I have several weighted keyboards..but I must admit that playing the S9/S10 is always a real pleasure.. Keyboard spe: TP-400 W (Hybrid, Wood ): 88 Keys weighted, hammer action, triple contact ivory & ebony feels, escapement
This is indeed a great video. I very much appreciate how thorough you have been with your tests and analysis. The only aspect I have been missing is action noise. I always pay attention to “clickiness” of the keys and how much they are bouncing. PHA50 is nice and quiet and I regret that there is no (relatively cheap) MIDI controller with this action. I regularly play on Yamaha C7 and its action has recently become a reference for me. It is a light action: Middle C (C4) - ~49 g C7 - 44 g C2 - 45 g C3 - 53 g C4# - ~52g - ~56g (middle of black key) To get the sound: C4 ~85g (T/S) (long but faint sound), C2 - 95-100g, C3 ~90g (faint), C7 ~~60g I also had Yamaha P-515. It almost damaged one of my fingers because of its heaviness 84g to move middle C (C4) C7 - 70g C6 - >75g C2 - >~90g C3 - 90g I had more than ten digital pianos. Among them four with PHA-4 action (it is very noisy action!). The last one developed a strange problem of increasing downweight. Nov 2023 Feb 21 2024 Middle C (C4) - 67g 75.2g C7 - 53g 55g C6 - 59g 70g C2 - ~66g ~78g C3 - 65.5g 78g C4# - ~52g - 68g (middle of black key) ~ 95g to get the sound (T) C4; C3, C2 - 94g, C6 - 85g, C7 - 75g (S) ------- I have given up on having a digital piano with the action I like (I tested numerous pianos) and I currently have Yamaha P-225. It is at least a quiet action. Thank you, Michael Ps. Here are a couple of pianos examples illustrating how the key downweight of some digital pianos may be misadjusted: P-125A (fourth sample) Middle C (C4) - ~>57g B3 -~65g; D4 - 52g C7 -
This is the finest Dpiano action study ever performed on CZcams or any online platform. It explains how some pianos are simply unplayable, and some are very difficult to play, and others are effortless. I am a strong pianist and like the heavy action of a Steinway Concert D 9 foot Grand, so I am not talking about strength when I say "difficult". There are 100's of difficulties that any piano can have, but effortless comes when none of these exist...which happens on our great acoustic pianos....WHO....are using the finest technicians to voice and tune. And obviously you know that action alone does not make a great piano, the INTERaction of action and sound is where that sweet spot lives. The other videos on your YT channel make this INTERaction evident, your passion and search for this INTERaction is why you have just become my best friend :) Hope we can have discussions on this in the future.
Hi, I'm happy you enjoyed the video. I agree. I'd love to own an acoustic piano if I could afford it and hand the room for it. The best digital piano action will always be a compromise compared to a good acoustic action.
@@brunolacerda4611 "Affordable" is relative. I choose the Yamaha DGX-670 with the stand and 3pedal system for $1100.00. I have played digital pianos since the first one made, the DGX-670 is the first one I have ever played that I enjoyed both sound and action. All other digital pianos sound was not good. Sound and expression of that sound is more important to me than a perfectly simulated grand piano action. I have played hundreds of acoustic pianos professionally and can adapt to almost any action. (The DGX series has been around for 20 years, but all of them except the last one, the 670, are awful).
Thank you for your information on key action. It would be nice if you could do a comparison between the Kauai se11 and the Roland FP 90 x. To me action is very important. I grew up playing Oregon and then switch to piano. I started out on an old upright chickering with very heavy action but it was fast. Eventually Howard and from my understanding this is a Baldwin company brand. I much preferred the chickering. Also it sounded quite crisp and robust compared to the baby grin Howard. Anyway, much appreciated this segment on action.
Great video! For great players, like yourself, everything you talk about is vastly important. For most of us players, I don't know if it makes that much difference. I would love to have a relatively nice small grand piano or even an upright Yamaha, but I know my purchase budget and Maintenace budget will never all it. Therefore the best keyboard/piano for me is the one I use. I doubt if I will ever outgrow the limitations of my keyboard. I am thinking of getting the SL NUMA GT. I watched the CZcams video of the tour of the manufacturing facility in Italy and it impressed me. By far the most important thing is to get out of CZcams and get on the keyboard, whichever one you have.
Yeah, I enjoyed watching the Studiologic tour as well. The Numa X GT doesn't get as much attention as Roland, Yamah, and Kawai, but it's a very capable stage piano. I've owned it for 6 months now and my appreciation for it has grown.
Loved watching this. I’ll tell you this these are my two of my favorite actions. I thought the PHA-50 was the best all and end all for me in regards to digital actions, then i stumbled upon the SL and I really loved how smooth it was. It does feel slight lighter and I worry I will loose finger strength if I only practice on it. Besides those two I just played a Kawai CA901 and now I can’t decide which I like better between the SL and the Kawai. . . Sigh
The difference in key weight between the two actions is not very much, but it's definitely noticeable. While the TP400 is a bit lighter, I don't think it would compromise strength or endurance unless you ended up transitioning to an action that was actually heavier than the TP400. Most decent acoustic actions will be lighter.
Appreciate the details on this one! Good review. This might be a long shot, but I'll ask since you dove into so much detail on the action... maybe you've come across the answer. If you adjust velocity curves on the NUMA do you know if it still sends out the complete range of velocities without skipping any values between 0-127, or does it lose resolution as it would if you set the velocity curve in a DAW or virtual instrument? Trying to understand if the adjustment is applied before or after the initial velocity value calculation. I'm not even sure if there's a practical way to test that, but I've been curious since MIDI 2.0 seems to be a ways off at least for controllers with premium hammer action.
Hi. From what I can tell there are no touch sensitivity settings that will prevent the full range (0-127) from bring reached. The settings only impact how easily that can be done. Of course there is a fixed setting and the fixed value can be determined, but all the other settings (Normal, soft, hard) and the +/- % adjustments within those settings don't limit the velocity range.
Thank you David for the very informative video, I enjoyed watching it and also been in the very same boat, had both of them to personally compare and I finally kept the FP90x, I felt like it did a better job as a MIDI controller. Both models are good controllers but I struggled a bit with the black keys on the TP400 feeling quite different to the white keys, even there's an option to adjust that, I couldn't feel confortable with any setting. Also, despite you can reach low velocities on the TP400 as a controller, I felt like the jump from lower to higher velocities was very easy, kinda tricky to get gradually higher velocities, a marginal extra force in my fingers would result in a substantial increase of the MIDI output, that didn't happen on the PHA50, felt like it was better implemented. I finally liked the PHA50 better and got myself its bigger brother Grand Hybrid action present on the LX706, a very nice MIDI controller, IMO useless internal pianos so I don't really benefit from the whole canbinet and speakers, but still a good controller to use with external speakers and VST. Another brand that has the MIDI output very well implemented is Yamaha, I particularly liked the CLP785 in this regard but its price was in a whole different range, the Casio GP was also very good at delivering accurate MIDI output but I didn't like much its action, it felt unnaturally sluggish to me. On a side note, I did these tests more than one year ago, not sure SL has changed or improved some of these aspects with new firmwares.
I always wanted to try Roland's Grand Hybrid like on the LX706. The Grand Hybrid has the longest pivot. However, like you I also don't need the big cabinet, but I imagine that action would be really nice and smooth. Thanks for sharing.
@@Comfort_One_Another Thanks David for answering, would you say you've achieved an equal touch between white and black keys? I remember while having the XGT for testing, I tried to adjust the -3+3 of the balance parameter (cannot recall what's its name exactly was) and still felt like the feel between them wasn't even, perhaps that changed with later firmware updates? Also, performing "fast" classical trills on blacks was somewhat difficult/inaccurate due to slow return, would you confirm? The PHA50 isn't much faster but a bit more consistent IMO
@@DavidIzquierdoAzzouz I would agree that the PHA50 is more consistent between the white and black keys. However, the differences on the Numa GT don't negatively impact my playing. That's probably because I don't have a refined piano technique. I'm a bit more ham-fisted when I play. 🙂
I haven't tried the numa, but I have a couple of keyboards and digital pianos with th PHA50. I also have the Korg RH3 keybed from the Kronos 88, and the motif xs 8 keybed. My daily driver is a kawai gl 40 (6ft grand) with the Millenium action. I like all of the keybeds that I play, with the pha50 and RH3 on the top of the list. I feel like the pha50 translates the best to the kawai piano action, which is on the heavier side. I'm just glad we have so many good options these days. Having said that, the motif seems to work best when it comes to controlling vsts. Personally, I prefer to play boards with built in piano sounds. It can be a pain to get a keyboard to work smoothly with vst libraries, especially because I expect the same level of playability I get from my piano, or digital piano. That's the reason I didn’t buy the vsl libraries, I just couldn't get the playability I get from my piano, kronos, or fantom. But that's a personal issue lol
Hi Mariano. You might want to consider trying the Ivory 3 Concert D. I'm really impressed with the balance and playability of it. I really think it's one of the best sampled pianos available today.
_Very_ interesting, insightful, and helpful review! I generally think of myself as preferring a heavier action, but I definitely prefer the TP-400Wes (of the Studiologic Numa X GT, _not_ to be confused with the TP-400 of various other offerings!) over at least the Roland PH4, Yamaha GHS, and Korg RH3. That said, I haven’t been able to try the Kawai RHIII of e.g the MP11 or Nord Grand(?) and would definitely find value in such a comparison! Now, _that_ said, the most useful thing in this video is the comparison with the actual Yamaha acoustic piano! I am blessed with three acoustic pianos and, interestingly, find that the newer the piano, the _heavier_ the action! In any case, I agree that whatever its technical deficits, the TP-400Wes is an absolutely _superb_ keybed, especially for the price! Cheers from a new subscriber!
Great study. There were some findings I never thought about. Namely finger sustain. On the other side: I missed some information about pivot point length respectively the difference of downweight at the tip and the end of the key. And did I miss the information about Note-Off velocity being sent? Nevertheless: great work!
Hi. When I did this video I had not yet taken the Numa apart, so I was unable to determine the pivot length. Having taken it apart since this video, I can say that the PHA50 has a longer pivot length. How much longer, I don't know because I don't have the Roland anymore and I never thought to measure the key length when I had it apart. I don't recall if playing at the back of the keys on the Roland was noticeable easier. It might have been slightly. Both actions send note off velocities.
Hi David, Lance from VI Labs here, thanks for this great review of these two actions! Just one point about the FP90X and it's triple sensor action: it ONLY works for internal sounds, NOT the MIDI output which is very bizarre. Roland did confirm this, on MIDI output the action is effectively a double sensor only so no ability to do finger sustain, or play a note sostenuto as it's also called, using the FP90X as a controller only. Great demonstration and explanation of this, by the way! Amazing how many still don't know what a 'triple sensor' action is meant to do. Not sure if this applies to other models using the PHA50 or any other of their DP models, they never gave me the full list I asked them for. Some great things coming here at VI Labs soon, will be reaching out to you. Thanks for everything you do, and hope you and your family are well!
That's very interesting. I never tried finger sustain while using the PHA50 to control a virtual piano. I just assumed it worked like it did with the FP90X internal sounds. Thank you for the information. One thing I'm confused by is the function of theTP400. It's supposed to be a triple sensor action (confirmed by Studiologic), however, it will not allow for finger sustain with internal sounds or as a midi controller. What's up with that? I'm very excited to see what VI Labs samples next. Hopefully it will by another concert grand with the same updates seen on the Modern U. A midsize grand could be nice also. I was disappointed to see that VI Labs was not used to sample the Ravenscroft 220 (done by Prime Studios). I would have definitely bought it if it was done by VI Labs. You guys did such a great job on the Modern U that the expectation is very high for your next release. 👍
@@Comfort_One_AnotherHi David, not sure about the Studiologic as I've never had one to test with. But I'm pretty sure the only two purposes for a 'triple sensor action' is to play a note sostenuto (or finger sustain, as you can with a double escapement grand action, like you perfectly demonstrated), or to get faster repetitions since the key doesn't have to fully 'reset' to strike again. This is also evident in any recorded MIDI in a DAW as you'll see note events overlapping on top of each other with no disconnect in between. Our VPC1 here does this flawlessly and you can finger sustain just as you would on the acoustic grand with no trouble. As for the FP90X, here's the full reply from Roland support: "Our Roland engineers currently don’t have a solution for you. The MIDI implementation for the A-88 was different than it is for the FP-90X. The FP-90X is not really a MIDI controller in the same way the A-88 was. Both instruments were intended for different types of players. The focus of the FP-90X is on the internal sounds. The FP-90X is designed primarily to offer high-level expression from the keyboard and pedals for the internal sounds. The engineers did say they will look at the possibility of making changes to the FP models but they also said they can’t really promise anything." Shame, as it seems they might be inhibiting or reducing the functionality when using the MIDI output, or the MIDI processing only uses two sensors and the internal sounds can use all three. I asked them for a list of all models that claim triple sensor actions but limit the MIDI output to two sensor mode, and they never replied. So this may only apply to the FP90X, or it may apply to all their DPs and only provide full MIDI support on their controllers and stage pianos. Just speculation. At any rate it is a disappointment since it's a rather expensive DP with a premium action. 😞 Also it's worth noting that the damper pedal input on the FP90X is incredibly sensitive, with no way to adjust the sensitivity. You barely press the pedal (their DP-10, the triple pedal made for the FP90X, or their RPU-3 I use with the A88 here), and the 'lift point' is very high and the reported velocity is also very high even if you work the pedal very slowly. Hence their mention of the A88 in their reply above, I said the A88 and pedal responds very smooth and linear compared to the FP90X. It's not the pedals either, it's the FP90X internal processing of the pedal speed and position, and there's no way to adjust it in their settings which is unfortunate as well. Fortunately we have a solution to help with this, will probably be in an update of all our libraries eventually. And I assure you our next VI Labs release will be mind-blowing. 😉Will definitely be in touch with you when a beta version is ready!
@@lancemgy Thanks for the additional information. I'd like to get a VPC1 if Kawai ever updates it. Really looking forward to your next release. I'm ready to get my mind blown.😀
@@Comfort_One_AnotherHi David, just posted an update in the PW forum thread, seems like Pianoteq may be the only piano VST that can take any MIDI input, double or triple sensor, and allow finger sustain. I tested several other piano VSTs and Pianoteq was the only one that did this. Interesting! If Pianoteq can do it, I think VI Labs can do it too. Finger sustain and anything with a triple sensor action seems like a rather unused feature, so I'm not surprised more haven't noticed this. The VPC1 is quite nice, nothing else like it. I can't imagine they'll ever update it though, we should be so lucky they're still making them, regardless of the high price. Try to find a used one if you can. 😉
Thank you so much for the video I own a 90X too I am an intermediate towards advance player I'd like your advice The 90x helps me a lot developing my fingers, and I noticed that when I play a lighter action However do you think this feelings of mine is correct ?
Hi. I believe it's easier to transition from a heavier action to a lighter one. Your fingers won't be fatigued from playing a lighter action after practicing on a heavier one. You'll just need to adjust your touch for the lighter action. So I think your experience and opinion is correct.
@@Comfort_One_AnotherThank you I appreciate your response.. I made a video of the pha-50 mechanics I took apart the piano czcams.com/video/H3cPa6XWTeM/video.html
Thanks for the video!!! I own the Numa GT. I did tried the Roland Rd2000. Personally i prefer the numa GT. It is easier and when you play arpeggios are just easier. Also when i played the roland for a while felt like my fingers were getting tired. I am not used to play that heavy. I do prefer the supernatural Roland acoustic pianos over the studiologic pianos. It just sound beautiful in my opinion. Many people say that sound fake but yhe studiologic sound more fake in my opinion. You can hear that yamaha CP80 sound blended with the samples.
I agree with your experience as well. I like the action on the Numa GT, but I don't care for the internal piano sounds. They blend nicely with the other sounds on the Numa GT, but the acoustic pianos don't sound that great by themselves.
@@pianobis777 The VPC1 is a great keyboard. The problem with that piano is that you cannot transport as easy as the Numa. Also on the Numa you got 4 midi accessible channels that you can use in a live setting.
I have an RD-2000, also with the PHA-50, and a Studiologic MIDI controller with the TP-100. While the PHA-50 is basically much better, it has a serious disadvantage in my opinion: the key travel is much shorter than on an average acoustic piano. It almost feels like you‘re pressing buttons, not piano keys. In so far the TP-100 is better. Therefore I considered to replace the Roland by the Numa X GT. But now I‘ve learned that the TP-400 has the same short key travel as the PHA-50? This is somehow disappointing. 😢
Thanks David for the great overview of both devices. I'm leaning towards the SL Numa GT,but haven't been able to find one to try in person. I've noticed Fatar key actions on the Nords and other midi controllers are fairly clunky and loud at the bottom of the key press. How would you say the Roland and SL Numa GT compare in that regard, volume off and just playing the keys? Thanks
I tried both of these, and to me, the tp400 feels way better. The feel of the keys themselves to the feel as it bottoms out and the weighting, all feels better. Somehow the Roland didn't feel like a high end keybed in comparison (subjective of course). I prefer the SL88 grand keybed (TP40 wood) to the Roland also. Funnily enough, they also had an old RD700 in the store, and I liked THAT better than the RD2000 I tried there too. I believe that has the old PHA-3 keybed... They don't make em like they used to springs to mind there.
I think a great choice for a light action is Yamaha's P-525 - but I haven't tried that one yet, just the same action on a different instrument. And not at all in such detail, just the initial feeling.
@@jsfotografie My son has the Numa X Piano 88 with the updated TP110 action. It's not bad, but it's nothing like the TP400. The TP110 is not a graded hammer action so all the keys are the same up/down weight. There is no simulated escapement. For someone who wants more of a small size acoustic grand feeling action, the TP400 would be a much better option.
That's a good question. I took apart the FP90X but never the Numa. So I can't say for certain which is longer, but I think there might be a slight difference in length with the PHA50 being a bit longer. However, when it comes to playing the back of the keys (fallboard) I didn't feel any noticeable difference.
I’ve owned several digital pianos over the years both Roland and Yamaha. My Roland experience I’ve owned two middle of the road price point. Yamaha I’ve owned five mid to high end. I owned the Yamaha CVP409 with escapement very nice. My most recent Purchase a year ago was the Yamaha CP88 stage piano. I’d have to say the CP88 is my favourite by far. It has real wooden keys with synthetic ivory tops,escapement and double strike feature for faster action just like an acoustic piano as well as graded piano action.My experience when it comes to digital pianos is as the years go by they just keep getting better and more realistic compared to a real acoustic piano. Yamaha is my preference over Roland I don’t feel Rolland has mastered the realism of a piano quite like Yamaha and I’ve played several. My experience with Roland is they sound muddy at least with the. Ones I’ve played Sound is most important to me.
I've owned 5 Yamaha digitals including their hybrid N1X. I like Yamaha's piano samples better than Roland's modeled pianos sounds. If I had to choose between a Roland and Yamaha slab I'd choose either the CP88 or YC88 (same actions).
David, do you still have your Yamaha N1? Or did you switch to these two keyboards? Also, can you comment on how much difference the sound improved from the move to the Genelecs from the Rokits you had? Was it a significant change in tone in the VSTs with this change?
I don't have the N1X anymore. Only the Numa X Piano GT. Switching to Genelecs was really the best audio move I've ever made. Internal speakers (even on the N1X) sound terrible compared to the Genelecs. The quality of the audio is about the best it will ever be. The bass extension on the 8050s is really good not only for piano, but just listening to music through them is a wonderful experience also. I do add EQ to music because Genelecs provide such a flat frequency response.
@@Comfort_One_Another Thx, David. Was there a huge upgrade going from the KKRs to the Genelecs? Are the ones you have the 8050s? Are you running (or do you see the need to run) a subwoofer with the Genelecs? Also, I'm curious what you compared the Genelecs to before choosing them?
@@jimj.9291 Hi. I would not recommend the KRKs. I used KRK Rokit 6 Gen 3 for several years and then I upgraded to the KRK Rokit 7 Gen 4. Here are the problems with them. 1. The Rokit 7 bass driver width is actually 5.5" which was exactly the same as my Rokit 6. Silly me, I actually thought was upgrading in woofer size. Not so. I think that is deceptive advertising on KRK's part. I contacted KRK about it and I got some silly excuse which I don't even care to remember. 2. Big increase in the white noise hiss that comes from the tweeters in the Gen 4 models. I could only hear the hiss in my Gen 3 when I put my ear right up to the tweeter. Sitting 3 to 4 feet from the monitor I couldn't hear anything. However, not so with the Gen 4. Much louder hiss and I could hear it sitting at the piano 3 feet away. I think there are a lot better options for lower budget monitors. I'd stay away from KRK. Currently I'm using Genelec 8050B monitors. Yes, they are way more expensive, but they are significantly better than the lower budget monitors I've owned. I originally had 8040B, but I felt the 8050B with the larger bass driver and greater bass extension was noticeably better for piano playing and listening to music. I don't need a sub because I don't listen to techno, hiphop/rap music. The low cutoff on the 8050 is at 32 Hz. That's low enough for piano and the music I listen to.
@@Comfort_One_Another Thank you, David. I'll take a look at the Genelecs. They are quite expensive and there is nowhere close to me where I can demo it against other monitors. I've always wondered how significant the upgrade would be to a high end monitor for piano VSTs. The Genelecs look like a very popular option for piano and it is good to know a sub isn't needed. Since it is a two way, I didn't know if any of the cheaper 3 way options would sound fuller on piano. And yours painted black look great!
@@jimj.9291 Thanks. I like the black color also. I think the two way speakers are preferable for nearfield monitors to get the acoustical axis in the right place. You want the speakers a few feet away from you when playing the piano to minimize perceived latency. Three way speakers are probably better for filling a room with sound, but not for nearfield monitoring.
Unfortunately, I have not tried the SL88 or the VPC1. Ideally you can try before you buy. If not, then make sure whomever you purchase from has a return policy you are comfortable with.
Was trying it out yesterday and the escapement on the Numa X GT drives me crazy. How can they nail literally every other aspect and then fail so badly at the escapement. The note triggering threshold should obviously be below the escapement point. I am wondering if they can fix that with a software update.
I really don't like the simulated escapement on the Numa. The white keys aren't so bad, but it's too pronounced on the black keys. I'm actually thinking about opening up the Numa and seeing how easy/hard it would be to remove the simulated escapement.
@@AntonKuznetsovMusic I will. I'm going to take it apart next week just to see how difficult it would be to modify the escapement. I also have one key that seems to have increased friction compared to the rest of the keys. I'm curious to see why that might be.
Hi. I wish I could tell you what action I prefer, but I never played a VPC1. Currently the VPC 1 is $500 more expensive than the Numa X Piano GT. The VPC 1 is only a controller with no internal sounds while the Numa has an entire library of sounds. I'll most likely try an VPC 2 if one is ever introduced, especially if they replace the old RM3II action with the newer Grand Feel Compact.
@@Comfort_One_Another I'm from Brasil. Here the VPC1 is less expensive, 16k vs 21k from numa. I have Numa X and I hate the sounds! And 4 of my keyboards keys are making weird noises.
@@Comfort_One_Another Now i'm betwen from changing my Numa X for the GT or for the Korg GrandStage. Korg i'll expend less money, but I'm not sure about the keys.
It is great to hear your thoughts about the two pianos but the video is a little bit like a clickbait given you set up the two keyboards on their stand and don't actually demonstrate any thing. In particular, we all know that repeated notes are easier on an acoustic , so it would have been more informative to demonstrate it on the 2 keyboards that you have set up purposedly in the video. Also demonstrating how these keyboards respond in term of midi range would have been useful too. However thank you for sharing your thoughts.
It says action comparison in the title. It's also mentioned in the first couple sentences of the video. I did demonstrate the single key repletion on all the pianos in the video. I also explained that both cover the full midi range. This video was more about the differences and not the similarities.
For me, the comparison was about what I expected given the title and thumbnail. It's hard for me to gauge action based on watching someone play it on CZcams, but hearing details about escapement feel, upweight, (in)consistency between black and white keys, textures, etc. was nice. A lot of reviews barely touch on those if at all, and those are the details I always wonder about with actions, so I appreciate the focus on those.
The PHA50 is certainly a great action. But the Casio "Natural Grand Hammer Action" and the Kawai "Grand Feel III" are much closer to an acoustic piano action than the PHA50. The Casio is probably the best simulation out there of an acoustic grand action (excluding obviously the action of the Yamaha AvantGrand or Kawai Novus 10, which are on a different price segment). The Kawai GF III is good but feels like a vertical piano, not like a grand piano. Compared to these, the PHA50 feels sluggish, and you can certainly feel its short fulcrum.
i only tried the roland ph 4a action...im happy with it...in my price budget..its on the heavy side ..but its probably the best action at the 1000 dollar price range...besides i dont play anything fast and my skill is rudementary......so its not a factor...light action is cheating...hahahahaha 😉
I agree. A digital action that is too light makes it difficult to transition to heavier actions that might be found on acoustic grands. Your fingers will fatigue easier when going from a light to heavier action.
Many people speak highly of the PHA4 or PH4a as you call it. However I don't care for it at all, and much prefer Yamaha's GHS action which many people are critical of.
@@JoeLinux2000The white and black keys on acoustic grand pianos are weighted so that they offer the same resistance - at least in good quality pianos that are properly regulated. So, if you play a C and and a C# on the 4 octave, for example, these two keys should feel the same. Note that a key can feel "heavier" if you play it deeper (i.e. closer to the fallboard). This is because the resistance increases as you move closer to the fulcrum of the key. So, if you usually play the black keys deeper than the white keys (as many players do), then the black keys can feel heavier, but this has nothing to do with height.
I simply love such videos, full of details with excellent presentation. Pure gold!
Thank you for such detailed review! This is the way it must be.
Excellent presentation of needed information. Thanks for sharing!
Thank you for the technical learning to be aware of what's happening and why they have different playable feelings. Cheers!
Very comprehensive analysis, I like that in a review.
Outstanding video David, thank you so much.
What an awesome review!
I love the tp400w keybed. as I use it on my dexibell S9 and S10.. thank you very much for your educational video..
Does the Dexibell S9/S10 (TP400) have simulated escapement? Thanks.
I have several weighted keyboards..but I must admit that playing the S9/S10 is always a real pleasure..
Keyboard spe:
TP-400 W (Hybrid, Wood ): 88 Keys weighted, hammer action, triple contact ivory & ebony feels, escapement
Thanks so much for a thorough disscussion on actions!
This is indeed a great video. I very much appreciate how thorough you have been with your tests and analysis.
The only aspect I have been missing is action noise. I always pay attention to “clickiness” of the keys and how much they are bouncing. PHA50 is nice and quiet and I regret that there is no (relatively cheap) MIDI controller with this action.
I regularly play on Yamaha C7 and its action has recently become a reference for me. It is a light action:
Middle C (C4) - ~49 g
C7 - 44 g
C2 - 45 g
C3 - 53 g
C4# - ~52g - ~56g (middle of black key)
To get the sound: C4 ~85g (T/S) (long but faint sound), C2 - 95-100g, C3 ~90g (faint), C7 ~~60g
I also had Yamaha P-515.
It almost damaged one of my fingers because of its heaviness
84g to move middle C (C4)
C7 - 70g
C6 - >75g
C2 - >~90g
C3 - 90g
I had more than ten digital pianos. Among them four with PHA-4 action (it is very noisy action!).
The last one developed a strange problem of increasing downweight.
Nov 2023 Feb 21 2024
Middle C (C4) - 67g 75.2g
C7 - 53g 55g
C6 - 59g 70g
C2 - ~66g ~78g
C3 - 65.5g 78g
C4# - ~52g - 68g (middle of black key)
~ 95g to get the sound (T) C4; C3, C2 - 94g, C6 - 85g, C7 - 75g (S)
-------
I have given up on having a digital piano with the action I like (I tested numerous pianos) and I currently have Yamaha P-225. It is at least a quiet action.
Thank you,
Michael
Ps. Here are a couple of pianos examples illustrating how the key downweight of some digital pianos may be misadjusted:
P-125A (fourth sample)
Middle C (C4) - ~>57g
B3 -~65g; D4 - 52g
C7 -
Thank you Michael for your contribution. I know that your references will be helpful to people.
This is the finest Dpiano action study ever performed on CZcams or any online platform. It explains how some pianos are simply unplayable, and some are very difficult to play, and others are effortless. I am a strong pianist and like the heavy action of a Steinway Concert D 9 foot Grand, so I am not talking about strength when I say "difficult". There are 100's of difficulties that any piano can have, but effortless comes when none of these exist...which happens on our great acoustic pianos....WHO....are using the finest technicians to voice and tune. And obviously you know that action alone does not make a great piano, the INTERaction of action and sound is where that sweet spot lives. The other videos on your YT channel make this INTERaction evident, your passion and search for this INTERaction is why you have just become my best friend :) Hope we can have discussions on this in the future.
Hi, I'm happy you enjoyed the video. I agree. I'd love to own an acoustic piano if I could afford it and hand the room for it. The best digital piano action will always be a compromise compared to a good acoustic action.
ok. But I have to pick one! The question is, with one is the best affordable available that is closer to the acoustics?
@@brunolacerda4611 "Affordable" is relative. I choose the Yamaha DGX-670 with the stand and 3pedal system for $1100.00. I have played digital pianos since the first one made, the DGX-670 is the first one I have ever played that I enjoyed both sound and action. All other digital pianos sound was not good. Sound and expression of that sound is more important to me than a perfectly simulated grand piano action. I have played hundreds of acoustic pianos professionally and can adapt to almost any action. (The DGX series has been around for 20 years, but all of them except the last one, the 670, are awful).
Thank you so much.
Very helpful. 🤓🤘
Thank you for your information on key action. It would be nice if you could do a comparison between the Kauai se11 and the Roland FP 90 x. To me action is very important. I grew up playing Oregon and then switch to piano. I started out on an old upright chickering with very heavy action but it was fast. Eventually Howard and from my understanding this is a Baldwin company brand. I much preferred the chickering. Also it sounded quite crisp and robust compared to the baby grin Howard. Anyway, much appreciated this segment on action.
Great video! For great players, like yourself, everything you talk about is vastly important. For most of us players, I don't know if it makes that much difference. I would love to have a relatively nice small grand piano or even an upright Yamaha, but I know my purchase budget and Maintenace budget will never all it. Therefore the best keyboard/piano for me is the one I use. I doubt if I will ever outgrow the limitations of my keyboard. I am thinking of getting the SL NUMA GT. I watched the CZcams video of the tour of the manufacturing facility in Italy and it impressed me. By far the most important thing is to get out of CZcams and get on the keyboard, whichever one you have.
Yeah, I enjoyed watching the Studiologic tour as well. The Numa X GT doesn't get as much attention as Roland, Yamah, and Kawai, but it's a very capable stage piano. I've owned it for 6 months now and my appreciation for it has grown.
Loved watching this. I’ll tell you this these are my two of my favorite actions. I thought the PHA-50 was the best all and end all for me in regards to digital actions, then i stumbled upon the SL and I really loved how smooth it was. It does feel slight lighter and I worry I will loose finger strength if I only practice on it. Besides those two I just played a Kawai CA901 and now I can’t decide which I like better between the SL and the Kawai. . . Sigh
The difference in key weight between the two actions is not very much, but it's definitely noticeable. While the TP400 is a bit lighter, I don't think it would compromise strength or endurance unless you ended up transitioning to an action that was actually heavier than the TP400. Most decent acoustic actions will be lighter.
Appreciate the details on this one! Good review. This might be a long shot, but I'll ask since you dove into so much detail on the action... maybe you've come across the answer. If you adjust velocity curves on the NUMA do you know if it still sends out the complete range of velocities without skipping any values between 0-127, or does it lose resolution as it would if you set the velocity curve in a DAW or virtual instrument? Trying to understand if the adjustment is applied before or after the initial velocity value calculation. I'm not even sure if there's a practical way to test that, but I've been curious since MIDI 2.0 seems to be a ways off at least for controllers with premium hammer action.
Hi. From what I can tell there are no touch sensitivity settings that will prevent the full range (0-127) from bring reached. The settings only impact how easily that can be done. Of course there is a fixed setting and the fixed value can be determined, but all the other settings (Normal, soft, hard) and the +/- % adjustments within those settings don't limit the velocity range.
Thank you David for the very informative video, I enjoyed watching it and also been in the very same boat, had both of them to personally compare and I finally kept the FP90x, I felt like it did a better job as a MIDI controller. Both models are good controllers but I struggled a bit with the black keys on the TP400 feeling quite different to the white keys, even there's an option to adjust that, I couldn't feel confortable with any setting. Also, despite you can reach low velocities on the TP400 as a controller, I felt like the jump from lower to higher velocities was very easy, kinda tricky to get gradually higher velocities, a marginal extra force in my fingers would result in a substantial increase of the MIDI output, that didn't happen on the PHA50, felt like it was better implemented. I finally liked the PHA50 better and got myself its bigger brother Grand Hybrid action present on the LX706, a very nice MIDI controller, IMO useless internal pianos so I don't really benefit from the whole canbinet and speakers, but still a good controller to use with external speakers and VST. Another brand that has the MIDI output very well implemented is Yamaha, I particularly liked the CLP785 in this regard but its price was in a whole different range, the Casio GP was also very good at delivering accurate MIDI output but I didn't like much its action, it felt unnaturally sluggish to me. On a side note, I did these tests more than one year ago, not sure SL has changed or improved some of these aspects with new firmwares.
I always wanted to try Roland's Grand Hybrid like on the LX706. The Grand Hybrid has the longest pivot. However, like you I also don't need the big cabinet, but I imagine that action would be really nice and smooth. Thanks for sharing.
@@Comfort_One_Another Maybe Roland will come out with a MIDI controller with the GHA action.
@@JoeLinux2000 That might be the ultimate controller if it happens.
@@Comfort_One_Another Thanks David for answering, would you say you've achieved an equal touch between white and black keys? I remember while having the XGT for testing, I tried to adjust the -3+3 of the balance parameter (cannot recall what's its name exactly was) and still felt like the feel between them wasn't even, perhaps that changed with later firmware updates? Also, performing "fast" classical trills on blacks was somewhat difficult/inaccurate due to slow return, would you confirm? The PHA50 isn't much faster but a bit more consistent IMO
@@DavidIzquierdoAzzouz I would agree that the PHA50 is more consistent between the white and black keys. However, the differences on the Numa GT don't negatively impact my playing. That's probably because I don't have a refined piano technique. I'm a bit more ham-fisted when I play. 🙂
Thanks. I'm playing a GHS action on the DGX-670 and I'm basically OK with it. Opinions vary greatly when it come to digital piano actions.
GHS is just ok, nothing more. It's good for the price range.
I haven't tried the numa, but I have a couple of keyboards and digital pianos with th PHA50. I also have the Korg RH3 keybed from the Kronos 88, and the motif xs 8 keybed. My daily driver is a kawai gl 40 (6ft grand) with the Millenium action. I like all of the keybeds that I play, with the pha50 and RH3 on the top of the list. I feel like the pha50 translates the best to the kawai piano action, which is on the heavier side. I'm just glad we have so many good options these days. Having said that, the motif seems to work best when it comes to controlling vsts. Personally, I prefer to play boards with built in piano sounds. It can be a pain to get a keyboard to work smoothly with vst libraries, especially because I expect the same level of playability I get from my piano, or digital piano. That's the reason I didn’t buy the vsl libraries, I just couldn't get the playability I get from my piano, kronos, or fantom. But that's a personal issue lol
Hi Mariano. You might want to consider trying the Ivory 3 Concert D. I'm really impressed with the balance and playability of it. I really think it's one of the best sampled pianos available today.
_Very_ interesting, insightful, and helpful review! I generally think of myself as preferring a heavier action, but I definitely prefer the TP-400Wes (of the Studiologic Numa X GT, _not_ to be confused with the TP-400 of various other offerings!) over at least the Roland PH4, Yamaha GHS, and Korg RH3. That said, I haven’t been able to try the Kawai RHIII of e.g the MP11 or Nord Grand(?) and would definitely find value in such a comparison! Now, _that_ said, the most useful thing in this video is the comparison with the actual Yamaha acoustic piano! I am blessed with three acoustic pianos and, interestingly, find that the newer the piano, the _heavier_ the action! In any case, I agree that whatever its technical deficits, the TP-400Wes is an absolutely _superb_ keybed, especially for the price!
Cheers from a new subscriber!
Great study. There were some findings I never thought about. Namely finger sustain. On the other side: I missed some information about pivot point length respectively the difference of downweight at the tip and the end of the key. And did I miss the information about Note-Off velocity being sent? Nevertheless: great work!
Hi. When I did this video I had not yet taken the Numa apart, so I was unable to determine the pivot length. Having taken it apart since this video, I can say that the PHA50 has a longer pivot length. How much longer, I don't know because I don't have the Roland anymore and I never thought to measure the key length when I had it apart. I don't recall if playing at the back of the keys on the Roland was noticeable easier. It might have been slightly. Both actions send note off velocities.
Hi David, Lance from VI Labs here, thanks for this great review of these two actions! Just one point about the FP90X and it's triple sensor action: it ONLY works for internal sounds, NOT the MIDI output which is very bizarre. Roland did confirm this, on MIDI output the action is effectively a double sensor only so no ability to do finger sustain, or play a note sostenuto as it's also called, using the FP90X as a controller only. Great demonstration and explanation of this, by the way! Amazing how many still don't know what a 'triple sensor' action is meant to do. Not sure if this applies to other models using the PHA50 or any other of their DP models, they never gave me the full list I asked them for.
Some great things coming here at VI Labs soon, will be reaching out to you. Thanks for everything you do, and hope you and your family are well!
That's very interesting. I never tried finger sustain while using the PHA50 to control a virtual piano. I just assumed it worked like it did with the FP90X internal sounds. Thank you for the information. One thing I'm confused by is the function of theTP400. It's supposed to be a triple sensor action (confirmed by Studiologic), however, it will not allow for finger sustain with internal sounds or as a midi controller. What's up with that? I'm very excited to see what VI Labs samples next. Hopefully it will by another concert grand with the same updates seen on the Modern U. A midsize grand could be nice also. I was disappointed to see that VI Labs was not used to sample the Ravenscroft 220 (done by Prime Studios). I would have definitely bought it if it was done by VI Labs. You guys did such a great job on the Modern U that the expectation is very high for your next release. 👍
@@Comfort_One_AnotherHi David, not sure about the Studiologic as I've never had one to test with. But I'm pretty sure the only two purposes for a 'triple sensor action' is to play a note sostenuto (or finger sustain, as you can with a double escapement grand action, like you perfectly demonstrated), or to get faster repetitions since the key doesn't have to fully 'reset' to strike again. This is also evident in any recorded MIDI in a DAW as you'll see note events overlapping on top of each other with no disconnect in between. Our VPC1 here does this flawlessly and you can finger sustain just as you would on the acoustic grand with no trouble.
As for the FP90X, here's the full reply from Roland support: "Our Roland engineers currently don’t have a solution for you. The MIDI implementation for the A-88 was different than it is for the FP-90X. The FP-90X is not really a MIDI controller in the same way the A-88 was. Both instruments were intended for different types of players. The focus of the FP-90X is on the internal sounds. The FP-90X is designed primarily to offer high-level expression from the keyboard and pedals for the internal sounds.
The engineers did say they will look at the possibility of making changes to the FP models but they also said they can’t really promise anything."
Shame, as it seems they might be inhibiting or reducing the functionality when using the MIDI output, or the MIDI processing only uses two sensors and the internal sounds can use all three. I asked them for a list of all models that claim triple sensor actions but limit the MIDI output to two sensor mode, and they never replied. So this may only apply to the FP90X, or it may apply to all their DPs and only provide full MIDI support on their controllers and stage pianos. Just speculation. At any rate it is a disappointment since it's a rather expensive DP with a premium action. 😞
Also it's worth noting that the damper pedal input on the FP90X is incredibly sensitive, with no way to adjust the sensitivity. You barely press the pedal (their DP-10, the triple pedal made for the FP90X, or their RPU-3 I use with the A88 here), and the 'lift point' is very high and the reported velocity is also very high even if you work the pedal very slowly. Hence their mention of the A88 in their reply above, I said the A88 and pedal responds very smooth and linear compared to the FP90X. It's not the pedals either, it's the FP90X internal processing of the pedal speed and position, and there's no way to adjust it in their settings which is unfortunate as well. Fortunately we have a solution to help with this, will probably be in an update of all our libraries eventually.
And I assure you our next VI Labs release will be mind-blowing. 😉Will definitely be in touch with you when a beta version is ready!
@@lancemgy Thanks for the additional information. I'd like to get a VPC1 if Kawai ever updates it. Really looking forward to your next release. I'm ready to get my mind blown.😀
@@Comfort_One_AnotherHi David, just posted an update in the PW forum thread, seems like Pianoteq may be the only piano VST that can take any MIDI input, double or triple sensor, and allow finger sustain. I tested several other piano VSTs and Pianoteq was the only one that did this. Interesting! If Pianoteq can do it, I think VI Labs can do it too. Finger sustain and anything with a triple sensor action seems like a rather unused feature, so I'm not surprised more haven't noticed this.
The VPC1 is quite nice, nothing else like it. I can't imagine they'll ever update it though, we should be so lucky they're still making them, regardless of the high price. Try to find a used one if you can. 😉
Any source for the confirmation from Roland about the double sensor for MIDI?
I'm not interested in any numa instrument. And this video showed I'm on the right way
Roland, yamaha has the best key actions.
thanks!
It's a great thing to be satisfied in life. 👍
Thank you so much for the video I own a 90X too
I am an intermediate towards advance player I'd like your advice
The 90x helps me a lot developing my fingers, and I noticed that when I play a lighter action
However do you think this feelings of mine is correct ?
Hi. I believe it's easier to transition from a heavier action to a lighter one. Your fingers won't be fatigued from playing a lighter action after practicing on a heavier one. You'll just need to adjust your touch for the lighter action. So I think your experience and opinion is correct.
@@Comfort_One_AnotherThank you I appreciate your response.. I made a video of the pha-50 mechanics I took apart the piano
czcams.com/video/H3cPa6XWTeM/video.html
Thanks for the video!!! I own the Numa GT. I did tried the Roland Rd2000. Personally i prefer the numa GT. It is easier and when you play arpeggios are just easier. Also when i played the roland for a while felt like my fingers were getting tired. I am not used to play that heavy. I do prefer the supernatural Roland acoustic pianos over the studiologic pianos. It just sound beautiful in my opinion. Many people say that sound fake but yhe studiologic sound more fake in my opinion. You can hear that yamaha CP80 sound blended with the samples.
I agree with your experience as well. I like the action on the Numa GT, but I don't care for the internal piano sounds. They blend nicely with the other sounds on the Numa GT, but the acoustic pianos don't sound that great by themselves.
If its to be used as a midi controller, isn't better to buy VPC1?
@@pianobis777 The VPC1 is a great keyboard. The problem with that piano is that you cannot transport as easy as the Numa. Also on the Numa you got 4 midi accessible channels that you can use in a live setting.
I have an RD-2000, also with the PHA-50, and a Studiologic MIDI controller with the TP-100. While the PHA-50 is basically much better, it has a serious disadvantage in my opinion: the key travel is much shorter than on an average acoustic piano. It almost feels like you‘re pressing buttons, not piano keys. In so far the TP-100 is better. Therefore I considered to replace the Roland by the Numa X GT. But now I‘ve learned that the TP-400 has the same short key travel as the PHA-50? This is somehow disappointing. 😢
Thanks David for the great overview of both devices. I'm leaning towards the SL Numa GT,but haven't been able to find one to try in person. I've noticed Fatar key actions on the Nords and other midi controllers are fairly clunky and loud at the bottom of the key press. How would you say the Roland and SL Numa GT compare in that regard, volume off and just playing the keys? Thanks
I think I recall the TP400 being a bit louder action, but not noticeable when playing at a normal volume or with headphones on.
Thank you sir!
That’s how must be done every piano demo
I tried both of these, and to me, the tp400 feels way better. The feel of the keys themselves to the feel as it bottoms out and the weighting, all feels better. Somehow the Roland didn't feel like a high end keybed in comparison (subjective of course). I prefer the SL88 grand keybed (TP40 wood) to the Roland also. Funnily enough, they also had an old RD700 in the store, and I liked THAT better than the RD2000 I tried there too. I believe that has the old PHA-3 keybed... They don't make em like they used to springs to mind there.
I think a great choice for a light action is Yamaha's P-525 - but I haven't tried that one yet, just the same action on a different instrument. And not at all in such detail, just the initial feeling.
The key bed in the studiologic are made by fatar and they supply many other companies. In fact fatar are responsible for the studiologic line.
The key bed in the studiologic are made by fatar and they supply many other companies. In fact fatar are responsible for the studiologic line.
nice review have you tried an Native Instruments Kontrol S88 MK3? :)
I have not. Do you know what kind of action it has in it?
@@Comfort_One_Another "sadly" the old Fatar TP/100 :)
@@jsfotografie My son has the Numa X Piano 88 with the updated TP110 action. It's not bad, but it's nothing like the TP400. The TP110 is not a graded hammer action so all the keys are the same up/down weight. There is no simulated escapement. For someone who wants more of a small size acoustic grand feeling action, the TP400 would be a much better option.
@@Comfort_One_Anotherawesome thx for the info :)
Hello David, have you tried Korg RHC3?
Haven't had the privilege of owning a Korg yet.
Hi, which action is noisier? I am looking for a quiet action to play at home.
Hi. I'm sorry, I don't recall.
Dear Sir, what about the key pivot length comparison? Which is lighter to play toward the upper key edge?
That's a good question. I took apart the FP90X but never the Numa. So I can't say for certain which is longer, but I think there might be a slight difference in length with the PHA50 being a bit longer. However, when it comes to playing the back of the keys (fallboard) I didn't feel any noticeable difference.
I only know that the pivot PHA50 is 22cm.
I’ve owned several digital pianos over the years both Roland and Yamaha. My Roland experience I’ve owned two middle of the road price point. Yamaha I’ve owned five mid to high end. I owned the Yamaha CVP409 with escapement very nice. My most recent Purchase a year ago was the Yamaha CP88 stage piano. I’d have to say the CP88 is my favourite by far. It has real wooden keys with synthetic ivory tops,escapement and double strike feature for faster action just like an acoustic piano as well as graded piano action.My experience when it comes to digital pianos is as the years go by they just keep getting better and more realistic compared to a real acoustic piano. Yamaha is my preference over Roland I don’t feel Rolland has mastered the realism of a piano quite like Yamaha and I’ve played several. My experience with Roland is they sound muddy at least with the. Ones I’ve played Sound is most important to me.
I've owned 5 Yamaha digitals including their hybrid N1X. I like Yamaha's piano samples better than Roland's modeled pianos sounds. If I had to choose between a Roland and Yamaha slab I'd choose either the CP88 or YC88 (same actions).
David, do you still have your Yamaha N1? Or did you switch to these two keyboards? Also, can you comment on how much difference the sound improved from the move to the Genelecs from the Rokits you had? Was it a significant change in tone in the VSTs with this change?
I don't have the N1X anymore. Only the Numa X Piano GT. Switching to Genelecs was really the best audio move I've ever made. Internal speakers (even on the N1X) sound terrible compared to the Genelecs. The quality of the audio is about the best it will ever be. The bass extension on the 8050s is really good not only for piano, but just listening to music through them is a wonderful experience also. I do add EQ to music because Genelecs provide such a flat frequency response.
@@Comfort_One_Another Thx, David. Was there a huge upgrade going from the KKRs to the Genelecs? Are the ones you have the 8050s? Are you running (or do you see the need to run) a subwoofer with the Genelecs? Also, I'm curious what you compared the Genelecs to before choosing them?
@@jimj.9291 Hi. I would not recommend the KRKs. I used KRK Rokit 6 Gen 3 for several years and then I upgraded to the KRK Rokit 7 Gen 4. Here are the problems with them.
1. The Rokit 7 bass driver width is actually 5.5" which was exactly the same as my Rokit 6. Silly me, I actually thought was upgrading in woofer size. Not so. I think that is deceptive advertising on KRK's part. I contacted KRK about it and I got some silly excuse which I don't even care to remember.
2. Big increase in the white noise hiss that comes from the tweeters in the Gen 4 models. I could only hear the hiss in my Gen 3 when I put my ear right up to the tweeter. Sitting 3 to 4 feet from the monitor I couldn't hear anything. However, not so with the Gen 4. Much louder hiss and I could hear it sitting at the piano 3 feet away.
I think there are a lot better options for lower budget monitors. I'd stay away from KRK. Currently I'm using Genelec 8050B monitors. Yes, they are way more expensive, but they are significantly better than the lower budget monitors I've owned. I originally had 8040B, but I felt the 8050B with the larger bass driver and greater bass extension was noticeably better for piano playing and listening to music. I don't need a sub because I don't listen to techno, hiphop/rap music. The low cutoff on the 8050 is at 32 Hz. That's low enough for piano and the music I listen to.
@@Comfort_One_Another Thank you, David. I'll take a look at the Genelecs. They are quite expensive and there is nowhere close to me where I can demo it against other monitors. I've always wondered how significant the upgrade would be to a high end monitor for piano VSTs. The Genelecs look like a very popular option for piano and it is good to know a sub isn't needed. Since it is a two way, I didn't know if any of the cheaper 3 way options would sound fuller on piano. And yours painted black look great!
@@jimj.9291 Thanks. I like the black color also. I think the two way speakers are preferable for nearfield monitors to get the acoustical axis in the right place. You want the speakers a few feet away from you when playing the piano to minimize perceived latency. Three way speakers are probably better for filling a room with sound, but not for nearfield monitoring.
I can't decide between Studiologic SL88 Grand (Similar to Numa) or Kawai VPC1, can you help me?
Unfortunately, I have not tried the SL88 or the VPC1. Ideally you can try before you buy. If not, then make sure whomever you purchase from has a return policy you are comfortable with.
I use Pianoteq. Can you tell me if this piano supports continuous pedaling and note off midi?
Hi. I don't remember if the Roland supports note off, but I know it does support continuous pedaling. The Numa supports both.
Was trying it out yesterday and the escapement on the Numa X GT drives me crazy. How can they nail literally every other aspect and then fail so badly at the escapement. The note triggering threshold should obviously be below the escapement point. I am wondering if they can fix that with a software update.
I really don't like the simulated escapement on the Numa. The white keys aren't so bad, but it's too pronounced on the black keys. I'm actually thinking about opening up the Numa and seeing how easy/hard it would be to remove the simulated escapement.
@@Comfort_One_Another you’re crazy :D
If you ever embark on this endeavour- please make a video.
@@AntonKuznetsovMusic I will. I'm going to take it apart next week just to see how difficult it would be to modify the escapement. I also have one key that seems to have increased friction compared to the rest of the keys. I'm curious to see why that might be.
Please, let me know if the Numa GT has better keys than Kawai VPC1, I'm about to get one of this.
Hi. I wish I could tell you what action I prefer, but I never played a VPC1. Currently the VPC 1 is $500 more expensive than the Numa X Piano GT. The VPC 1 is only a controller with no internal sounds while the Numa has an entire library of sounds. I'll most likely try an VPC 2 if one is ever introduced, especially if they replace the old RM3II action with the newer Grand Feel Compact.
@@Comfort_One_Another I'm from Brasil. Here the VPC1 is less expensive, 16k vs 21k from numa. I have Numa X and I hate the sounds! And 4 of my keyboards keys are making weird noises.
@@pianobis777 Might be worth trying out the VPC1. Let me know your impressions if you end up getting it.
@@Comfort_One_Another Now i'm betwen from changing my Numa X for the GT or for the Korg GrandStage. Korg i'll expend less money, but I'm not sure about the keys.
What did you do? I am between VPC1 and SL88Grand
So all along it’s Roland Roland Roland, then at the end he prefers the other one!
For me the TP400 is the best feeling digital non-hybrid action I've ever played.
It is great to hear your thoughts about the two pianos but the video is a little bit like a clickbait given you set up the two keyboards on their stand and don't actually demonstrate any thing. In particular, we all know that repeated notes are easier on an acoustic , so it would have been more informative to demonstrate it on the 2 keyboards that you have set up purposedly in the video. Also demonstrating how these keyboards respond in term of midi range would have been useful too. However thank you for sharing your thoughts.
It says action comparison in the title. It's also mentioned in the first couple sentences of the video. I did demonstrate the single key repletion on all the pianos in the video. I also explained that both cover the full midi range. This video was more about the differences and not the similarities.
For me, the comparison was about what I expected given the title and thumbnail. It's hard for me to gauge action based on watching someone play it on CZcams, but hearing details about escapement feel, upweight, (in)consistency between black and white keys, textures, etc. was nice. A lot of reviews barely touch on those if at all, and those are the details I always wonder about with actions, so I appreciate the focus on those.
The comparison was exactly what I expected from the title.
The best keybed that does not exists: A lighter pha50 😥 the pha50 is a tad too heavy compared to the best grands
The PHA50 is certainly a great action. But the Casio "Natural Grand Hammer Action" and the Kawai "Grand Feel III" are much closer to an acoustic piano action than the PHA50. The Casio is probably the best simulation out there of an acoustic grand action (excluding obviously the action of the Yamaha AvantGrand or Kawai Novus 10, which are on a different price segment). The Kawai GF III is good but feels like a vertical piano, not like a grand piano. Compared to these, the PHA50 feels sluggish, and you can certainly feel its short fulcrum.
@@ampacwith Casio are you talking about?
i only tried the roland ph 4a action...im happy with it...in my price budget..its on the heavy side ..but its probably the best action at the 1000 dollar price range...besides i dont play anything fast and my skill is rudementary......so its not a factor...light action is cheating...hahahahaha 😉
I agree. A digital action that is too light makes it difficult to transition to heavier actions that might be found on acoustic grands. Your fingers will fatigue easier when going from a light to heavier action.
Many people speak highly of the PHA4 or PH4a as you call it. However I don't care for it at all, and much prefer Yamaha's GHS action which many people are critical of.
@@Comfort_One_Another Black key height has a lot to do with the feel of an acoustic action. Higher feels heavier.
@@JoeLinux2000The white and black keys on acoustic grand pianos are weighted so that they offer the same resistance - at least in good quality pianos that are properly regulated. So, if you play a C and and a C# on the 4 octave, for example, these two keys should feel the same. Note that a key can feel "heavier" if you play it deeper (i.e. closer to the fallboard). This is because the resistance increases as you move closer to the fulcrum of the key. So, if you usually play the black keys deeper than the white keys (as many players do), then the black keys can feel heavier, but this has nothing to do with height.