Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Digital Pianos - Electronic Pianos - Synths & Keyboards New hybrid digital pianos "too good" compared to acoustic?

From what I understand, Kawai has the best action with NV10, but Yamaha has the best headphone sound with the N1X. Is it reasonable to expect version 2 of the NV10 to not only have soundboard like the NV5, but also binaural sound for headphones?

I am currently grappling with choosing between the NV10 and N1X. If I go with NV10 now I can get full trade-in value for up to 3 years. I envision myself playing with headphones most of the time, and wonder that if Kawai still hasn't come out with binaural, perhaps they simply are not interested in it.

As an NV-10 owner, I love the action, and I do like it better than the AvantGrand actions I've tried. However, I don't think you can state that the NV-10 simply has a better action; they're both superb and it'll be a matter of personal preference. There are plenty of people out there that prefer the Yamaha action.

I think it's also NOT reasonable to assume the next NV-10 will have either a soundboard or binaural recorded audio (or an audio interface)....we don't have any evidence that supports any of those propositions. Maybe it will have some/all of those, maybe not at all. Nobody knows.


I get the "full trade-up value" deal too, but I would suggest NOT even considering that in your decision. It's a common sales tactic with pianos, and between the uncertainties of the shop still being in business, how much less they're willing to negotiate on your upgrade pricing, etc., it's not a certainty that it results in any net savings to you at all.

I also use my NV-10 with headphones 95% of the time. Personally, I don't consider the lack of binaural audio as any kind of negative. Nothing is automatically better because of binaural audio, and nothing is automatically inferior if it lacks it. Binaural recording is a process that must be implemented correctly, and there are a lot of lackluster examples out there. I think a fine stereo recording could easily outperform a binaural sample (e.g., I would love if Garritan CFX's stereo output were available natively on the NV-10; it's not binaural but is so much more realistic and pleasing).

I also wonder why Kawai didn't go binaural on the Novus line 🤔.

I don't really expect them to create an other version of the Nv10 soon, but hopefully 🤞 an NV20 with a soundboard. However so far it looks like (somebody please correct me if I'm wrong) Kawai reuses the same hard- and software components for the Novus and upper CA models, and I would expect any new released model to have the same limitations.

Now I guess it's your personal call pdavidow, between action and sound. I'm more inclined towards the action, because the sound of digitals can be upgraded (via an actual Kawai software update or VST). But here I am still not buying an NV10 because I don't enjoy the speakers 😁.

The best action? The best headphone sound? Perhaps it would be more accurate to say that people who purchased the NV10 praise the action (among other things) and people who purchased the N1X praise the binaural sample (among other things). That hardly makes those factors "the best" in their class.

Most people are satisfied with their purchase whether it be the action or samples, etc., that's why they purchased it to begin with. However, that doesn't necessarily mean one is categorically better than the other. Try before you buy and decide what is best for you.


God Bless,
David

I was not aware that Kawai can do an audio software update.

Digital sound and tacktile response is still far behind acoustics.

..but how far behind; a few miles or light years?

IMO, that's actually a good question.

Tone-wise, we're not far off, assuming your standard is DP sound versus *a recording of* an acoustic piano. A few generations into modeling and advanced resonances and I wouldn't be surprised if we get to a point where they're indistinguishable.

Out/speaker-wise, I don't know if we'll ever get there. I haven't seen any indication that a digital piano can sound like a live acoustic piano* and I feel this is one area where we just get to "good enough" and live with the result out of necessity.

*IMHO, Transacoustics where you have some kind of digital output from a real acoustic cabinet are the most convincing I've heard, and I'm not sure whether it's the cabinet, soundboard, strings, or some combination of everything, but I've been fooled more than once in misjudging the source while playing.

I wouldn't judge a piano from what I've heard or what others have said.Judge a piano for yourself.

These full trade-in deals are phony. There's no such thing.How can you possibly expect a dealer to take your trade-in and pay you back the full purchase price? That's fantasy.

He can juggle the numbers so that he seems to pay you the original price on your trade-in ... and then sell you the new piano at full list price, or even more.

Don't be fooled. Expect your piano to lose at least 20% in value the minute you take delivery, and 50% in just a few years.

So adding a real soundboard would still not be good enough?

It seems like some believe that the soundboard -in a digital- is no different than speakers, but wouldn’t the soundboard provide at least a wider and more natural propagation of sound?

I mean, how many speakers would it take to fill-in the entire cavity of a baby grand?
In theory, a soundboard in a baby grand digital hybrid will fill every inch of the piano’s cavity with sound, so I think that would be a significant improvement over conventional, and very directional, speakers.

What about adding a string-like form of sensor that is both reacting to the pounding of a real hammer and providing some form of sympathetic resonance?

I'm far from an expert, but I'm honestly skeptical that a soundboard is the end-all be-all. Kawai's had soundboards on their top-end CA/CS models for years now. And though they sound nice, I've never thought they were more convincing than a good speaker setup (especially in-cabinet speakers like on an N2). And if they really were the ultimate solution, I would think that manufacturers who have a good soundboard/transducer setup like Kawai/Yamaha would be using them everywhere.


Maybe so...but then there are other questions to answer--with the soundboard on an acoustic piano, you have a bridge transferring vibrations from strings to produce the sound. With a digital, you have a recording of the output from a soundboard being piped back into a soundboard via transducer to create what....some other sound? It sounds like re-uploading lossy-compressed files to youtube over and over. I have to wonder if the soundboard is everything it's supposed to be, why do we use mics for the master sample in the first place? Shouldn't there just be some accelerometer or seismometer transcribing the actual movement of the string at the bridge instead? Again, I have no real idea how any of this works...

A soundboard in an acoustic piano is not just a speaker. It has a special crown shape and is under precise tension, so that it changes the simple string vibrations, dissipates, propagates and modifies them into what we know as the beautiful piano sound It’s the heart of why a piano sounds like a piano.

A soundboard in a digital piano on the other hand is just some wood that vibrates from a transducer. It’s not under tension and has no special shape. The transducer doesn’t feed string-like vibrations. It feeds a prerecorded sound from a piano that has already gone through another soundboard. It’s just a speaker. Large one but speaker.

Just seems to me that, apart from the actual playing experience, the sound of a digital- any digital I've heard - is processed, refined from its original all encompassing texture. It's always apparant in demos or YT vids.
Some of us might prefer this; but I reckon you get a better more organic effect only when turning the digital up; it does sound more natural then, when one is sat in front of it.
The answer would seem to be less processing for the more expensive models. There's no reason why the full sound of the acoustic shouldn't be at your digits when playing a digital.
And the speakers can't be to blame either. they can only reproduce, either well, or poorly, that which is already there.

So ... the soundboard is just another gimmick. Like the phony "escapement" clicker.

Let me go find my shovel and my hip boots.

My understanding is that the soundboard of the Yamaha AvantGrand N3 or N3X is just a piece of wood driven by transducers that provides some resonance (they call it the Soundboard Resonator).

HOWEVER, my understanding of the Yamaha Transacoustic pianos is that they use the SAME single soundboard utilized for the acoustic portion of these pianos. When being played by a digital sound, they use transducers to drive this same single soundboard to broadcast the digital sound. When played acoustically, the acoustic strings vibrates this same single acoustic soundboard. And you can do both in parallel, called layering, meaning you can drive this soundboard with a digitally sampled sound, and simultaneously use the action keys to strike the strings to generate the acoustic sound off this same soundboard. And take it one step further, play a pre-recorded digital sampled sound track then play along with this soundtrack acoustically, to turn the performance into a 2-instruments performance.

As for whether the transacoustic sound of the sampled sounds is realistic or not, that's subjective to each individual, but plenty of reviews seem to be positive about how real it sounds with sampled sounds. I've never had a chance to hear one myself personally so I don't have any personal opinion on this.

As far as Gombessa's comment that if transacoustic were the ultimate solution, why wouldn't Yamaha/Kawai use it everywhere. I don't know, but I suspect that maybe because this is still relatively new technology (at least for piano, it seems like it's been around much longer for guitars), and perhaps they'd like to reserve this technology for higher priced piano lines to begin with. I'm hoping that eventually, they'll find business motivation to push this down to lower price point digital/hybrid piano lines as a replacement for speaker-based systems. I wouldn't be surprised if the successor to the N3X will be rid of speakers and replaced with a full size soundboard (not the less-realistic Soundboard Resonator they currently have) driven by transducer.

Modelling VST+Full Soundboard transducers will be the best way than sampling I think.
Just like they've done: Steingraeber Transducer Pianos

BTW, TA2/Aures of Y/K have shown great results with full soundboard and acoustic-digital mixing.

It seems like they have a ‘stringless’ version. This makes it more like the AvantGrand but with a soundboard instead of speakers; isn’t that what we’ve been asking for?

Granted, this technology pales in comparison to what Steinway is offering (a player-piano). The Spirio, as Steinway calls this state-of-the-art tech, is yet to be surpassed by anything out there (including the TransAcoustic, and now the ‘ducer stringless piano).

I believe Pianoteq is providing the modeling for the Steingraeber ‘ducer piano, but once again, this tech cannot compete with Steinway’s Spirio.

Yes, I know these technologies are meant for different things, but still there is a common aspect related to the innovation of the piano as we know it by implementing/merging digital/electronic with acoustic (the Spirio is a player-piano; WOW! The ‘ducer piano uses a soundboard to generate a modeled piano-sound created in collaboration with Pianoteq; good, but not even close to Steinway’s advanced synergy!

I haven't kept up with this tech, but I recall reading that the Spirio playback system is a fairly basic approximation of the Disklavier playing system Yamaha has had for decades? And the Yamaha goes to extreme lengths such as measuring/adjusting for weight drift and stiction in the keys to ensure smooth playback in a number of different states of regulation. It's interesting stuff but I'm not sure the playback system is all that "innovative" today.

I no have a friend with a Spirio M, and while it's pretty cool too see Lang Lang on the ipad playing a D while the keys move in time on the M, it gets old fairly quickly. To me, I want the piano so I can play, not so I can sit and listen to a recorded performance.

I suppose this works best for entertaining guests over at your house.

AvantGrands have that 🤯? I didn't pay attention but indeed, it is listed in Yamaha's website specs, now I'm really curious what it looks like/what is meant exactly. I can't find any picture online.

I think it may be a very niche market: the added price of the Aures/TransAcoustic system is quite high (in the 3 to 4k-ish €/$ for K500 Aures I believe), so for entry line pianos it may not make sense to offer a system that costs the same as the actual instrument: at that point I'd personally prefer buying a better acoustic piano.

On the other end if I can place a grand piano at home (meaning, in a house without neighbours directly around) I think I'd rather get a really good acoustic and then perhaps a digital on the side if an occasional silent practice is required. I agree however that the N3X has the perfect form factor for my current situation at least: living in a city flat, wanting a grand action as close as possible to the real deal but with controlled size and sound volume. Bonus points for a sleek looking instrument. Wink wink NV-20 Kawai 😉!

That's a fair and true point, I may have been 'inceptionned' by marketing talk 😁. I wonder however, could a digital soundboard still be a perk in that its large size produces better lower frequencies? Or can the same results be achieved with a regular subwoofer, and it is just a question of how it looks 🤔?