it feels like the two elements are now out of sync.

Touch - Better on the 585
Sound - Better on the 685

You need a 685 with the same keyboard as the 585 (I even prefer the look of the keys on the 585!)

Need to try a Kawaii CS-11. Really curious as to how I would find it.

While I'm not as good a pianist as you probably are (coming from the organ, having a 7 year hiatus in playing, and only switched to the piano full time 8 months ago), I did experience some different piano's since then.

To try the piano, I started out with a Kawai MP7, and got to play fairly well from lead sheets (as I had done at the Hammond organ), and some simple Grade 1-2 classical pieces, but with the trills. (This is the important part.)

After some practicing, I could easily play quite fast trills on the MP7.

Then I switched to the LX-17 (and moved on to grade 3 and 4 pieces, and will soon start on some grade 5), and couldn't produce a trill if my life depended on it. Had to learn it all over again. Now, I can do trills as easily as I did on the MP7, and I can *still* do trills on the MP7 (which is now at my girlfriend's apartment).

In the store, the CS11 feels great with regard to playing popular music (at which I'm much better than classical at the moment), but I *still* can't do any trills on it, even though I can on two other digital piano's. I'm confident I'd be able to trill on the CS11's GF2 keyboard, and older GF1 keyboard with some practice. To show that the keyboard you're used to makes a big impact is the fact that as soon as I sat down behind ANY Roland having a PHA-50 or PHA-4 keyboard, or a Kawai with an RH-II or RH-III keyboard, I could do trills as well as I can on the MP7 and LX-17.

On the CLP-585, which I dislike with a passion both in sound and keyboard... and features as well..., I can't produce anything close to music as the only thing I can do is either soft, or loud. I dislike that piano, and I think it actively hates me as well.

I've felt that way on some old acoustic uprights I've happened to sit it. It really is mostly a matter of what you're used to. I remember when I first moved from my CP50 to my MP11, I felt I could control sensitivity and dynamics a lot better on the Yamaha. But now, after being used to the MP11, sitting down at a CP50 or CP4 really makes me notice that front-loaded Yamaha weighting.

The funny thing is I find it's pretty easy to stay acclimated with completely different-feeling actions so long as you play them regularly. Over a given week I might sit down at an acoustic upright and grand, and several different digitals, and as long as I keep that up, it doesn't really matter which one I'm at, adjusting is almost instant. However, if I don't touch one for a month or more, it suddenly starts to feel unnatural again. The only exceptions I've noticed to this are moving between the grand and the MP11 (they feel very close), and moving between the upright and the Yamaha NU1 (they feel nearly identical)--I could play one of these pairs exclusively for a month and still be able to sit down at the other and not be flummoxed by the difference in the action.

Indeed.

The guy at my local piano store is a young chap who plays quite well (self taught, as he normally plays the accordion), and he once told me: I don't like acoustic piano's. While they sound as good or better than the high end digitals, they all have crap keyboards. They don't feel as they should.

He's somewhere close to 30, and he's never played an acoustic piano in his life, apart from the ones in the store where he works, but most of the time, it's the store owner who sells the piano's (as that guy mainly sells the accordions... evidently, as that is where his grades an knowledge are.)

Still, it goes to show that there isn't one true right. For him, the 'digital actions' are the best ones.

For me? I've played organs all my life, from cheesy 80's home organs to orchestral organs such as the Roland Ateliers, and Hammond organs and Hammond clones.... I've also played many arranger keyboards in the 90's, and owned a few myself... so I've used a lot of organ and synth-like actions. Never did any half-decent action prevent me from playing what I want.

Therefore I'm of the opinion that I can play anything on any piano action, if the action is not all bad. I don't care if the keys are totally plastic such as the MP7, are full wood such as GF2, or are a hybrid plastic-with-wooden-sides such as the PHA-50. I also don't care if the action is folded or long (PHA-50 vs GF2). The only thing I care about is if I can play what I want.

Sometimes, when I fail to do something on the LX-17 and I'm thinking "should I have gotten the CS8 for the GF2 wooden action?", I remeber that La Campanella video posted a few posts earlier, and then think: "Nah. It's probably me."

While I like the LX-17 a lot, I still have to confess that, if the CS11 had been in two parts, I would probably have gone with that piano, because I like that one a lot as well, and it's €1200 cheaper than the LX-17. (Since I bought it, the LX-17 had a €250 and a €200 price bump. Back then, the LX-17 was €750 more than the CS11, which I think it was worth it, but now at €1200 more, it's getting into overpriced territory.)

As for the CLP-685... I've not yet played it. If it's only a very small improvement over the CLP-585, or only changed in some ways which may or may not be an improvement, there is a big chance I still don't like it.

Personally, my opinion is that if you have a CS11 or an LX-17 and you have it set up to your liking, the only worthwhile upgrade is to a grand piano. The next generation of digital piano's will not be enough of an improvement. I think will take at least three generations (around 10 years) to improve the piano's at these price points. Manufacturers could do it now, but they won't. They will go in tiny steps.

I'll be considering an upgrade when the warranty of my LX-17 runs out in 2026. If I can afford it (also, with regard to the location where I live), I'll possibly upgrade to a silent grand, or do nothing if the improvements are not enough.

Whilst I don't wish to be unkind, I would like to question the above statement regarding digital pianos having superior keyboards to acoustic pianos.

In reality, no digital piano has the transient response characteristics of the piano (upright or grand) excellently modeled or sampled. A pianist's 'sound' is largely due to instrument and room acoustics, as well as the way they weight all the notes, pedal, and control lines and other musical structures. However, their is a component of touch, or more precisely, the way the key is excited. The audio spectrum is increasingly percussive as the acceleration of the key is greater. It is essential to master this to become a very good pianist. Without access to an instrument that can create these sounds, it's not possible to fully access how well one keyboard plays versus another.

I do think that digitals have many useful features however, and I am in the market myself as the better digitals play trills better than my upright and have a heavier feel in preparation for performance on a grand.

very interesting to follow- this article.

I assumed that a digital piano in the higher price segment simulates the feel and sound of an acoustic piano as good as possible. I initially planned to go for a clp 585 but waited when hearing about the new models.

I am searching for a digital piano, that is in the price range of a clp 685 and has the most natural feel and sound (with a bösendorfer piano being the absolute ideal). I do not need to make funny sounds with it or record samples.

- which digital piano is as close as possible to the like of boesendorfer in sound and feel?

I also was surprised to see that the clp 685 is very heavy in terms of the touch-weight. While a Bösendorfer has 48g to 55g, the clp 585 already had 60g to 80g. The clp 685 is even more heavy, which is also shown in the video comparison from Tony https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dEKFGkR6KAk

So how "realistic" is the feel of the clp 685 compared to other digital pianos in this range with having a Bösendorfer as ideal?
and more important, is it suitable for children learning to play piano (considering the additional force needed to play the piano?

I do appreciate your thoughts / feedback on this a lot!

PS: yes, I know that you cannot expect to get a digital clone of a Bösendorfer for the price of a clp 685. However, for the price of the clp 685, you should get a very good digital piano that imitates it well.

The common view here is that no digital piano internal sound beats some of the top VST sampled pianos that run into multi-gigabytes in size. In which case, you could buy a piano with a better action like a Kawai CS11, and hook it up to a computer to get a better Bösendorfer. Yamaha actions at that price point are ok (not up to the Grand Feel II action though), but their best action lives in the N3X Avant Grand which is pricey.

Maybe in Pianoteq 6, they will release a Bösendorfer and Fazioli modelled piano sound. Rumour has it that the next version is coming soon, as the standard version has just gotten a 30% discount.

Well, it's the point of view of the player. That young guy at the music store never had any official training on piano. He's self taught, and has been playing on mid-end digitals his entire life, so that is what he knows, and what he views as a 'real piano'. While the acoustics may be better, he still might not like it.

An $50 whisky is probably better than an $10 wine, but if someone doesn't like whisky, he'll probably label the wine as being the better drink.

Digital pianos arguably do have better keyboards than acoustics. Acoustics are limited by the physics of making the note sound. Things like the escapement notch are an imperfection as is the grading from top to bottom.

Digital actions have less to go wrong and need less work over time, can be more responsive and faster.

Much of the work in the 'better' digital actions is trying to recreate the imperfections of an acoustic grand

This is usually preferred as it makes transitioning to an acoustic easier. I'm not sure it's objectively 'better' though.

Digital actions need less work over time? Not mine. Mine needed four repairs in eight years.

Sorry, but that just reads like somebody who has very little experience with acoustic pianos. None of the current digital actions are as good as a decent acoustic action. They don't offer better control in any dimension.

Quite true, ando. The digital piano is a compromise in every respect. Every.

If you want low cost, or if you want to listen with headphones, or if you cannot for some reason maintain an acoustic piano, or if you have space restrictions, then a digital meets the need where an acoustic cannot.

But if you don't have those needs and restrictions, the acoustic wins easily. The action is just one of the many advantages of a acoustic piano.