Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Digital Pianos - Electronic Pianos - Synths & Keyboards Yamaha PF-500

OK, so from my previous topic "digital vs acoustic" I am going digital - great thanks to everyone for all the input. Now, I am very intersted in the Yamaha PF-500. It's in my budget ($2000-$3000), it has a large election of voices and rythm/percussion sets for MIDI, and has wieghted keys for learning proper piano technique. I have been confused by some of the other topics in the forum discussing this instrument. The statements that are confusing are:

1) If you are leaning towards PF-500 go to Clavinova. This sounds fine but the CLP220 thru CLP240 do not have large selection of voices. The CLP270/280 is way >$3000.

2) You will make a mistake if you do not get the best action (e.g. GH3). Once again, sounds fine, but GH3 is >$3000.

3) Roland has better sound and actions. Yes, but to get a large selection of voices, >$3000.

Please advise. I am also posting in the Piano Forum.

Hi,

I am also considering the PF500, but lately I am leaning more towards the CP300. Just wanted to let you know that, according to information from Yamaha, the PF500 has been discontinued and there is no direct replacement for it.
You can still find it, though, in many on-line and brick-and-mortar stores.

Regards

Sergio

OK, I am open to hearing suggestions on the Yamaha CP300, Roland RD-700SX/HP-103/KR103 and Kawai CA5/CP115. I'm not too carzy about a "stage" piano (primarily looks from my wife's standpoint) but need to weigh the options. Remember is all cases the budget.

Keep it comming in! Thanks

I can't remember where I heard it but I was under the impression that the Yamaha Nocturne (N100) was replacing the PF500.

http://www.yamaha.com/nocturne/

It may be worth considering.

Eric

OK, I'm really calling on all experts here. At face value the PF-500 seems like the perfect combination of digital features (38 voices + 480XG), graded piano action, nice clean looks with integrated stand and pedals and price ($2200). How could this be replaced by only 10 voices (Nocturne)! Wouldn't it have made more sense to put the integrated stand on the CP-300? Am I missing a market niche here? I respect the idea that by definition a piano, digital or acoustic, is meant for sounding like a piano, but if I was only getting basic piano funtionality I would get the real thing (acoustic). If you are buying digital shouldn't the extra voices, XG/MIDI compatibility, multitrack recording...be standard? I mean, after all, I get this on my $300 Casio.

i don't think nocturne n100 is replacement of pf500. it's just another model, and that's all. i have pf500 and like it, although i wish it has GH3 action lately. i got it below $2000 about 2 years ago.

If it was me, I'd go with the pf500 over the nocturne (and probably the cp300 over the pf), I think polyphony is 128 on the pf and only 64 on the nocturne (not to mention the nocturne's looks suck compared to the pf's).

The cp300 is $100 less than the pf500 last I checked, but may technically be a better piano (better awm sampling). Hard call, I think the cp300 slightly edges out the pf500 simply on better/newer technology (but yeah definitely like the look of the pf). Why don't you try playing both and see which you prefer?

I have a CP300 and personally I think it looks nice. It would probably look even nicer with the LP3 stand or whatever it's called, but I wanted it as portable as possible so I've just go it sitting on a cheapo "X" stand. Does the job.

Whatever you do (and I guess you already know this), get something with built-in speakers. If you want something that looks good, you certainly don't want cables and speakers lying around everywhere.

Damian

Hi Shopper,

I've owned a PF-500 for a little over a year now and I'm very happy with it. I know people will argue that "you simply must have a real acoustic piano" etc, but to me the PF-500 is "close enough" to the feel of an acoustic. If you aspire to become a concert pianist it would be a different story, but for a guy who plays for recreation like I do, it works out fine.

I also looked at Clavinovas, but I don't really care for the cabinetry. Plus they generally offer a bunch of features I wouldn't use.

I considered the PF-1000 but decided against it because the price was higher, and surprisingly the 1000 didn't have a USB cable port (but the 500 did, go figure).

One other thing, on the topic of number of voices: before you start thinking you're getting 400+ voices on the PF-500, listen closely to the "XG" voices. There are a whole bunch of different voices available under the XG button. This feature sounded pretty neat to me when I was shopping, but a) it's a really long list to scroll through, and you can't just jump to the one you want using the PF-500's control panel, and b) in my opinion, none of them sound as good as the non-XG voices. I never use any of them.

Just my 2 cents.

Maybe I do not undertand the technology correctly but I just want to make sure that when I play a GM file on the piano all channels come through including percussion. I think some of these >$2200 digital piano's (e.g. Noturne) do not have that capability. Please correct me if I am not right.
Thanks

I would pick CP300 over PF500. PF500 is bascailly P250 with a nicer casing.

CP300 piano sounds much better than PF500, and CP300 looks much better than P250 (imho).

I agree with Signa re: the Nocturne. I tried one out at Guitar Center in Towson, Maryland, last weekend, and not only was the look of it just so-so, but more importantly, the feel was mediocre at best. I own a P 120 which I take on the road and it could run circles around the Nocturne even if I had one arm in a sling.

I was also told (by some on-line vendor) that the Nocturne was replacing the PF500, but when I asked Yamaha they said "there is no direct replacement for it". In fact the Nocturne is a lesser piano than the PF500, IMO (less poliphony, less voices, no split, less sound system, less connectors, no recording capabilities...). I also tried it at GC and didn't like it near as much as the PF500.

I tried as well the CP300 and liked it better soundwise. I prefer the stand and fixed pedals for my home use though, because I find myself chasing the pedal around whenever I try a stage piano.

It seems to me that home pianos from Kawai, Yamaha or Roland are, in general, overpriced in the US in relation to their stage counterparts. E.g. the Clavinova CP240 in Europe is usually around $400 cheaper than the CP300 (they are sold in the same stores). In the US the situation is the opposite (CLP240 generally more expensive than CP300), due to the fact, I guess, that "Clavinova type" pianos are only sold by piano stores, while stage and lower end home pianos are found in general music stores and on-line vendors and more aggresively discounted. That makes stage pianos, IMO, a better buy over here.

I ordered the PF-1000 recently (am waiting to receive it), which looked like the next step above the PF-500 (more voices, styles, bells/whistles). It was $3000 with free shipping and no tax.

http://www.music123.com/Yamaha-PF1000-Digital-Piano-i71877.music

I was also debating a clavinova series or a 'stage' type piano. I didn't like the console-cabinet look of the clavinova so hopefully I'll like what the PF-1000 does.

I wish Yamaha had GH3 in a stage piano.

CP300 does not have GH3 keys, but I liked it better than my GH3 key Clavinova. CP300 seems to have touch lighter keys than the older P250. I liked the feel. (This could be an illusion however. If the sample changed and the velovity mapping has changed, then even with the same key action, it will feel suddenly different, because how they interact with each other)

I think only place that you will notice difference between GH and GH3 key is playing a single notes repeately (tremolo).

I bought my PF-500 almost three years ago and have been extremely happy with it. I also own an acoustic (a Walters Studio) but still use the PF-500 frequently when I want silent practice or to use the other voices. I also use the sequencer to practice duets with myself or other kinds of practice routines.

I agree with the comment about the XG voices. It's nice to have them for GM playback, but I find them inconvenvient to select and don't use them when I'm playing.

I was definitely never interested in a Clavinova since I didn't want to pay for the cabinetry and the Clavinova speaker system was not useful either (I use headphones a lot and otherwise just turn on the big monitors in my music room if I don't like the little built-in speakers on the PF-500).

At the time I bought mine, the P250 was the top of the stage piano line and it offered nothing for me over the PF-500: the piano pedal emulation was better on the PF-500 and I wasn't interested in the "portability" of a real stage piano. Don't know about the CP300 since I haven't been looking at new models lately.

When I was shopping I tried Roland and frankly the keyboard touch was much inferior to the Yamaha in my opinion.

I'm not surprised that the PF-500 would not be directly replaced. It was an odd product in the Yamaha lineup: not interesting to Clavinova dealers (who often sell furniture as much as pianos) but a little out of place at Guitar Center with the stage pianos and synths.

I agree on the keyboard feel of the CP300 - it's one of the best keyboards I've ever played, seems to feel better than the GH3 keyboard on my less than two year old CVP-307. The CP300 is at the very top of my list for my next board purchase.

I agree. I'm not sure what market segment Yamaha was targeting with the Nocturne N100. I doubt that we will see the N100 model around for long, especially considering the price.

The decision to buy either a CP300 or a PF-500 would be a very simple decision for me based on the several factors listed below:

• A new model versus one that's been around 3-4 years (the PF-500 was introduced in 2002; same year as the P-250 and the CLP-150)
• 40MB of "piano" WAVE ROM memory on the CP300 compared to 22MB for the PF-500
• 50 samples banks on the CP300 compared with 30 sample banks on the PF-500
• Improved piano sound on the CP300 based on most reviews
• Much better keyboard feel on the CP300 than the PF-500 (IMO)

Hope this helps.