Composers' Forum

Music Composers Unite!

This is sort of a continuation from a different thread.

I have purchased this piano and I'm very happy with it. This is the latest technology in digital piano making. Would be interested to hear different perspectives about what people think about this instrument and whether they believe that instruments such as these do justice to music and music making in general. My personal impressions so far are very positive. One thing is for certain that technology will never be able to accurately create what an acoustic instrument can do, but the truth is that many music colleges are taking up these Yamaha instruments to their schools and are incorporating them in their every day teaching, composition, and performance series and projects.

Here's a short video that showcases the piano I purchased, I personally love this instrument very much. Besides its amazing capabilities and dynamics it's also so beautiful and refined. Retail is $8,995.00

Best Wishes,

Saul Dzorelashvili

Views: 245

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I would say these are well suited to composition, traching and maybe performance but not recording unless your circumstances prevent you from using microphones. Even so I don't see what the benefit of this instrument is when it seems to simply be an expensive version of excellent and much cheaper weighted stringless keyboards. For one of these you could purchase 6, 8, maybe a dozen cheaper models for a teaching environment depending on context and use.

You own one, what is the advantage that makes it worth so much? I have heard better-sounding piano renditions from cheaper keyboards using either their onboard sound or external samples. For live performance the speakers can't be that good. What are the situations in which this significantly out-performs other stringless keyboards?

This is the upright version, you have heard better sounding cheaper digital pianos?

Which one?

But my point is practically proved for me as the linked model is roughly half the price and sounds very good. It must be said of course that after ten seconds on Youtube there are videos in which it sounds extremely bad too! Certainly a factor here is that your linked video has the might of Yamaha to mix and master their product as a sales pitch. I could not name the keyboards and digital pianos that challenge but it's not really relevant. I was asking what makes it so GOOD and worth the price tag and I am not personally attacking you by doing so!

For example how much of the bulk of it is functional given the lack of strings? How much of the price goes into the aesthetic design over the guts to preserve the appearance? You could remove 80% of the instrument and change absolutely nothing about the functionality. If the upright is far smaller but with comparable potential sound what is the point of the full model? Since the speakers can't compare to an acoustic instrument and immediately remove the realism of the instrument compared to (again potential) realism from direct input as in your linked video then why is so much space and presumably money sunk into it? Since it uses sampled sound wouldn't a good weighted keyboard using comparable samples at a fraction of the cost be more practical? I'm afraid it seems to me a fairly standard set of features put in a very pretty box that serves no purpose bar authenticity.

Other than build quality the advantages as I see them come mainly from ease of recording and the ability to lower volume or mute entirely into headphones or other output. A great many rivals offer such features for less. For not much more, on the other hand, you could buy an acoustic grand from Yamaha themselves. Of course it would not sound as "there" as the electric because you would be hearing, instead of perfectly captured piano samples, the wholly different sound of a piano at distance. Good samples are ready-mixed.

You own it and love it and that's the important thing but you did ask for different perspectives - I'm sorry I do not share the view that you were hoping to see here.

That upright is not cheap its about $6000. It doesn't have the same quality speakers as the baby grand and the baby grand's keys are made out of wood. So all these features and more add to the higher price tag.

I never did say it was cheap Saul. In this country it comes to roughly £3250 on average compared to your piano which is £6250 on average and that was all I said, that it was roughly half the price and has a comparable recorded sound when handled by Yamaha themselves.

I made quite a few points and queries but you don't seem interested in following them up. I must say that if you had wanted to simply start an appreciation thread for your instrument you could have neglected to ask for perspectives and we wouldn't be having this non-conversation. I am out but my last two pence will always be acoustic and great recording equipment over digital. Enjoy your keyboard. Charles

Saul Dzorelashvili said:

That upright is not cheap its about $6000. It doesn't have the same quality speakers as the baby grand and the baby grand's keys are made out of wood. So all these features and more add to the higher price tag.

These two pianos are very different, if you go to the Yamaha site you will see the huge amount of differences in specs quality and sound. More features, more specs, more work, costs more money, but in the states here the difference between the 2 is not 50% its about 25% which is reasonable given the many advantages the grand has over the upright. But again, without testing and trying it out its will be difficult to make a reasonable assessment.

The piano features a technology knows as:

Yamaha Virtual Resonance Modeling (VRM) technology

The CLP-695GP is the top-of-the-line CLP Clavinova. The flagship CLP in a grand piano cabinet offers luxury, state-of-the-art technology, and unprecedented sound quality. Grand Touch keyboard action combines with renowned world-class Yamaha CFX and Bösendorfer Imperial piano samples for an unrivaled grand piano experience from a digital piano. You will lose yourself in the sound of the binaurally-sampled CFX which is a totally immersive headphone experience. When you want to sit back and listen, stream audio to the CLP-695GP via Bluetooth and take advantage of the high-fidelity 300W sound system, featuring Spruce Cone speakers made from the same wood used in Yamaha concert grand sound boards.

This is not just some regular standard 'keyboard' but state of the art professional instrument that features the latest technology that is available in the field of digital pianos. This video is for the regular older upright version and look what professional concert pianists are saying about this, can you imagine now what the CLP-695-GP sounds like which is a better piano with the latest advancements and superior speakers and features...?

For me, I can't be overly protective or defensive about the age of digital pianos. I can see benefits to both. A digital instrument is probably cheaper to maintain in the long run, and won't detune when you least expect it. A real piano certainly has a more organic experience due to the inevitable flaws. And no two real pianos sound alike.
As I write this, I am minded of the grand piano in our local theatre where I volunteer. Two of the low register keys are notoriously clunky and there is a buzz in the top octave which has never been resolved. Just because it's real doesn't make it better. But would we replace it with digital.? Progress awaits...

I wonder how much they paid the pianist for that sales pitch.  Let's think about the sound production of the two types of instruments.  In the Clavinova we have a sound board which vibrates sympathetically to the speakers.  The larger cabinet of the grand style would be analogous to a larger speaker and thus a fuller or more resonant sound as compared to the smaller upright.  Even so the speakers are rather small, about a foot in diameter.  It would seem impossible that this instrument would be adequate  for a large concert hall. 

In an acoustic piano the source of vibration is the whole sound board.  Strings are stretched over a wooden bridge which connects to the sound board.  The weight of a single string pressing down on the sound board can be as much as ten pounds so that the total pressure of the strings in a large grand can be as much as a ton.  When a string vibrates the sound board vibrates by direct attachment, not just sympathetically.  In essence, instead of a one foot speaker you have a 25 square foot speaker in the case of a concert grand.  The resonance then comes not from the cabinet, but from the whole room or concert hall. 

     The same is true of electric violins or cellos.  No one is paying ten million for an electric cello (the price of Yo Yo Ma's cello).  But I've never played this new version of Clavinova with a sound board.  It might sound really nice in a small room.  I would bet that sampled vibes of a Bosendorfer on the upright would sound better than an acoustic upright of the same size, which might make spinets and small uprights obsolete (no loss).

Graeme,
Clunky keys can always be fixed by regulation or new action parts.  A buzz in an old piano usually means loose bridge pins. Or there could be inadequate pressure on the bridge because the sound board has lost its crown, in which case you need a new piano. Of course a Clavinova would never have these problems.  Think of how many piano technicians will be put out of work if we give up acoustic pianos.



Graeme Helliwell said:

 
 As I write this, I am minded of the grand piano in our local theatre where I volunteer. Two of the low register keys are notoriously clunky and there is a buzz in the top octave which has never been resolved. Just because it's real doesn't make it better. But would we replace it with digital.? Progress awaits... 
 

They have started to incorporate high end digital pianos even uprights to concert music halls...

Whichever way you look at this, the technology of digital piano making is groundbreaking and unprecedented.



Lawrence Aurich said:

I wonder how much they paid the pianist for that sales pitch.  Let's think about the sound production of the two types of instruments.  In the Clavinova we have a sound board which vibrates sympathetically to the speakers.  The larger cabinet of the grand style would be analogous to a larger speaker and thus a fuller or more resonant sound as compared to the smaller upright.  Even so the speakers are rather small, about a foot in diameter.  It would seem impossible that this instrument would be adequate  for a large concert hall. 

In an acoustic piano the source of vibration is the whole sound board.  Strings are stretched over a wooden bridge which connects to the sound board.  The weight of a single string pressing down on the sound board can be as much as ten pounds so that the total pressure of the strings in a large grand can be as much as a ton.  When a string vibrates the sound board vibrates by direct attachment, not just sympathetically.  In essence, instead of a one foot speaker you have a 25 square foot speaker in the case of a concert grand.  The resonance then comes not from the cabinet, but from the whole room or concert hall. 

     The same is true of electric violins or cellos.  No one is paying ten million for an electric cello (the price of Yo Yo Ma's cello).  But I've never played this new version of Clavinova with a sound board.  It might sound really nice in a small room.  I would bet that sampled vibes of a Bosendorfer on the upright would sound better than an acoustic upright of the same size, which might make spinets and small uprights obsolete (no loss).

In the left corner we have a nine foot Steinway grand weighing in at 900 lbs. with 25 sq. ft. of soundboard, price tag $100,000. In the right corner we have a three foot Clavinova weighing in at 80 lbs. with two sq. ft. of speakers, price tag $8,000. Who's going to win this fight?

Let's consider how the sound of each instrument gets to the brain of the listener. The strings of the Steinway vibrate, which is converted to air vibrations, which is converted to ear drum vibrations which is converted to electrical impulses which the brain interprets as sound. I count three conversions of energy.

In the Clavinova: The strings of the piano from which the samples are taken vibrate, which is converted into air vibrations which is converted into microphone vibrations, then to electrical impulses, to digital signals, back to electrical impulses of the speakers,

to speaker vibrations, to air vibrations, to ear drum vibrations, to electrical signals to the brain. I count nine conversions of energy. The question is, how many conversions can take place before the signal becomes junk?

There is a time and place for acoustic instruments, and there is a time and place for electric instruments. Yes, they can be used together, but one can not replace the other. One can choose to play one over the other, but at a cost. Music is extremely traditional. Fads come, and fads go, but some things remain. There is a reason that the finest violins are hand made, from the same materials, as they have been for hundreds of years. I play an electric guitar. I also play an acoustic guitar. Given enough effects I can make one sound much like the other. But at their core, they are very different playing and sounding. I can play a screaming distortion lead on the acoustic, and classical music on the electric. But at a cost. Even if others can't tell the difference, I know the acoustic lead is a fake. If for no other reason than the fact that I really wanted to play it on an electric.

Then there are my sample guitars.

Reply to Discussion

RSS

Sign up info

Read before you sign up to find out what the requirements are!

Store

© 2018   Created by Gav Brown.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service