Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Digital Pianos - Electronic Pianos - Synths & Keyboards How close is a hybrid to the real thing?

Don't worry about it too much. "Hybrid" is already a loaded term, and folks (myself included) may often jump in and point it out.

But generally, there is no "agreed upon" definition of a hybrid, without reducing the term to the unhelpful definition of something that incorporates aspects of both an acoustic and a digital. But how much "acoustic" is needed? 88 keys? Keytops are the same material? Shiny metal capstans? Soundboard? Different manufacturers (including Yamaha, Casio, Kawai and Roland) have used the term "hybrid" in different ways.

A somewhat-accepted definition of "hybrid" has been the category of high-end digital pianos that use a "real acoustic action" taken from or derived from an acoustic piano. The Yamaha Avant-Grands and the Kawai Novus fall into this definition of "hybrid," and I'd argue it is the most frequently used definition here -- a digital piano with a real acoustic piano action.

The only issue with Casio is that they very cleverly market their GP-series as a hybrid positioned alongside the AvantGrand and Novus, and make claims about their keys and action that can be misconstrued as being in the same class. A LOT of folks in fact think it is. But in reality, the keys and action in a GP are nothing like a real acoustic grand action, and in reality are just like any digital action with wooden keysticks, like the Kawai Grand Feel series.

In the end, it doesn't matter all that much; by all accounts the GP's action is a fine one, it feels real and is quite performant, and some people prefer it even to the real-action hybrids. How you like it is really what matters in the end, no?

I chime in when there seems to be confusion about the facts/claims of the action, as quite a few buyers are taken in by the intimation that the GP has a "real acoustic action" like the other hybrids it labels and peers itself against.

Excellent responses all and I appreciate your time to share your knowledge.

Exactly right. For example, even in terms of the action. the acoustic piano's sound is heavily colorized by the rigidity of the hammer shank. there is a dramatic difference between the most and least rigid. there's no way to replicate this coloring and adaptive physics in a digital instrument. so while the complexity achieves the tactility of the acoustic action, that tactility is still far removed from the sound as colored by the ultimate impact. it's a complicated fascade that leads to something completely different.

No need to retract anything, your post is lovely!

Casio markets the GP line with the term 'hybrid' attached, yet generally the piano nerds such as me consider the term 'hybrid' to mean a true piano action (the full mechanism) in an otherwise digital instrument. Currently, that would only apply to the Yamaha AvantGrand and Kawai Novus instruments.

But in a more relaxed sense, who cares? The Casio/Bechstein action is really good and I sure did like to feel it under my fingers a week ago.

Glad you still love your Bechstein grand. I hope to meet one in person some day to get an impression. It may well be that Blüthner and Bechstein turn out to be my favorite piano builders.

Cheers and the happiest playing,

HZ

"Casio markets the GP line with the term 'hybrid' attached, yet generally the piano nerds such as me consider the term 'hybrid' to mean a true piano action (the full mechanism) in an otherwise digital instrument. Currently, that would only apply to the Yamaha AvantGrand and Kawai Novus instruments"

Or conversely, an actual acoustic instrument which also incorporates digital sensors and sound engine apropos the Kawai, Yamaha et al. Silent and 'Player' piano ranges!

I think that sounds about right. A piano derivative instrument that has pretty much the full hammer striking mechanism, for purposes of making users 'feel' pretty much the same mechanism action as some sort of acoustic piano, except the measured velocity and/or other related quantities are used as inputs to a digital system that outputs notes/sounds nuances etc based on what those inputs are at various times ----- which is pretty much 'digital' anyway.

True ..... the outputs of these digital systems to become audible to us ..... is analog ... through a digital to audio conversion process.

Digital to analog that is.

I really think we should stop calling pianos with purely digital sound sources 'hybrids'. The action does not decide if a piano is hybrid, the sound source does. Silent pianos are hybrids because they have strings as well as a digital sound generator. Digital pianos with 'real' actions are still digital pianos. This is how it always used to be, and changing the meaning of the term 'hybrid' will only create confusion for newcomers on the market.

EDIT: never mind me, from other posts in this thread it seems that this train has left the station long ago. So forget what I wrote. I'm gettin old.

Ostinato. It's ok. We came back for you. Let's go. And we're off.

Hence the perpetual lack of resolution

I think the only reason we don't move towards the silent/player space for the term is because they are relatively rare (both in the piano world as a whole, and on the digital forum here). You're just more likely to run into the high-end AvantGrands and Novuses (just look at the respective hands-on threads for the N1X and NV-10).

There are pianos with strings, harps, etc. If they have a silent mode with a digital sound source, they are still acoustic at their core.

Digital pianos, on the other hand needed a marketing differentiator when manufacturers took an acoustic piano action, axed the strings with a digital sound source. Yamaha and Kawai modified there hammers differently, but kept actions mostly intact. IMO, hybrid is a word ppl decided was a good term for these two models. There was a consensus and life was a happy place - until Casio marketeers came along and hijacked the word.

Since then, as ppl who follow these threads know, has caused an outcry and opened up the overuse of the term "Hybrid."

Lastly, IMHO, the design of the upright piano actions with a digital sound source is a money grab. and I would buy a Casio with long wood keys above an upright action hybrid.

Ppl has decided it was a good term because the first use was about this use. And it couldn’t be confused with Silent piano since Yamaha sells its Disklavier under the Silent registered mark and not under as Hybrid. (But Kawai can’t use Silent about the ATX series because it is a registered mark!)

Then when a term is used the first time in a domain (like Hybrid used by Yamaha about GranTouch, then AventGrand), it is quite logical to associate this term with the first associated meaning and to consider other associations misleading. Whatever the logic behind the new association. (And the main logic with Casio is marketing !)

(Note : the first time Erard produced actions with a repetition lever, they named it double escapement, and 2 century later, we still use the same expression with the same meaning, even if it is not very pertinent : only one escapement jack… but everyone know what I could mean by double escapement… just something which was protected by the US patent #4,631)

An acoustic piano can be a silent piano too ------ such as in a vacuum environment, or in space (although, not sure what no gravity in space does with the hammers etc hehe).

Interesting to see the considerations of the term hybrid. To add my completely unrequested two cents:

I would consider an acoustic with a silent player system to be just that: an acoustic with a silent player system. Above all, it is an acoustic. It can function as an acoustic without the silent player system, but the silent player system cannot function on it’s own. The silent player option is just that: an option. But the acoustic element of the instrument is complete, foremost, & dominant.

I’d consider the AvantGrands/Novus’ to be truly “hybrid” because they combine elements of an acoustic and elements of a digital, in equal parts, and in full harmony. Full true acoustic action, full digital sound creation. One doesn’t function without the other. The acoustic action can do nothing without the digital elements, and the digital elements can do nothing without the acoustic action.

-

Also, as others have said, the Casio GP series doesn’t qualify to be a true hybrid since it doesn’t really have a true acoustic action: real key sticks and miniature hammers like the hybrids, but the actual “action” is just a plastic weight visual approximation. HOWEVER, it is a fine instrument, and they’ve done a good job with the weighting to capture the feel of weight and movement a real action would give. Not a hybrid, but the best non-hybrid action on the market in my opinion.

We could probably say that it's probably fair enough to give the hybrid name to those pianos that really do have the key mechanism being completely acoustic piano type (regardless of what type it is) ----- as in the full hammer system. Somebody basically have to give this version of a 'piano' a name. So they grabbed the hybrid word - since it the instrument really is significant mix between a significant portion of an acoustic piano and a 'regular' digital piano without that 'acoustic' key mechanism. And removing the hammers from the 'hybrid' or tinkering with the key mechanism in the wrong way will most likely make the 'hybrid' no longer work properly.

It can be silent, but not a Silent(R) excepted Yamaha Silents.

+10

« Not a hybrid, but the best non-hybrid action on the market in my opinion. » My experience with the Casio action is that they are fairly decent, just like the CLP675 or LX17, but I haven’t the Wow effect of the N1X. Then I am quite puzzled when some piano virtual shops put Casio GP models on the same category than the N1X and NV10S. There is something which doesn’t fit my feelings.

True, the hybrids, like the N1X, are significantly better. However, among the non-hybrids, I think the GP-series has the best non-hybrid action on the market, at least in terms of design.