Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Digital Pianos - Electronic Pianos - Synths & Keyboards Roland LX706 Review

It is now nearly 6 months since I upgraded from the Roland LX7, the main reason for the change being that I had become increasingly frustrated by the limitations of that instrument from a sound point of view. And the reason why I went for the LX706 rather than a Yamaha, Kawai or Casio ‘equivalent’ is partly down to the limitations imposed by Covid. But with Kawai I’m afraid that my experiences with their quality control over the past three years have been such that I didn’t seriously consider them and the Yamahas didn’t particularly appeal. I did consider the latest Casio GP310/510 range having had an opportunity to briefly play a 310 last December at the same time as a LX708. I quite liked the 3 acoustic simulations of the 310 though found the keytops slippery, certainly in comparison to the LX708. So, considering the supposed improvements of the new Roland range seemed to match what I needed, I went for the LX706 – it is in an upstairs bedroom so no chance of getting the LX708 up there, and I play mainly with headphones, or very quietly so as not to disturb my wife.

So what are my thoughts now that I have had a chance to really play it. And I really do play it, at least 3 hours every day. Well I am pleased to say that although I wasn’t expecting much improvement, the changes that they have made, and the changes that I have been able to make have resulted in a much improved instrument compared to the LX7. The overall design and recording options are also much better,

Now I know that some people prefer the sound of the LX7/17 pianos, but one reason I say that the new range is so much better in that respect is down to the sound envelope which results in a much clearer note definition. This link gives a good description of Note Envelope
To my ear the balance between the various components is much more like the ‘real’ thing and works very well for most pieces, though occasionally, when playing lots of notes together or in succession – not necessarily rapidly - I still find myself saying that it is still not quite right. But I doubt whether modelling will ever succeed in creating the nuances that you get from the interaction of different notes and their harmonics.

Now to the changes that I have made. Well, for some reason the factory tuning is 442 so changing that to 440 reduces the brightness – the music I play doesn’t need that. Over the course of the first few months I have also made quite a few changes to the characterisation of notes. I forget how many. I have also made changes to some of the octave tunings and increased the touch weighting to 70. Although the action is good I have a slight niggle with the escapement simulation as I think it is set too high and increasing the touch weighting seemed to help with that.

In an ideal world I would have an acoustic upright – I have no room for a grand – and in a year or two that may be possible. So I am constantly listening to videos and, when possible, playing acoustics and in the process comparing it to the LX706. The end result is that I reject many brands as, to my ear, they do not offer a significant sound improvement over the LX706 and there is the additional, often significant cost.

As for digitals, in particular the new Yamaha 700 and Kawai 99 ranges, well the sound of the Yamahas still seem digital to me so no temptation there. With the Kawai the action improvement looks to me to be very significant – I am so glad I didn’t stick with CA67 I originally bought as it would never have last more than a year with the amount of time I play. But I have never been a fan of the Kawai sound, and even playing their acoustics has never excited me. So, for now, I will stick with my LX706 until I find an acoustic to replace or supplement it.

Most digital piano buyers in my opinion do not want to tinker too much with the sound.
The factory calibrated instrument should sound great out of the box. The fact that you had to do all those changes to get the instrument to sound good is the reason why many people stay clear of that line from Roland.
This is my case. Given the choice, even if the action is worse, I'd chose the hp704 over the lx706 because, to me, the sound out of the box is much better. Maybe if I'd spent many hours adjusting individual notes and general brightness I could get the lx706 to sound better than the competition. However I just want to play the instrument. I don't have the capacity nor the time to tinker that heavily into a digital piano.

Thank you for the review !
I'm the guy who returned an LX706 for the HP704 but maybe i also better spended more time to adjust all those settings.
It seems that your editing time has resulted in a better sounding piano and ofcourse the LX706 keybed is very high quality and so pleasant to play.
HP704 still is enormous great value for not so much money...
Glad you are happy with the LX !

Mareg - It was and never has been my intention to spend lot of time tinkering with the sounds. But I had learnt from the deficiencies of the previous LX7/17 range something about what could be done, and the changes to the LX706 were all done gradually. And yes, you are right, you should be able to play out of the box.

Ivercaut - The older sound of the HP7 that I had originally in 2002 was in some ways better than the LX706 and my dealer used to play old Roland sounds to me down the phone, lamenting that the newer Roland sounds weren't as good. But the HP7 had a lot of deficiencies, like the lack of sustain, few dynamic levels, action, etc.

In the end your piano choice is going to be dictated by what kind of music you play, the level you play at and a host of other factors.

Hi Colin, I really liked and enjoyed your comments and opinion on the Lx 706 and particularly the part where you describe the different changes you made as I often find myself struggling with the sound and range thinking that is just still not quite right... Is there any chance that you couldn't share in detail what exactly have you done in terms of changes so that I can try that myself and see if that could work for me too? I'd really appreciate it
Many thanks

I left a message here:
http://forum.pianoworld.com//ubbthreads.php/topics/3052938.html#Post3052938

if you tried, can you give me your opinion? Thanks

ps. I receive the piano on Monday

If you send me your email - use the personal message facility - I will send you a setup file which contains my changes which you can read and apply as necessary. But remember that your ears are not the same as mine so changes that I have made may not suit you.

Just to add to my last comment about this. Yes, it is good to be able to play straight out of the box without any tinkering, especially if you are a beginner. But what I have been doing is merely the digital equivalent of voicing a piano in much the same way as a tuner would voice an acoustic. Something often needed with new acoustics. As for this being specific to Roland, well when I briefly had the Kawai CA67 I found myself tinkering more than I was playing it! One of several reasons why I got rid of it.

Hi Colin - I would love to see your settings. Will you share them with me please

My issue with the new Roland cabinet range is that they sound boxy and compressed compared to the Kawai and Yamaha models, with the Yamaha CLP685 clearly winning the sound clarity contest, and the Roland coming stone dead last on that front in all categories: stage, portable, workstation and cabinets.

In store testing comparing the LX708, RD2000 and Fantom 88 showed a compressed dynamic range, and boxy sound. I changed from low impedance store cans to HD650 cans for the LX708. Either the headphone amp in the LX708 is underpowered and can't handle 300 ohms, or the output is as bad as I heard. I suspect the former. The RD2000 and Fantom 88 sounded equally boxy with both cans.

Others have recently reported that they found it difficult to find cans that suit the latest Roland models, whilst others have brought external amps instead. The ES8 sounds better in store than the LX708, as does the Nord Grand. With this in mind, if you are (like me) a fan of the concept of modelling instead of sampling, you might want to arrange to test an external amp with top cans such as Sennheiser or Beyerdynamics, to see if the headphone performance improves enough to raise the Roland's competence against rival models. Either that, or read a few posts and test with cans that suit the Roland.

Both of the RHIII actions in the ES8 and Nord Grand have actions that compete well with the LX708. In this respect, Roland do OK. This is primarily because the Yamaha action is heavy but sound enough, however, not class beating. I actually like the Roland actions but found that the LX708 action slightly lighter but of similar quality to the PHA50. They might like to improve the mechanism next time, as well as the dimensions of the action. If headphone practice is the main concern, then the Casino GP510 action is very nice. If it had the Yamaha amp / speaker combo, then the Casio would be my choice over the CLP785 and CA98 (not tested the CA99), but only with a VST for sound.

The external speaker performance of the LX708 was the main reason I decided that the new LX isn't competitive. I really liked the amp speaker performance on the LX17 compared to the CA97 and CLP585. However, I found that direct comparison to the CLP685 next to the LX708 showed how far behind the Roland amplifier system currently is compared to the Yamaha's: They need to sort out the sound quality more than the tone, as the tone was an improvement, but has been let down IMO by the other aspects affecting sound output.

When you are buying an expensive cabinet digital, you want the best sound output, or else, why not buy a portable slab version instead. Whilst I enjoyed playing the LX708 more than the RD2000 or Fantom 88, there wasn't a large enough improvement to convince me of the value of the top cabinet model.

Currently, I think in that segment, the choice models are CLP775/785, CA79/99 and GP510 with Garritan CFX.

That said, I am interested in the replacement for the LX700 series, which I hope for Roland comes soon.

I remember playing the LX7 in my local shop; it seemed a lot better than the HP605 next to it. The response was very good, and quite inspirational. I was getting well into it when the removal guys came in, and took it.
I tried the LX latest briefly but prefered the variety of sounds Yamaha offered.
Bt it's not what you play, but how you play it!

Exactly my experience with the HP704. It’s a bit sad that even the LX708 is exhibiting the same traits...

I used to love Roland and I think their actions are currently better for my taste compared to corresponding Clavinova and CA pianos, however the boxy sound and very unconvincing piano sound are a big let down and to me are a wrong turn for Roland. They should return to sampling (in addition to full modeling for whoever likes it) and not just what they had years ago but a full-blown sampling comparable to Yamaha and Kawai latest sound engines or even better.

Yes, absolutely: a great player will make a $300 toy piano sound great, and a player with poor rhythm and touch will butcher anything they play on the best Acoustic Grand. An even greater talent will butcher the piece of music in a clever way: such as Les Dawson: