Nord, any (trusted) insight on feature to cost ratio?

[Funkyflash5]

While a balanced output might have a practical benefit in a studio setting, I personally wouldn't set foot on a stage with any of my keyboards without a decent isolation / DI box incorporating good quality isolation transformers. It's just not worth the risk for such a modest and long-lasting outlay.

That's fair enough, but so far it's only getting used in the studio and it's unlikely to ever be used on a gig where I'm not the one running sound on my own board. For now I'll save a couple cables and DI for something else but if I do end up with some weird gig, I'll keep this in mind.

[tea for two]

Here's something weird.

Acoustic Piano (upright or grand) and Old (not brand new), just the sound is inspiring for me.
I can place my ear so near the keys just to hear their movements.

Digital Piano, Sampled Piano, Programmed Piano, no matter how faithful a recreation I just want to alter it.

ADSR is almost must for me in considering a Digital Piano.
My Fusion 8HD had this in spades, ADSR linked to Piano, sound mangling the Piano.
This is the reason it's still my favourite Digital Piano, alongside the 88 weighted keys being one of the better ones under £2k (even though I no longer have it).

[Arpangel]

He.
Digital Piano, Sampled Piano, Programmed Piano, no matter how faithful a recreation I just want to alter it.

I think digital pianos are like caricatures, cartoons, exaggerated examples of what a piano sounds like. So the temptation is to turn it all down, a bit less attack, a bit less bright, less velocity.
It’s surprising how smooth a real piano is, also, it has the benefit of a real acoustic room, to colour and blend the sound. I use the word real unashamedly, because "that’s" what it is, real.
It’s surprising how difficult it still is to emulate acoustic instruments, the piano is so important too, but you would never see a digital piano on stage at a serious classical recital, just like it would be unthinkable to play a sampled Sax, it’s that serious and it always amazes me how people can settle for what is actually a lot of the time, a bad sampled piano, for quite serious projects.

[Wurlitzer]

It depends how you look at it.

I've long ago taken the attitude that I don't care whether these emulations are 100% accurate; what I care about is whether they're beautiful, expressive and musical.

Partly this is because the better ones are already 95-99% accurate, and with the law of diminishing returns that remaining 1-5% is such a mountain to climb for such a tiny difference that is only sometimes relevant anyway. There are just more important things to be getting on with.

Partly it's because the whole idea of 100% accuracy relies on the fallacy that there's a single definable "thing" being emulated - "THE" piano sound; "THE" Rhodes sound, Hammond sound etc. In reality there are as many different piano sounds as there are pianos. Getting emulations fimrly in the ballpark is one thing, but when you start saying an emulation is too bright or whatever, what are you comparing it with? I've heard plenty of pianos that are brighter than some sample sets.

OTOH I find that there's an inescapable experience that occurs when I start playing a truly great sampled or modelled instrument (just as there is when I play a real Steinway). I find myself "drawn in", seized with curiosity about what the instrument can do, delighting at unexpected details, and losing track of time as I get lost in "the zone". That experience is why we do all this bollox in the first place, I'm not going to waste it in order to scrutinize the ADSR envelope against some mythical perfect benchmark.

[Arpangel]

It depends how you look at it.

I've long ago taken the attitude that I don't care whether these emulations are 100% accurate; what I care about is whether they're beautiful, expressive and musical.

Partly this is because the better ones are already 95-99% accurate, and with the law of diminishing returns that remaining 1-5% is such a mountain to climb for such a tiny difference that is only sometimes relevant anyway. There are just more important things to be getting on with.

Partly it's because the whole idea of 100% accuracy relies on the fallacy that there's a single definable "thing" being emulated - "THE" piano sound; "THE" Rhodes sound, Hammond sound etc. In reality there are as many different piano sounds as there are pianos. Getting emulations fimrly in the ballpark is one thing, but when you start saying an emulation is too bright or whatever, what are you comparing it with? I've heard plenty of pianos that are brighter than some sample sets.

OTOH I find that there's an inescapable experience that occurs when I start playing a truly great sampled or modelled instrument (just as there is when I play a real Steinway). I find myself "drawn in", seized with curiosity about what the instrument can do, delighting at unexpected details, and losing track of time as I get lost in "the zone". That experience is why we do all this bollox in the first place, I'm not going to waste it in order to scrutinize the ADSR envelope against some mythical perfect benchmark.

I know what you’re saying, but I never use digital acoustic pianos, I just don’t get inspired by them, I think it’s also got a lot to do with the keyboard too.
I absolutely don’t have a problem with Rhodes, as that’s such a diverse sound anyway, and the keyboard, even though it’s important, for some reason doesn’t bother me as much on a digital instrument.

[Hugh Robjohns]

It’s surprising how difficult it still is to emulate acoustic instruments, the piano is so important too, but you would never see a digital piano on stage at a serious classical recital

It is extremely difficult to emulate acoustic instruments convincingly, I completely agree. It always amuses me how easy it is to reliably tell within a few moments of walking in to a bar or club whether piano music is coming from a real acoustic instrument or from a CD or digital/virtual instrument.

And no, Obviously you wouldn't expect to see a digital piano at a classical recital.

But not everyone has the space and/or funding to support a real, good condition, well maintained concert piano.

The harsh reality is that there are an awful lot of poor quality, or just plain knackered and poorly maintained real pianos sitting around in homes, churches and other venues. You already know all about this...

So for those people, while a digital piano obviously isn't quite as good as a real piano that's been perfectly maintained and set up, it is a massively better and more practical option than a knackered real piano... or no acoustic piano at all. It is what it is: a cost-effective practical alternative.

[Arpangel]

It’s surprising how difficult it still is to emulate acoustic instruments, the piano is so important too, but you would never see a digital piano on stage at a serious classical recital

It is extremely difficult to emulate acoustic instruments convincingly, I completely agree. It always amuses me how easy it is to reliably tell within a few moments of walking in to a bar or club whether piano music is coming from a real acoustic instrument or from a CD or digital/virtual instrument.

And no, Obviously you wouldn't expect to see a digital piano at a classical recital.

But not everyone has the space and/or funding to support a real, good condition, well maintained concert piano.

The harsh reality is that there are an awful lot of poor quality, or just plain knackered and poorly maintained real pianos sitting around in homes, churches and other venues. You already know all about this...

So for those people, while a digital piano obviously isn't quite as good as a real piano that's been perfectly maintained and set up, it is a massively better and more practical option than a knackered real piano... or no acoustic piano at all. It is what it is: a cost-effective practical alternative.

Yes you’re right, and that’s the reality of it, my partner and I, her more than me, see this all the time, "cost effective" "practical solutions"
That’s what we don’t like about the modern world, so much.
Before digital pianos, it was great to hear a good piano, if you didn’t have one, you didn’t have one! that’s what made hearing one so special, like so many other instruments.
My partner doesn’t understand any of this, or music technology, despite my interest, she comes from a musical world of the past, very much so, and I think she’s influenced me, more than me her.

[tea for two]

There was a darkly lit church near where i Iived a decade earlier. During summertime just bits of light would get in through its windows.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/193629214 ... ed-public/

Some week days it would be open.
Hardly anyone went there.
In it, a Bösendorfer Grand (I'm guessing as I wasn't looking at the brand), 1920's I presume. 88 keys not one of their extended 97.
It was and still is my favourite Piano I ever played on.
However, some days or even many days, I just wouldn't feel it. I sat down didn't do anything.

Whereas other days I felt it with my Akai Lpk25 mini keys and Sampled, Programmed Pianos.
(I don't have the ability to turn on the tap as and when).

Sometimes I will have a concept in mind. Altering the Piano sound enables me to approximate this concept.
I expect the Nord's have alterations.

[pax-eterna]

And real Rhodes are a clunky ball-busting PITA, no matter how much one can be tempted to romanticise them.

All we need now is a member by the name of Rhodes to issue a rebuke

Andy

Nope that post is 100% accurate I had a Stage 73 flat top....I would not even CONSIDER lugging one now

[Arpangel]

And real Rhodes are a clunky ball-busting PITA, no matter how much one can be tempted to romanticise them.

All we need now is a member by the name of Rhodes to issue a rebuke

Andy

Nope that post is 100% accurate I had a Stage 73 flat top....I would not even CONSIDER lugging one now

It’s amazing how keyboard players complain, what about drummers? they have lots of stuff to carry around, it’s just accepted.

[Wurlitzer]

Yeah but they're just like beasts of burden. They don't know any better.

[Wurlitzer]

I know what you’re saying, but I never use digital acoustic pianos, I just don’t get inspired by them, I think it’s also got a lot to do with the keyboard too.
I absolutely don’t have a problem with Rhodes, as that’s such a diverse sound anyway, and the keyboard, even though it’s important, for some reason doesn’t bother me as much on a digital instrument.

I agree with this. I think a large part of the difference between an acoustic piano and a digital one is not the qualities of the raw sound wave produced, but the fact that the acoustic one is a piece of wood and metal in front of you bouncing sound waves directly around the room, whereas the digital one is, necessarily, playing through an amplification and speaker system. One reason I believe this is because I've found a good part of that difference is already in place when you mic up an acoustic piano and put it through a PA. The sound may originate from a real piano, but listening to the end product is absolutely NOT the same thing as sitting in a recital hall listening to a classical pianist play an unamplified piano direct to your ears. I would have to assume this difference is never bridgable.

Whereas in a Rhodes (or anything else electro-mechanical) that part of the difference doesn't exist, because even the "real" instrument still relies on amplification and speakers to make usable sound.

[Arpangel]

Whereas in a Rhodes (or anything else electro-mechanical) that part of the difference doesn't exist, because even the "real" instrument still relies on amplification and speakers to make usable sound.

Despite the amplifier and speakers, a Rhodes still has that interaction between mechanical parts, it’s a hammer striking something that will be different for every note, you may be able to sample that, but it will only be one snapshot of every individual note, they won’t change every time you play it, like a real Rhodes would.

[Wurlitzer]

It will if it's modelled.

[Arpangel]

It will if it's modelled.

Airfix are making Rhodes kits?

[jellyjim]

I just tried a Piano 5 and a CP88

I couldn’t assess the sound, though I liked what I heard from both. Noisy shop, crap PA and no headphones. I will have to return.

I did prefer the action on the Yamaha but I thought the action on the Nord was fine. Interestingly there was a Piano 4 above it and that felt different again. It felt softer but it could be a clapped out and years old display model.

All three were vastly superior to the action on my MODX8 but that’s to be expected and not really a fair comparison.

I didn’t find the controls of the CP88 at all inviting. It looked cluttered. I disliked the metal switches. They reminded me of my terrible DIY audio efforts that always fall apart.

The Nord panel drew me in. It said, it’s safe here play with me. The strong contrast between the controls and the red background is effective. I’m sure the Yamaha panel becomes second nature but my initial reaction was negative.

I was impressed by both. It will come down to sound, the value or otherwise of the differing feature set and whether I’m willing to pay a premium for the Nord. What it wont come down to is the key bed. They were different but both an upgrade from what I’m used to.

[Wurlitzer]

I was impressed by both. It will come down to sound, the value or otherwise of the differing feature set and whether I’m willing to pay a premium for the Nord. What it wont come down to is the key bed. They were different but both an upgrade from what I’m used to.

Agreed, the actions on both those instruments are among the very best available.

For me though, the obvious difference would be the number of sounds they give access to. The sounds of both instruments are very high quality, but the number included in the Yamaha is tiny. Probably enough pianos and EPs to be getting on with, but rapidly falls off a cliff when it comes to variety of strings, brass etc. By contrast, the Nord not only contains high quality sounds but gives you access to their online sample library where you can download others and customise the instrument to contain exactly what you need.

I was considering the CP88 but ended up buying its predecessor the CP4, mainly because its got a far greater range of sounds (which still manage to be almost entirely stunning quality) and partly because a good deal came up on a used one. I'm extremely happy with it, and the action is sublime. It seems the only thing the CP88 added to it was the more immediate onboard controls, so if you're not impressed by those I can't see what would justify it.

I considered the Nord but it's overkill for what I need. In your position I'd take it over the CP88 though, any day. And that thing about an instrument "drawing you in" - that's your musical spirit trying to tell you something. Always listen to that.

[jellyjim]

And that thing about an instrument "drawing you in" - that's your musical spirit trying to tell you something. Always listen to that.

Oh you silver-tongued devil! I think that might have just tipped me over the edge

My band mate has a CP4. He loves it.

[ajay_m]

Given that this thread has broadened to an overall discussion focussed around electric and acoustic piano, plus ergonomics, my home studio has evolved gradually to try and give me beautiful sounds but without faffing around too much with the computer. Where I'm at currently is that I have an old technics spx30 88 note weighted keyboard whose action I still prefer to anything else I've ever tried, but I don't use its inbuilt sounds just set up as a master keyboard.
For acoustic piano I have a Reaper project that loads the embertone walker piano which is far and away the most realistic grand piano I have ever heard and for Rhodes sounds I use the neosoul library which again nails the grit and imperfection of the originals very well.
Then I have a Hydrasynth keyboard which is now my 'goto' synth.
But now I have added an Akai Force and this actually has a very nice modelled EP where you can change params like pickup height etc and it also has a surprisingly nice acoustic piano and can be set up as a very quick scratchpad for idea capturing without having to use the computer at all. So now I do find myself more often just pressing New project on the force and bringing up a quick template that I can just playing and recording in to with good enough sounds but lots of knobs and buttons so I can quickly then adjust track pan and balance, whack some drums down and quickly build up an idea.

So the Nord solution I think is 'jack of all trades, master of none'. It's a good gigging solution but in a studio I think a more bespoke approach gets much closer to the 'having a real grand piano and a real rhodes' scenario but without sacrificing practicality which in my case is that everything has to fit through a hatch into my loft conversion studio and weigh no more than I can lift single handed.

[Arpangel]

everything has to fit through a hatch into my loft conversion studio and weigh no more than I can lift single handed.

That sounds like an "Oblique Strategy"
Great post though, you’ve summed it up.