Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Digital Pianos - Electronic Pianos - Synths & Keyboards Yamaha CP88 vs P515

SCM, as we were talking about on those piano samples, seems to have essentially been a kind of data-saving compression mechanism. Not an engine, and I'm not sure what kind of "engine" you think could have been added from the P515 instead... I guess you mean maybe the VRM feature? That and the binaural sample are probably the main software enhancements of the P515, though with binaural's technological advantage being based on headphone playback, it might not be such a marketing advantage in a gigging piano. It still could be nice to have, though. What are the comparable "engines" (or whatever you were referring to) that "almost everyone else is doing"? Are you talking about the resonances?

I can't speak to that specifically, I'm not very familiar with the PSRs. I wouldn't be surprised, though, because that's consistent with Yamaha's approach as I've generally seen it. Yamaha tends to use the same sounds (or subsets/supersets of the same sounds) in many boards throughout the price range, differentiating the models more by features than by sonic technologies. Kurzweil, Nord, and Dexibell do the same... even their lower priced boards often have many of the same sounds and technologies that are in their high end boards. This is a bit different from the way Roland and Korg have traditionally differentiated their boards, where different boards more often have very different sounds or sound engines (the trade-off being that while a cheaper board may lack the sound technologies of a higher end board, those cheaper boards tend to have more of the higher end features than a Yamaha equivalent). Though Korg and Roland have both moved away from that a bit in recent years, as Korg came out with the Grandstage and Vox Continental which have basically a subset of Kronos technology/sounds in lower cost boards, and Roland has developed their ZEN-Core engine which provides some amount of common sound technology from the lower cost RD-88 and AX-Edge up to the high end Jupiter X and Fantom.

At any rate, whether CP88 has the same basic tech as a PSR-E doesn't really matter, if it sounds/feels/operates differently. If someone doesn't think a CP88 sounds/feels/operates better than the PSR-E for their purposes, by all means, save the $ and get a PSR-E. ;-)

Crumar Seven, Dexibell Vivo S7 Pro, Kawai MP11SE, Korg SV2, Nord Piano 4, are all marketed as stage pianos, i.e. largely to the same type of customer, and all emphasizing a good amount of real-time front panel control without a lot of menu diving. Roland FP90 is arguably in a slightly different category, though. So 6 potatoes and 1 watermelon.

Interesting, considering all the posts that have said things like the main difference is escapement. Evan as Abdol said in this thread, "Bad Mister in yamahasynth.com mentioned that CP-88 uses the P-515 action with the notch removed. So NWX means NW-GH with escapement." Someday when this pandemic is over, I look forward to trying both in person.

Interesting again. I know the CP1/CP5 had SCM on the acoustic and electric pianos, but I've seen conflicting info about the CP4. It definitely has SCM on the EPs, but it was less clear whether they used them on the APs. Tangentially, there's a related discussion about SCM at http://forums.musicplayer.com/ubbthreads.php/topics/2751455/Why_doesn_t_the_Yamaha_Montage

Again, I'm looking forward to trying them myself. But as a reference point, I liked the feel of the CP1 a lot more than the CP4 (NW-GH, which is why I didn't have high hopes for the CP88). If the CP88 actually feels more like a CP1/CP5 but at lighter travel weight and with a MUCH better interface than those models had, that would be pretty appealing for me right there. (CP4 didn't feel *bad* but it did not impress me the way the CP1/CP5 did.)

p.s. to abdol (too late to edit)... good point also about SCM smoothing out velocity transitions. I did see that in some of the Yamaha lit, and that goes beyond what was described in the article I linked to.

Regardless of what you think about the authenticity of the NW-GH action, it's a very good stage piano action---just not a great acoustic piano action emulation. I would certainly choose the NW-GW over the RHIII if I were playing Prelude/Angry Young Man.

In many ways, that's the story of the Yamaha stage piano since the CP1 onwards: it seems to me that they are targeting their instruments more towards gigging musicians and less towards home players who want a compact stage piano to use both at home and out gigging.

I can see why, as the Kawai and Roland offerings are pretty well covering that market. Also, less children are learning piano than in previous decades; therefore, why not focus upon the professional market. I think the CP88 is targeted at band pianists and not classical musicians necessarily.

Yes, CP88 is targeted primarily at performers and P515 at home players. Not that you couldn't use either board for either purpose, but their design/features are aimed more at those groups. You can see it even in the primary promotional images.

P515 is shown in home living environments on non-portable furniture style stands... https://usa.yamaha.com/products/musical_instruments/pianos/p_series/p-515/index.html

CP88 is shown with stage lighting, on gig stands, and rolling in a wheeled case... https://usa.yamaha.com/products/musical_instruments/pianos/p_series/p-515/index.html

LOL, I had the impression that the SCM is applied on the pianos as well! so I never played CP4 specifically to see how the piano samples transition! In e-pianos it is much obvious because stepping to the brighter sample is audible but I have played CP4 side by side to compare it with my own MP7SE and since I have the XF, CP4 wasn't intriguing at all. That's why I liked its e-pianos more than my XF!!! Had I known that up front I would have never spent much time playing and comparing it!

This is taking the trickery to the next level by Yamaha!

Well as I said, I'm not sure. I've seen conflicting info about SCM on the pianos of the CP4. But if you liked SCM on the EPs, I think you can still buy that today, in a Reface CP...

In other words, you agree with anotherscott that the sounds of the PSR-E series keyboards (i.e. Super Articulation Lite) are lower quality than the sounds in more pro-oriented Yamaha stage pianos.

The idea that some pianos are stage pianos while others are for home use is fine, but the idea that someone should buy two digital pianos, one for home, one for performance is a big stretch.

My requirements were for a competent stage piano that can double as a practice instrument for classical repertoire, so I could buy just one digital piano for both needs. This led me to the following assessments:

MP11SE -- too heavy, otherwise outstanding

MP7SE -- best overall for me personally

ES8 -- MP7SE was only $115 more and has features more useful to me than built-in speakers, but this was a solid contender

P-515 -- action too heavy for me, otherwise a solid choice

FP90 -- action on the heavy side for me, but was a solid contender, $450 more than MP7SE when I purchased

CP88 -- met requirements, but MP7SE is better and much cheaper, CP88 is lighter

RD-2000 -- tonal sustain inadequate for my classical repertoire

CP4 -- tonal sustain inadequate for my classical repertoire

Korg Kronos --very good piano sound, complex and expensive, action inadequate for my needs

Nord -- I find Nord pianos to be too overpriced

This was based on my personal needs. Your mileage may vary.

Many people only need one or the other, though. Lots of home players never gig. In my case, I gig, but I also have an acoustic piano at home. This hasn't stopped me from buying far more keyboards than I need, however. ;-)

I found this article:

https://www.yamahasynth.com/ask-a-question/scm-piano-in-cp4-vs-montage-pianos

in which Bad Mister addresses this issue. My understanding is there are no SCMs in the piano sound then.

This is very tricky because all you see and hear about the CP series were advertisements about SCM modeling and how awesome it is. I looked in the CP1 manual and also this:

https://www.soundonsound.com/reviews/yamaha-cp1

I don't think the user manuals are even complete for CP1 or CP4. I remember I could adjust some parameters for the Rhodes (maybe the hammer position I don't remember). But my guess is the SCM requires the analysis of all of the samples and is a processor-heavy operation and Yamaha ditched it.

Bad Mister at one point calls SCM acting like effects! I don't think even he knows what clearly SCM is or does. Probably only Toshifumi Kunimoto knows what it is. He just put it there and told others it works, YES

So not really sure what to say. Yamaha has been very unclear about this technology and it didn't live that long. That's why I don't appreciate what Yamaha is doing.

Roland, Kawai, and others do provide clear definitions of what their technology does. At least there is enough information in the user manuals. Good luck finding the phrase SCM in CP1 or CP4 user manuals or even any relevant detail.

Well I brought my MP11 on more than 70 gigs, it's not that difficult with a foldable trolley. You only have to lift it when putting in/out the car and on its stand. I still can lift the Mp11 + its case with only 1 hand (I practice Martial Arts).

But I want a new stage DP and will buy a lighter one, I'm aging...

Yes. Here's another thread where someone from Yamaha (Athan Billias) affirms that the CP4 acoustic pianos DO employ SCM... http://forums.musicplayer.com/ubbthreads.php/ubb/printthread/Board/18/main/171839/type/thread... BUT the CP1/CP5 SCM acoustic pianos have the adjustable parameters of hammer stiffness and damper resonance, which do not appear to be available on the piano sounds of the CP4. So maybe the SCM is still used, but with fixed settings instead of user controls for these things? Or the SCM implementation of the CP4 is in some ways a subset of the CP1/CP5 implementation? Who knows... as you say, they are unclear.

In order to get the best action, I would shortlist:

MP7SE
Roland RD2000

Both are lighter than the MP11, and therefore will be a breeze for you to lift. Also, both have better functions than the Nord Clones (GrandStage, CP88, etc). In particular, the MP7SE is great value for money and sounds so much nicer than the CP88 in terms of acoustic pianos..

If you feel that you can do without the functions, the Nord Grand has roughly the same action as the MP7SE (without let-off simulation).
In my in-store test, I thought the Nord was quite a bit better than the CP88; although, it costs a lot.

The only other model I would consider is the Dexibel; however, you'd need to test this in store to see if you can stomach the action.

As someone else said: the benefit of the Nord is that the sound library gets updated and you can continue to get the latest piano sounds etc; also, it looks pretty sweet onstage and you can buy the bespooke speakers if your re-mortgage leaves you with any extra cash.

When I compared the FP-90 and RD-2000 side-by-side, the action of the RD-2000 was a bit lighter and slightly slower for trills and repetitions. While they are described as the same action, I was left thinking they may be adjusted differently for different applications-- FP-90 optimized for acoustic piano, RD-2000 set to cover the range of sounds in the keyboard. But some have said that there may be a break-in period for this action as an explanation for the difference. For classical piano, I would recommend the FP-90 over the RD-2000. I believe doudou also wanted builtin speakers. This would suggest a short list of ES920, FP-90, P-515.

After comparing the FP-90 and RD-2000, I was left wondering if the PHA-50 action has counterweights that are a little lighter in the RD-2000, resulting in a lighter touch and slower repetition, improving its use for organs and synths a bit. I don't know if this is true, however.

Maybe RD-2000 was played more often. It's a cool looking synth with lots of knobs and volume/faders. I don't think Roland would mess around with the action.

I also find this comment from the Roland website interesting:

Weight: 47 lbs 14 oz
* Actual weight can vary slightly from that indicated due to the fact that wooden parts are involved.

Or possibly because the touch settings were altered by previous users.

This would not make repetition speed slightly slower. And when I try out digital keyboards, I try to remember to do a factory reset when I start.

What Abdol suggested seems reasonable. New untouched actions are often quite a bit stiffer and it can take a few months of playing before you notice the action has loosened up a bit.