Welcome to the Piano World Piano Forums Over 3 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!
I think what threw me... is Roland's own advertising. They noted the RD 2000 has its "best action yet" or something like that. Which simply is not true. I really thought the RD 2000 was the state of the art from this maker.
Peace Bruce in Philly
The RD2000 had Roland's best action until a few months ago.
I knew about the Roland "home pianos" with speakers that look like nice furniture...... I kinda figured, incorrectly, that they were just that... targeted to the home use market and the speaker/amp layout improved the sound to be more piano like. I really didn't think they also had "better" other stuff. Again, wrongly, I thought the home stuff was the same as the RD 2000, defeatured, with better home looks and speakers.
Again, action being so important..... I thought that the RD 2000 had the best. A pro musician, who buys a stage piano would want this, therefore,.... why wouldn't they have a stage piano with this stuff... even if it was heavier.... that is the choice of the buyer.
But my wife sells works of art to people who would be just as willing to pay $1.5M as $1M for them, just to hang on their wall. Why shouldn't people who are less budget-constrained like that, get exactly what they want, even if it is entirely aesthetically motivated?
Oh, come on Ty! That is even worse than Bruce comparing digital pianos, to high performance cars. I don’t think your wife would get much work, in the art world, if she was hanging art on clients walls that depreciated like digital pianos.
That Whaletone is pretty cool looking though.
I'm on a different order of magnitude myself than the clients of my wife I mentioned, but yet, I don't believe I've ever seriously considered depreciation in any purchase I've made, whether it was for cars or pianos - in the case of the latter, I am looking at N1X and NV10, and I haven't researched what the depreciation would be, and likely won't either even though I am raising that point here. On the other hand, this might just be because I'm rather spendthrift and irresponsible. Art collectors are sometimes impulsive with their purchases, but really can't be said to be spendthrift or irresponsible. Those of you who are financially responsible and consider such things as depreciation and total cost of ownership - well, I admire you!
across the stone, deathless piano performances
"Discipline is more reliable than motivation." -by a contributor on Reddit r/piano "Success is 10% inspiration, and 90% perspiration." -by some other wise person "Pianoteq manages to keep it all together yet simultaneously also go in all directions; like a quantum particle entangled with an unknown and spooky parallel universe simply waiting to be discovered." -by Pete14
I knew about the Roland "home pianos" with speakers that look like nice furniture...... I kinda figured, incorrectly, that they were just that... targeted to the home use market and the speaker/amp layout improved the sound to be more piano like. I really didn't think they also had "better" other stuff. Again, wrongly, I thought the home stuff was the same as the RD 2000, defeatured, with better home looks and speakers.
Again, action being so important..... I thought that the RD 2000 had the best. A pro musician, who buys a stage piano would want this, therefore,.... why wouldn't they have a stage piano with this stuff... even if it was heavier.... that is the choice of the buyer.
Peace Bruce in Philly
But you were right. When you bought your RD2000, the LX706 and LX708 probably hadn't been released. Presumably the successor to the RD 2000 will have the newer action.
I don’t think your wife would get much work, in the art world, if she was hanging art on clients walls that depreciated like digital pianos.
Off topic, but speaking of depreciating art, here is a work of contemporary art from my wife's world that appreciated the moment it was purchased! (Not being sarcastic here - it did indeed appreciate in value!)
across the stone, deathless piano performances
"Discipline is more reliable than motivation." -by a contributor on Reddit r/piano "Success is 10% inspiration, and 90% perspiration." -by some other wise person "Pianoteq manages to keep it all together yet simultaneously also go in all directions; like a quantum particle entangled with an unknown and spooky parallel universe simply waiting to be discovered." -by Pete14
I don’t think your wife would get much work, in the art world, if she was hanging art on clients walls that depreciated like digital pianos.
Off topic, but speaking of depreciating art, here is a work of contemporary art from my wife's world that appreciated the moment it was purchased! (Not being sarcastic here - it did indeed appreciate in value!)
I don't suppose it happens very often when you buy a painting that it immediately turns into one of the world's most famous works of art.
I'm on a different order of magnitude myself than the clients of my wife I mentioned, but yet, I don't believe I've ever seriously considered depreciation in any purchase I've made, whether it was for cars or pianos - in the case of the latter, I am looking at N1X and NV10, and I haven't researched what the depreciation would be, and likely won't either even though I am raising that point here. On the other hand, this might just be because I'm rather spendthrift and irresponsible. Art collectors are sometimes impulsive with their purchases, but really can't be said to be spendthrift or irresponsible. Those of you who are financially responsible and consider such things as depreciation and total cost of ownership - well, I admire you!
Yes, well on digital pianos, I wouldn’t either . . . But the higher expenditure, the more you think about future value.
I don’t think your wife would get much work, in the art world, if she was hanging art on clients walls that depreciated like digital pianos.
Off topic, but speaking of depreciating art, here is a work of contemporary art from my wife's world that appreciated the moment it was purchased! (Not being sarcastic here - it did indeed appreciate in value!)
I don't suppose it happens very often when you buy a painting that it immediately turns into one of the world's most famous works of art.
Let's just say that the buyer decided to definitely keep it, as in about 15 seconds, this work doubled in value! I think the above video, made by the artist himself, contributes to its cachet.
across the stone, deathless piano performances
"Discipline is more reliable than motivation." -by a contributor on Reddit r/piano "Success is 10% inspiration, and 90% perspiration." -by some other wise person "Pianoteq manages to keep it all together yet simultaneously also go in all directions; like a quantum particle entangled with an unknown and spooky parallel universe simply waiting to be discovered." -by Pete14
Those who like the above are often the sorts of people, like my wife, who pay homage at the altar of Bang and Olufsen.
Holy crap those things are even uglier than me and that takes some doing.
I never was one for "design" objects.
@Bruce: the highest end you can get is building a real grand piano action into a DP. Way too heavy and bulky! to do so in a slab.
Sound wise you will always be limited by the speaker setups. KAWAI does try to get closer by employing a sound board but a transducer just can't replace real swinging strings. It's not a matter of $$$, it's a matter of technology. We just don't have it.
The backbone of modern industrial society is, and for the foreseeable future will be, the use of electrical Power. VPC 1 -> Pianoteq 6 Std | Garritan CFX / Pearl Alto Flute 201
what solutions can you buy that are practical solutions to the inherent flaws of sampling, modeling and speaker technology - so that the final product creates the "sound quality" of a decent acoustic?
... there are DPs with soundboards, of course. Yamaha also has the TAs that play synthetic sound through their acoustic soundboard. Are their inherent flaws that you can think of that are still not being addressed with such implementations?
Sure, but none have passed the “acoustic†test; otherwise we could point one out and say “hey, this one did it. And the jury is still out on which speaker technology/setup will produce a high-end digital piano that can equal a decent acoustic. Point in case - when Kawai moved from the CA98 to the Novus they ditched the wood soundboard for a point speaker system!?
(The TransAcoustic doesn’t count because it is an acoustic, so of course it sounds like one. And if they manage to not make it sound like an acoustic, then we’re back to inherent flaws of digital technology.)
I think the main point is that we’ve got all these bits and pieces of current technology - but none of it solves the problem of making a high-end digital piano that produces the “sound quality†we get from a decent acoustic. And throwing money at the problem won’t get rid of the fundamental flaws in those technologies. My gut feeling is that could spend USD$50,000-100,000 to build a digital with the best of those technologies (samples, modeling, speakers) and we’d still just get something that still isn’t as good as a decent basic acoustic. It’s gonna take a thoughtful approach and a more elegant solution that hasn’t been thought of yet, to make it work.
We are the music makers, And we are the dreamers of dreams.
I think one pays for the cubist aura reminiscent of Picasso.
With due respect to Tyrone's wife, B&O has some nicely designed gear.
B&O was a client of mine. As a general matter, no consumer electronics business makes much profit so it is safe to assume B&O spent a lot of money on design, engineering, raw materials, assembly and service.
I can't speak for those nifty cubist speakers. But for some of B&O's previous models, B&O invested a lot of time and money to optimise both aesthetic and audio goals. I thought they balanced beautiful design with pretty good sound. For shoppers who did their homework, a handful of competitors' speakers had better specs but were always in non-descript boxes.
What I mean is this: There must be a market for a specialized digital piano with nothing but the "Best". For example, action. Why no DP with a duplicated grand hammer action with sensors?
You might want to read Veblen's "Theory of the Leisure Class", with its theory of "conspicuous consumption".
"Conspicuous consumption" goods have a strange property:
. . . The more expensive they are, the more desirable they are.
That's independent of any additional "use value" that the higher price might bring.
You can see that in high-end watches, high-end cars, and (at least when I was following the market) high-end hi-fi equipment. Custom-made straight razors are another example, I think.
Your RD2000 is designed, and sold, as a tool for a working musician. So Roland put in what they thought was necessary for that person, and priced it at what they thought that person might pay, in a competitive market.
I agree with some previous posts:
. . . For pianos, the 'conspicuous consumption' items are acoustic grands, from Steinway, Fazioli, and a few other makers.
Nobody -- except maybe a pianist -- will walk into a living room, see a Yamaha Avant Grand or Roland GPxxx, and think:
. . . "Oh my -- the people who live here must be really rich!"
Whereas everybody knows what a Steinway means.
. Charles --------------------------- PX-350 / microKorg XL+ / Pianoteq / Lounge Lizard / EV ZXA1 speaker
I am pointing out what appears to me to be a gap in the market place and asking as to why this is so? When I look at my RD 600 and compare to my RD 2000, I just would have thought it would be more advanced. This brings out many questions.... maybe Roland et al realizes that a "perfect Steinway" action is actually detrimental to sales given the stage keyboard has to do so many things.. such as play like an organ too.
Of course the short answer, assuming a perfect market, is that there is no money in it. Or more specifically, the rate of return of that investment is less than putting money elsewhere for comparable risk.
Regardless of the reason a person would want to spend money on something expensive, that demand is there... at least so I thought. Again, I believe, "the market" is so darn big, and there is so much money out there, I just thought that I could buy a digital piano without speakers/amps that had a true, Steinway-like action.
Regarding Veblens belief (it is a belief, there is no science behind his late 1800s conjecture), so what? It employs people. Look, the very existence of a whammy bar on a guitar or a stick that warbles on our pianos is all trickle down economics. These digital pianos are not food or medicine. They are driven by folks like us, spending our wealth on entertainment ~gasp~.. and handing money over to people who are simply trying to make money from us. I would have thought they are missing an opportunity to make more.
Besides, not everyone who pays big money for something does this to be seen or to get chicks.... entertainment is a valuable pursuit. Otherwise we would all be wearing blue denim uniforms. Anyone, and there are very few, who have seen or heard my home audio system would not be impressed. They think I am nuts.... not a compliment. I do it for another pursuit... I love it... it helps me in my pursuit of happiness.
The RD 2000's basic piano sounds (modeled) are superior to the RD 600... I owned both and had them side by side before I sold off my RD 600. But they are not, what I thought, would be 20 years worth of advancement. Now what do I mean by that? I am not sure.... I guess the RD 600 sounds were really pretty darn good.
Action wise? Again, same comment.... I guess the RD 600s action was pretty good... I believe it was the first DP action with an actual hammer.
Regarding the memory, controls etc etc..... the RD 2000 is way way way more... just over the top with tech such as the USB to PC connectivity (well at least I am impressed).
I guess I see a digital piano in the same way I view computer-powered anything... twenty years is an eternity.... I guess I never realized that maybe, just maybe, the RD 600 was already near some sort of piano nirvana.... good enough ... and that is darn good. Seriously, I kept that RD 600 for twenty years for a reason... I loved it. I could hear faults in its samples... you develop a better ear with time... and the piano sound I used for the default I could hear some metally unrealness with some finger pressures... and the decays weren't all perfect etc etc.... but again, it was a good sounding piano.
Further... that a stage piano is really for a working musician and may not be in alignment with what I wanted. Anywho.....
Regarding "High end"... well first, I was unaware of the Yamaha mechanisms.... but anyway, I just figured in a world market so darn big, and so darn flush with money, that I would have been able to find a stage piano with a Steinway-like action. Further, the RD 2000 is Roland's "Top O' the Line" stage piano.... I would have thought a top-o-the-line anything would be more than $2400 simply because I thought there would be a market for it... again because the market is so huge etc etc. .
Heck, is was worth a post on this piano forum. It even flushed out a resident Communist.
. . . Heck, is was worth a post on this piano forum. It even flushed out a resident Communist.
Peace Bruce in Philly
ROFL !!!!
I'll cop to "liberal Democrat" -- nothing to the left of that. Well, maybe "democratic Socialist" . . .
Thanks -- I didn't realize that "Theory of the Leisure Class" _was_ 19th-century, by a hair (published 1899). I thought it was 20th century, because its ideas seemed so current when I read it 50 or 60 years ago!
I don't want to get sidetracked into politics. This forum is far too friendly, and supportive, for that.
. Charles --------------------------- PX-350 / microKorg XL+ / Pianoteq / Lounge Lizard / EV ZXA1 speaker
Yes, no politics.... but.... how about a more science-related comment? Most of the material of that time were ruminations... based on observation... and at a very transformative time for human history... the history was not written yet. Today, to do economic publishing at the University level, you can;t just "reflect" or use "logic". Economics today is based on science... hard data.... statistical analysis. Taking a thoeory and testing it on data gathered in another place or time to then see if the outcomes were the same. If this scientific approach was applied to economic and behaviourl texts of the time, there is good chance communism would not have happened... or may have been different. Karl Marx had no real data other than his observations... he would not have lasted longer than a nano-second of peer review.
If this scientific approach was applied to economic and behaviourl texts of the time, there is good chance communism would not have happened... or may have been different. Karl Marx had no real data other than his observations... he would not have lasted longer than a nano-second of peer review.
You are far underestimating the willingness of people to believe what they want to believe or to believe what is convenient. While modern day examples of these effects abound in the US and Europe, this would cross into verboten politics.
"Discipline is more reliable than motivation." -by a contributor on Reddit r/piano "Success is 10% inspiration, and 90% perspiration." -by some other wise person "Pianoteq manages to keep it all together yet simultaneously also go in all directions; like a quantum particle entangled with an unknown and spooky parallel universe simply waiting to be discovered." -by Pete14
You are far underestimating the willingness of people to believe what they want to believe or to believe what is convenient. While modern day examples of these effects abound in the US and Europe, this would cross into verboten politics.
No need to go into politics, really.
Just take a look at the high end HiFi snake oil market and you see this effect in action. Pretty darn profitable action at that.
The backbone of modern industrial society is, and for the foreseeable future will be, the use of electrical Power. VPC 1 -> Pianoteq 6 Std | Garritan CFX / Pearl Alto Flute 201
Regarding "High end"... well first, I was unaware of the Yamaha mechanisms.... but anyway, I just figured in a world market so darn big, and so darn flush with money, that I would have been able to find a stage piano with a Steinway-like action. Further, the RD 2000 is Roland's "Top O' the Line" stage piano.... I would have thought a top-o-the-line anything would be more than $2400 simply because I thought there would be a market for it... again because the market is so huge etc etc. .
Peace Bruce in Philly
If you want expensive, Roland isn't the best manufacturer to look at, unless they are selling a new technology such as the V-Piano. The action in the RD2000 is one of the most responsive actions ever made in my experience. I'm not sure what else they could have offered at the time the RD2000 was released.
![[Linked Image]](http://forum.pianoworld.com//gallery/42/medium/12282.png)
![[Linked Image]](https://luxexpose.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/LuxExpose-Whaletone-3.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/3swohiehkekm3nzZKy61RwQJpZQ=/30x0:971x627/1820x1213/filters:focal(30x0:971x627)/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/47355160/Bang___Olufsen.0.0.jpg)
