Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Digital Pianos - Electronic Pianos - Synths & Keyboards GHS vs PHA-4 vs RHC need help

I'm searching for a DP which is not pricy but will last me for a few years. The sound and all the other cool features are not as important to me as the action is.

Almost everyone says the PHA-4 feels better than the GHS and RHC and it also has that triple sensor thing BUT it's heavy which means it can be tiring and it takes time rise up so it's not suitable for fast repetitions and that's something that can limit me in the far future. I was wondering if that's a valid reason to skip the FP-30X and go for the other options. If so, which one should I choose?

What's your budget?
Are you willing to buy used instruments?

1000 USD and I am willing to buy used items if its really worth it

I would say that for people reaching grade 6, the benefit of buying a used digital (especially if you have a lowish budget) is that you are able to buy a piano with a more nuanced action: which can cope better with the requirements of grade-6 to 8 pieces.

Also, if buying a recent model used, the sampling bit-rate etc., will be much higher in an intermediately priced piano than in a lower priced model.

Now from a beginner's perspective, yes you can buy a new instrument for $1000 which will suffice.
The depreciation with digital pianos is worse than for cars.
A new $1,600 mid-level portable piano (e.g., ES920, FP90X, P515 etc) will sell used about 2 years later for a tad over $1000.
A new $850 low-priced portable piano (e.g., ES110; FP30X, P125) will sell used for about $350--$450

An intermediate level portable piano should last ----maintainance free---for about 10 years. If you do have to pay for ware-and-tear repairs due to regular intensive practice, then the cost of repair will be relatively low---typically the labour bill for 2h work dwarfs the part cost e.g., $70/h.

Ergo, buying 2-3 year old used digital piano is not a bad bargain.

As you test before you buy a used instrument, you can ensure it fully works before purchasing ---whereas new instruments get shipped by the store to your house and you get what you get.

So what I advise is to go to a store and test lots of models from low-mid-&-high priced models---get an idea of what they feel and sound like to play.
If you feel like buying an intermediate level portable or cabinet piano, you can always come back to this question and ask tips on buying used.
*there are a few posts on this topic already which can be googled .

if the es110 NEW is 555 euro, get that. otherwise fp30x. but do try them first you might hate one or the other.

> Almost everyone says the PHA-4 feels better than the GHS and RHC and it also has that triple sensor thing BUT it's heavy which means it can be tiring and it takes time rise up so it's not suitable for fast repetitions and that's something that can limit me in the far future. I was wondering if that's a valid reason to skip the FP-30X and go for the other options. If so, which one should I choose?

You should try them yourself and choose which you like the most. Ignore what everybody says because this is very subjective. The ES120 is not widely available yet but should have slightly improved action (though one may prefer discounted ES110). Regarding Yamaha slabs, you may also try the lower CLP7x5 series, the GTS action will likely soon migrate to their slabs too.

Fyi David: GTS (Grand Touch - Small) - a modified version of the NXW action with improvements in weighting of the black keys. I think Sem is talking about the GTS in the Yamaha cabinet pianos...
CLP735 is plastic
CLP745 is wood.

Also fyi: the Yamaha digital piano nomenclature is confusing so..
CLP = Clavinova
CSP = Clavinova Smart Piano (comes with an app (Smart Pianist) to help you learn and other education gizmos).
CVP = Clavinova Versatile Piano (an arranger piano series using similar technology to the Tyros/genos arranger workstations and the electone series organs)

With a budget of 1000, I'd probably go for a Kawai ES110. I wouldn't say "everyone' thinks the PHA-4 is better. I'd rank them roughly equally, maybe a slight edge to the kawai. It should be quite easy to find somewhere to play the roland if you're in the US and not too hard to find an ES110 or ES520 to try out the Kawai action.

Any of the actions you describe and the pianos attached to them will get you into the upper grades. GHS from Yamaha is ok, but I still found it taxing some years ago, for my dodgy fingers. PHA 4 is fine to play but is not light. RHC found on the ES110 is to me, the best. The piano itself is very dynamic, but you soon learn to get used to this, like you'd have to on an acoustic.
ES110 does not have good speakers, but they do a reaonable job. and the piano's cheap. Mine has a 5 year g'tee on it.

peterws, are you sure you're talking about ghs, i've played ghs myself, I wouldnt' classify it as much heavier than the rhc, it's tighter at the top, but overall, pretty close in resistance taking the whole travel into account.

of course, all actions are fundamentally Inferior to the RHC.

I wouldn't worry about repetition rate whatsoever.

I've had all the actions you mention and I would steer clear of the GHS - the constant up-weight made playing this for extended periods quite tiring.

I loved the RHC action in the ES 110 I had - I never fell in love with the (RHC 2 ?) action in the ES 520.

If I had to pick a cheap DP solely on action I would go with the 110 every time.
If I were to broaden my criteria and also consider sound and features the FP-30X would be my choice - action is fine and USB audio is a key feature to me - but may be entirely meaningless to you depending on what you'll be doing with the instrument.

Cheers
Morten

I been playing GHS for years on my DGXs. I had three; they were fine istruments and the keyboard too, was fine but tiring particularly if you dug further into the keys for any prolonged period. I found GH and GH3 to be no better, since of course, they were heavier.
RHC isn't perfect, but it's the best I'll find for my purposes at the moment..
It's a grest compromise.