Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Digital Pianos - Electronic Pianos - Synths & Keyboards N1x vs. Clavinova in terms of sound

Hi to all!

I would like to know how you see the tonal difference between the Avantgrand N1x and a Clavinova such as the CLP-645?
There is no doubt that the action of the N1x is way better but how do you compare the sound?

Both have Yamaha CFX (with binaural sampling) and the Bösendorfer Imperial.

Was anyone able to compare those side by side?

This is a tuff question.

I tried both at the same store using the same headphones.
Even tough i didnt like playing the clavinova at all i think the samples
sounded the same.

So it was just a matter of the better action for you?

I’m more curious about how the upcoming CLP7XX will compare to the AvantGrands in all aspects.

I assume Yamaha will make some improvements to the sound engine? Perhaps a tweak or two for the action?
I wouldn’t mind a few more speakers for the current 645; this would bring it up to six. And hopefully they will improve the cabinet design for all the models.

See thats the reason it is a tuff question for me. When i was looking for a new piano
I was looking for the package that fitted MY needs the best.
And the action was a verry important factor.

You can always change the sound with vst's, different speakers or headphones.
But you wont be able to change the action.

When is there an upcoming CLP7XX ?
Currently at the NAMM 2020 nothing has been announced, so Kawai is still leading the game :P

Some old posts said YAMAHA usually announces Clavinova at another event. In Spring IIRC. I'm hoping they upgrade the actions across all levels. Speaker issues I can fix myself

Unfortunatly it doesent make much sense from a business perspective to bring any major improvements.
There will be tiny improvements and fixes but nothing Major.

One day, maybe summer namm… they have to… they seriously walking behind now compared to Roland HP, LX and Kawai CA , NV.

The binaural sound may indeed be the same patch. However, one of the hallmarks of the AvantGrands is their multi-channel sampling output. The pianos in AGs are sampled with four channels (instead of just stereo L/R) at different points across the soundboard, and each channel is replayed to a different speaker in a (roughly) corresponding position. I'm not aware of the CLPs (including the 695) doing anything like this.

Odd that the NU1X (part of the AvantGrand family?) does not use multi-channel sampling, corresponding speaker setup and sound system, yet people love it and its old stinking stereo.

My guess is that it doesn't make sense given the speaker profile. The NU1X is so narrow that all you can really output is stereo (unless you'd like to sample at the pedals )

The depth of instrument required by a grand action is what makes the multi-channel output possible/beneficial.

Hear me out: what about an NU5X? and I’m not talking about the fifth generation NU1X, but something that would co-exist alongside the NU1X.

The ‘NU5X’ will be taller and deeper (similar to its acoustic sibling), it would accommodate a longer (keys) upright action and allow for some form of a multi-channel sound system.

While i like the Idea from a consumer perspective what would bei the benefit for yamaha ?

Taller? I'm against this as I'm a small person. If there is a upgrade, it also should be in the clavinovas, because they have just the right height.

Welcome to Piano World, Eric.Interesting observation.
And I think you're right, based on past performance.

To quote former member "dewster" from seven years ago ...
http://forum.pianoworld.com/ubbthreads.php/topics/2217153/re-yamaha-p105-teardown.html#Post2217153

http://forum.pianoworld.com/ubbthreads.php/topics/2217774/re-yamaha-p105-teardown.html#Post2217774

Sad. But true.

I understood two speakers can convey depth of field effectively enough. Binaural stuff is supposed to do this isn't it? I've had vinyls which did this very well. And films too. Why doesn't the piano do the same? Binaural on my P515 is so good I switched it off . . . .

You can't really do it with two speakers. You have two EARS which represent two point targets for sound. So with two isolated sources (closed back headphones or earbuds) you can represent 3d positional audio--that is what binaural audio is. But it's the isolated part that is missing when you output to speakers.

So why is it that two speakers is adequate for playing a recording of an acoustic piano?

I had a CLP-685 which has the same sound engine as the CLP-645. I traded it for an N1x. It appears that the N1X has re-recorded the CFX and Bosendorfer Imperial using "Spatial Acoustic Sampling".

To me, the Bosendorfer Imperial is the most significant improvement. The Imperial on the CLP-685 was thin and lacked bass, it really didn't do justice to the Imperial. On the N1X however, it's vastly improved, and in fact, on speakers, I prefer the Imperial to the CFX. It's got a very warm sound, where the CFX is quite bright comparatively. On headphones, the CFX with the binaural sampling is the only sound to consider, the rest sound distant and washed out comparatively. I personally think the binaural CFX over headphones is the same between the CLP-685 (and thus the 645) and the N1X, there's no difference to my ears.

Even though the speaker system is better on the CLP-685, I actually prefer the N1X because of the speaker placement. On the CLP-685 the sound seemed to come out of the front of the piano, and always gave the impression you were playing a recording like through a hi-fi, where on the N1X the sound comes from where you expect it to come from on a grand piano. I miss the big woofers that the CLP-685 had, but I'm not willing to fork over the dough for the N3X.

Also, the rest of the piano sounds on both pianos are, in my not so humble opinion, crap, and I never use them. The pipe organs, which the N1X has, I believe are the same sample as the CLP's and they sounded better on the CLP-685 because of the better speaker system, I could shake the walls with the low registers