<pinkfloydhomer@gmail.com> wrote in message news:fdf1e9af-632a-4cca-9e3c-14c9ccbe518c@s12g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
I need a not too expensive digital piano that doesn't take up too much
space, because I am in a small apartment. Something that can be tucked
away behind a door or under a bed etc.
Still, I would like 88 keys, action and sound as good as possible.
Recommend a digital piano for a lousy piano player that just had to
get rid of his real piano and who appreciates good sound.
I have been looking at these models:
Casio CDP-100
Casio Privia PX-110
Casio Privia PX-200 (heard that this was better than the 300?)
Casio Privia PX-300
etc., PX-310, PX-320 etc.
Yamaha P70
Yamaha P140
Yamaha CP33
etc.
I am not very good at playing the piano. I mostly use it to play small
Bach pieces that I struggle my way through until they sound decent. So
the more expensive models are probably overkill. On the other hand, I
really appreciate good sound, nice rich suspense and good action etc.
I am leaning towards something like the PX-110. But I heard that the
PX-200 had better sound with more overtones and longer sustaining
sounds because of more polyphony and so on.
/David
I bought a Yamaha CP33 with a good sound system (costs extra) last summer and am very pleased with it. It feels and sounds like an acoustic piano. I also am working on easy pieces by Bach and other composers.
I need a not too expensive digital piano that doesn't take up too much
space, because I am in a small apartment. Something that can be tucked
away behind a door or under a bed etc.
Still, I would like 88 keys, action and sound as good as possible.
[cut]
I bought a Yamaha CP33 with a good sound system (costs extra) last summer
and am very pleased with it. It feels and sounds like an acoustic piano. I
also am working on easy pieces by Bach and other composers.
I have CP33 too, and while sound is good, I'd suggest trying to play it a bit, because action is noticeably heavier than on piano and it may affect Your (David) playing.
Well, I heard that heavier action is good for learning, but dunno if it's true.
In article <fdf1e9af-632a-4cca-9e3c-14c9ccbe518c@s12g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, pinkfloydhomer@gmail.com <pinkfloydhomer@gmail.com> wrote:
I need a not too expensive digital piano that doesn't take up too much
space, because I am in a small apartment. Something that can be tucked
away behind a door or under a bed etc.
Still, I would like 88 keys, action and sound as good as possible.
I have been looking at these models:
Casio CDP-100
Casio Privia PX-110
Casio Privia PX-200 (heard that this was better than the 300?)
Casio Privia PX-300
etc., PX-310, PX-320 etc.
[....]
I am leaning towards something like the PX-110. But I heard that the
PX-200 had better sound with more overtones and longer sustaining
sounds because of more polyphony and so on.
I've had a PX-310 for a couple of years and I like it a lot. I think all the Privia models are good value for money, but which model would be best for you depends very much on what needs you might have besides just hitting the keys... [I *believe* that the CDP ones are older and not as good, but I couldn't swear to that.]
I like my 310 because it has features I find a real need for -- such as Line *In* as well as Line Out. It on;y has 32-note polyphony, but that hasn't bothered me.
The 200 has 128 polyphony which is nice. Dunno if the sound engine is "better" otherwise, but as far as I'm concerned it can't be much better than mine! -)) On the other hand its computer-connection features seem to be dumber than the 310, and I might get as frustrated as Serge has with the one he bought... (See recent 'SSMusic' posts here and in comp.music.midi.)
If you don't need much more than basic MIDI connection and want mainly "piano" sounds, I'd go for either the 200 or the 110. (I had one of the latter for about three days, until I found it didn't have Line Out, so I traded it up for a 310. Glad I did.) I also understand that the 320 is replacing the 200, so you might want to check that out carefully.
One other thing you might want to look at in the newer models is the one major problem that some people find with the 100..310 set. Their keys 'thunk' rather on release, and I've heard rumours that the new ones are much better.
Cheers, -- Pete --
-- ============================================================================ The address in the header is a Spam Bucket -- don't bother replying to it... (If you do need to email, replace the account name with my true name.)
Casio Privia PX-200 definitely has better sound engine and good value for the money. Especially after price reduction down to $499.00 US.
But it is the first keyboard I ever seen in 25+ years that doesn't respond to MIDI program change messages. Shockingly there is no way to change sound played on the keyboard from any computer or sequencer.
Why?
My 25 year old Yamaha PS-6100 can do that!
What in the world Casio Programmers have been smoking?
In article <47d01b9f$0$16675$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>, SSMusic <sergestodolnik@tx.rr.com> wrote:
Casio Privia PX-200 definitely has better sound engine
and good value for the money. Especially after price
reduction down to $499.00 US.
But it is the first keyboard I ever seen in 25+ years that
doesn't respond to MIDI program change messages.
Shockingly there is no way to change sound played on
the keyboard from any computer or sequencer.
What in the world Casio Programmers have been smoking?
Heh. I'll tell you one thing. I don't think I'll be trading in my PX-310 anytime soon!
For interest, I took a look at the manuals (User and MIDI) for the PX-320, which I assume is sort of the successor to mine, and aside from the better polyphony, it seems in every way *less* useful than its predecessor.
OK, I didn't really expect it to still have a MIDI-THRU, which has worked well for me (probably difficult to combine that with USB), and it *does* have a Line In, which I also find a major benefit. However, its useability seems to have gone down the toilet.
For instance, if I want to set a split point on my 310, Ijust hold down the 'Split' button and hit the key where I want the split to be. On the 320, you have to first hit "Function/Split" and then use the "Up/Down" buttons to move to the key you want -- using codes in the display as a reference!
Then on mine, for numeric entries there is a range on the keyboard that represents digits, so if, for example, I want to select one of the 168 extra tones, I just hold down "Function" and hit the two or three digits. The 320 appears to have nothing like that -- you have to use those step buttons to walk through to the one you want... one step at a time. Eekk!
And yes, it has the same 'feature' as the 200, that MIDI channel messages don't affect the keyboard tones.
Like you said -- what have they been smoking...? -/)
-- Pete --
-- ============================================================================ The address in the header is a Spam Bucket -- don't bother replying to it... (If you do need to email, replace the account name with my true name.)
Actually all of those problems can be easily cured by new Firmware.My Yamaha Tyros had several firmware updates.Takes less than 2 minutes to download and install via USB.
But I am not holding my breath that Casio will ever do it.
There is nothing to program. MIDI RX routine has been used in 1000s of keyboards for 25+ years. Just cut and paste. It wouldn't add a penny to the production cost.
I went over to Guitar Center and tried out all their pianos. The Casio PX-310 was the best sounding and easiest to play of the small units. I was surprised that many of the more expensive digital pianos were simply terrible instruments.
You got to be smoking something really bad to intentionally not include features available on every keyboard in the market even if it doesn't cost you a penny.........
every keyboard in the market even if it doesn't cost
you a penny.........
I would have thought that that might depend on what other features it offers at its price point. Like a weighted keyboard, perhaps - I had a 5-second tinkle on a budget Casio digital in my not-so-local sheet music emporium yesterday, and I thought the keyboard felt pretty good. Compared to the synthesiser next to it, the feel on the Casio was well into piano territory.
If they can successfully sell something without certain features, then they can probably charge more for the same thing with the features added in.
In article <47dedd31$0$22837$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>, SSMusic <sergestodolnik@tx.rr.com> wrote:
If Casio can successfully sell PX-200 why would they
drop the price by $200.00 shortly after keyboard hit
the market?
And "adding the feature" that has been available on
every keyboard on the market for 25 years sounds
totally ridiculous........
They don't need to produce new keyboard to add
MIDI RX. Just new downloadable firmware.
Every manufacturer does it for free.........
I suspect what actually happened is that bumping MIDI handling up to 32 channels foxed them a bit! -/) "We can only get 16 channels in, so where do we send them..? Better use the upper 16 for that, and leave the lower set for the internal keyboard etc. Nice and clean that way...(!)" They just forgot that many peoiple would *want* to control the keyboard sounds by MIDI as well.
Going back to 'tonewheel's comments a few posts ago (and Wally's below), the flaw in the argument that this is all due to "comsuner targetting" is that there *is* no higher priced Privia that does it the sensible way. [that I know of anyway.]
If they can successfully sell something without certain features, then
they
can probably charge more for the same thing with the features added in.
-- ============================================================================ The address in the header is a Spam Bucket -- don't bother replying to it... (If you do need to email, replace the account name with my true name.)
