🎹 Kawai DG30 vs Roland GP6 | Which Digital Grand Piano Reigns Supreme? 🎹
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 29 июл 2024
- 🛒 Get the Kawai DG30 HERE ▸ geni.us/Kawai-DG30
🛒 See more Roland Digital Pianos HERE ▸ geni.us/Roland-Digital-Pianos
🛒 See More Digital Pianos HERE ▸ geni.us/all-pianos
💕 Subscribe to Merriam Pianos HERE ▸ bit.ly/SubscribeMerriam
🔔 Click the 🔔 bell to be notified of all videos! ▸ bit.ly/SubscribeMerriam
#KawaiDG30 #RolandGP6 #DigitalGrandPiano
0:00 - Video Introduction on the Kawai DG30 vs Roland GP6
0:27 - Sound Demo Roland GP6
1:06 - Sound Demo Kawai DG30
1:44 - Roland GP6 Spec Rundown
7:12 - Spec Rundown Kawai DG30
9:54 - Piano Sound and Experience Review
11:34 - More Playing on the GP6
13:31 - More Playing on the DG30
20:19 - Piano Action Review
21:08 - Final Thoughts
Hello! Today we’ve got a big comparison of a couple of newer models from the digital baby grand category as we’ll be seeing how the Kawai DG30 and Roland GP6 stack up to one another.
Please like, subscribe and hit that notification bell!
Video Overview
Digital baby grands have been gaining in popularity like never before due to their aesthetic appeal, smaller footprint and minimal maintenance requirements.
On this channel, we’ve been closely tracking the ever-narrowing gap between digital and acoustic pianos, which has brought high-quality musical experiences to players of all skill levels without the barrier of a huge price tag.
Roland GP6 Spec Rundown
The GP6 is equipped with Roland’s Piano Reality Premium Modeling sound engine, which delivers an authentic grand piano sound experience with unlimited polyphony. Modeling engines also offer a ton of editability in terms of shaping the piano sound to your own liking.
There are 324 total sounds and a powerful 5-speaker system with 85 watts of rated output power.
In terms of the action, it’s equipped with the new Piano Reality Premium Keyboard, which is an update to the popular PHA50 Roland has been using for several years. This action boasts wood and plastic hybrid keys, escapement, ivory feel keys and the new accelerated key sensing technology for ultra-detailed touch response, the key upgrade over the PHA50.
The other big highlight of the GP6 is the new discrete, multi-channel digital amplification, which means there’s absolutely no signal degradation occurring at any time. The improved clarity of the sound over the previous generation GP-607 is staggering, and probably the clearest-sounding Roland digital piano we’ve played up to this point.
Finally, Roland has gone with a Smart Touch panel for navigating the instrument, and you can turn off the backlight so that it disappears anytime you aren’t interacting with the panel. Otherwise, the GP6 is equipped with Bluetooth MIDI and Audio, dual headphone jacks, USB ports, and all standard features like a metronome and transpose.
The GP6 is available in a genuine polyester finish in both Black and White.
Kawai DG30 Spec Rundown
The DG30 is equipped with the Responsive Hammer III (RHIII) action with left-off, triple sensor key detection and ivory touch key surfaces. It is a plastic action but is often regarded as the best plastic action on the market.
The tone engine is the Progressive Harmonic Imaging (PHI) tech, and this features an SK-EX concert grand piano with 88-key stereo sampling. The DG30 has 350 sounds and 256-note polyphony.
Driving the system is a pair of 20-watt amps for 40 watts in total, dispersed among 3 speakers. The DG30 is also equipped with Bluetooth MIDI and Audio, dual headphone jacks, USB to host and device, a 16-track MIDI recorder and it also has a ton of preloaded music and repertoire.
The finish is also genuine polyester, and it is available in polished Black.
The Piano Experience
We highly recommend spending time with both of these pianos tweaking the sound settings to optimize things to your own preference, as well as the space your piano will be occupying.
Playing them side-by-side, it’s immediately clear just how different the sonic experience is on each piano. The DG30’s sound feels much closer, similar to an upright piano experience. There’s also a lot of cabinet resonance and warmth as well. Clarity is good, but the sound does start to blend when you have a lot going on.
Over on the GP6, the sound is a lot bigger and wider, so the sonic experience is much closer to a grand piano as opposed to an upright. And it’s so clear - even with a ton of notes ringing out, the sound is incredibly clear.
Action Comparison
Even though the PRP and RHIII actions are made with different materials, the playing experience isn’t all that different. There is more lateral give on the RHIII and the keybed feels softer, so players that really like to dig in might prefer the PRP.
Connect with Merriam Music:
● Website ▸ www.merriammusic.com/
● Contact Us ▸ www.merriammusic.com/contact/
● Instagram ▸ / merriammusic
● Facebook ▸ / merriammusic
● Twitter ▸ / merriammusicinc 
Видеоклипы
I love your videos. Even though I'm not in the market for a piano, I just love hearing Stu's thorough analyses, and hear him play.
Thank you kindly! We appreciate you tuning in and supporting our channel! :)
I really love your reviews. The right mix between playing the pianos, explaining the possibilities, the differences and your personal preference. Thank you so much.
You're very welcome! We're really happy to hear that you've been enjoying the videos. :)
Thanks for your excellent reviews, musicality and joy of playing Stu! Thank you Merriam Music for your channel. Your review helped my family and I make our decision. We don't live in Canada, so couldn't be an actual customer. We were able to visit a dealer in South Texas and play it. It looks, sounds and feels beautiful! Yes, we bought a GP6 today! Looking forward to delivery and enjoying it to the full in our home. Thanks again and all the best to you and the Merriam Music family.
You're very welcome! Thank you for tuning in! We're glad our videos were helpful through your decision making process. Congrats on your new Roland GP6! It is a wonderful piano. I know you and your family will be thrilled with what it has to offer! :)
Another great review! I noticed a few editing updates on this post. Always informative, always entertaining. 👏🏼👏🏼🤩
Thank you so much! We appreciate you taking the time to tune in and share your thoughts. :)
Thanks for the review. Had a play with the Roland at their London Denmark Street shop and thought this is IT! Beautiful top, middle and low end reality. Up there with the sound of an acoustic grand.
You're very welcome! The Roland GP6 and GP9 models in particular are amazing and have definitely bridged the gap to an acoustic grand piano experience in a meaningful way. :)
Over the last 4 weeks I've been researching the internet about digital piano's and saw and heard many demo's and reviews but obviously needed to physically sit behind them and play. After narrowing these two instruments down I visited a piano dealer here in Holland and tried them both. I was stunned at the sound, playability and musical pleasure I got out of these instruments. I've been playing an old Yamaha Clavinova PF-100 (that came out even before the Big Bang) for too long and needed an upgrade badly. These new digital piano's are indeed light years ahead as far as digital piano tech goes. Thank you Merriam Music and in particular Stu Harrison for the well balanced, insightful, honest, transparent demos/reviews AND inspiring piano artistry. For me the Roland GP6 came out as the winner and so I purchased it! Thank you so much again for the help and I wish you at Merriam Music all the success in the world!
Thanks so much for tuning in and supporting our RUclips channel! We sincerely appreciate it as well as the kind words. Congrats on your new Roland GP6 digital grand! It is a remarkable instrument with a wonderful touch and tone to match its beautiful aesthetic. I know you will be thrilled with what it has to offer. :)
Thanks, Stu - agreat video as always. Until a couple of years ago, Roland gave me the impression that they were focusing on general musical experience (maybe more audience focused, rather than playing experience) with their pianos, but recently they are becoming more and more piano focused with their new models - I think Kawai has matured in that regard for a while now. I can't wait to see how the next LX series will be like, exciting times ahead...
Hi! Brent here! Thank you so much for the kind words and for taking the time to share your thoughts! I think that is a very good point. It definitely seems to be an industry trend these days. More digital piano companies seem to be focusing more and more on the core piano experience for the player, which, in my experiences, is what many players tend to prioritize.
It would be better to have the captions smaller (more discrete) and to put them in a foreign language. This would help millions of French speakers (I'm thinking French Canada, etc) or Spanish speakers, for example, identify with this channel. It would also help us ignorant English speakers pick up some foreign language phrases.
Nice review as always!! We are waiting the comparison with some slan digital pianos for midi controlling/vst
Thank you kindly! We appreciate you tuning in. Also, we have received a number of requests for comparing popular slab digitals specifically in regard to their ability to function as MIDI controllers in conjunction with VSTs. It is on our list of potential videos to tackle in the near future and we will do our best to accommodate producing that. :)
@@MerriamPianos ❤❤❤❤
Somehow I've been 'suffering' along with a Roland RD-700GX stage keyboard for the last ~20 years. Been looking to get back to a more piano-like experience so really trying to find info on all the major digital grand manufacturers in this space. This is like the 3rd video I've caught of Stu's and they have all been very informative. I look forward to many more as I try to determine what may suit me best.
Thanks so much for tuning in! We're happy to hear that you have found the videos helpful through your process. Digital piano technology has definitely come a long way in recent years and the core piano experience has greatly improved. :)
11:30! Thank you for the great piano playing too!
Thank you so much! We appreciate you tuning in! :)
Great review! Not sure about the built-in captions. I found them distracting. They even spoil the effect of what Stu is saying before he completes the sentence. Viewers can always turn captions on in RUclips (I know they’re not perfect).
Thanks for tuning in and for your feedback! We appreciate it immensely. :)
I agree
It depends on the maternal language of the viewer how you might feel about it.
@@JoeLinux2000 FYI, my first language is not English. 😊
@@JoeLinux2000 Alas, English doth not befit my mother tongue, and verily, the matter of subtitles at hand doth vex me sorely. The timing, being premature, and the font size, being quite prodigious, doth cause me no small amount of discomfort. Yet, if the timing were more aligned with customary subtitles and the font were rendered somewhat more diminutive, I would be less inclined to protest.
Or at least that's my two cents.
Excellent comparison as ever. Clear and to the point. I do think the subtitles are an innovation of questionable value, however.
Thanks for the kind words and for taking the time to tune in! We appreciate the feedback as well. :)
Questionable, indeed. I would say downright annoying! I don't understand the point of the subtitles, since Stu speaks clearly in perfectly understandable (eh?) Canadian... 🙂
@@SeaDrive300Also, YT has an auto-caption feature on par with this, but which can be disabled.
6:33 What are you talk about Stu? My family loves hearing me practice my scales. In particular, they love my Hanon exercises 😂
Hahaha you are very lucky to have a very patient and supportive family! ;)
Stu, thank you for your excellent review. Although not the scope of this video, would you please comment if there is a significant sound/action difference between GP-6 and GP-9 (besides size and wattage)? Thanks
Hi! Brent from Merriam Music here! Thanks for the question and for tuning in! Unlike the GP607 and GP609, which used the same PHA50 action and were far more comparable in terms of the overall musical experience, the GP6 and GP9 have distinctly different actions, tone engines, and speaker systems. To this point, they are quite different in their overall sound and touch.
Loved this review- just to be clear on something - is the piano modelling engine in the GP-6 the same as the LX708, or has it bean upgraded?
Thanks so much! They have made some tweaks and modifications to the engine. The GP6 features the updated "Piano Reality" engine. The sonic experience and tracking of expressive details via the action and sensor system are meaningfully improved with the GP6 and GP9 models in my opinion.
Hey Stu, would you mind sharing your tweaks and Virtual Technician settings for the SK-EX, EX and SK-5 you’re using on the DG30? Thanks and great video as always
Hi! Brent from Merriam Music here! I'd have to ask Stu as to what (if any) changes were made. Generally, we use the default settings for these video reviews and comparisons as a reference point for the audience. Furthermore, this is a true representation of the intended sound of each sample set from the manufacturer. :)
@@MerriamPianos hey Brent thanks for your reply. Would definitely appreciate you asking Stu for his preference settings on those. Thanks a bunch and all the best
Wow, the video production throughput is impressive at the moment! Thanks for givings us so many interesting Merriam reviews to watch!
I think these two models are luxuries in a sense. They cost a lot of money for what's really inside, but I believe they can be worth having all the same, since aesthetics can be very important, particularly in a commercial application.
But businesses need tools that can be fixed/replaced/upgraded quickly, so my concern is aftersales support. These expensive shells/cabinets might last for 50 years, but before then, there will be worn keys and drinks spilt inside - particularly in those pianos used in hostelry. Also, there'll be cracked motherboards, blown speakers, and maybe some features will be obsolete. So for how long will the manufacturers pledge to support these models, and will there be any modular upgrades on features?
If I had a small jazz club, I'd be tempted by the GP6, but would it be robust enough? How quickly could I get it fixed?
These dazzling models should be replacing the entry level (+) uprights and baby grands which are proving unmanageable in many applications.
Recently, I played a U1 acoustic piano at a jazz club, for International Jazz Day. It's the club's piano, but the club shares the venue with other types of performance, so the piano is kept offstage and cannot be lifted up just for individual performances. During the previous two jazz concerts there, the whole band played offstage, just to be near the piano. The audience could barely see the performers' heads. So this excellent jazz club has one big logistics problem. I watched the club grow from nothing to a cultural beacon, and against tremendous adversity, and I can imagine how hard the piano purchase was for it.
Accordingly, I really appreciated having a reasonable acoustic instrument to play. The action was wonderfully smooth. But the sound was a bit boxy (it's only a U1) and there were mic and monitor problems too. Furthermore, with the piano offstage, I couldn't communicate well with other band members. I bit my lip, and resisted suggesting that the club might do better with a high end digital piano that can be moved around more easily, and will not require tuning. But if the club had bought a digital or hybrid, would it now have a broken instrument?
An acoustic piano can't be moved much, and it has no lineouts, but it will take a hammering from assorted pianists. Manufacturers and distributors of high end DPs need to reassure venue managements that they will be supported, and that these pretty digital baby grands, for example, will survive the rigours of public use over a long period of service.
Maybe Merriam can discuss after sales methodolgy during reviews of high end digital pianos.
Hi Mike! Brent here! Thanks for writing in with the question. In Canada, the warranty for both of these digital grand models is 10 year parts and 10 year labour. We have found Kawai and Roland's warranty support to be fantastic. We have a large network of technicians available to support and facilitate and warranty issues or repairs across the country. I believe these details will differ between certain markets, so I can only speak to our experiences with both companies, which have been excellent. Generally speaking, digital grand models like the DG30 and GP6 can last many years. There are digital grand pianos from Roland that are 20+ years old that are still going strong and functioning without issue. However, it all comes down to how the instrument is used and cared for. Having drinks spilled into the keys or electronic components of a digital piano is a recipe for disaster and one of the most common things to cause issues with sensor strips and circuit boards alike. If an instrument is kept on a stage at a venue and treated respectively by the musicians (in other words, not being used as a coaster for drinks), there is no reason that a venue could not get meaningful longevity out of a digital grand. Thanks and hope this helps!
@@MerriamPianos Thanks. You've answered a big part of my question(s) but I'm still wondering what the process is like to get something fixed. We're not talking about expendable and highly shippable portable pianos. We're talking about investments which involve substantial amounts of furniture. Does the digital baby grand need to be dismantled, boxed and dispatched just to fix two sticking keys? And do pianos return within weeks or months? With an acoustic piano you just call the local piano technician, and he can probably come and fix it on the spot.
And will replacement parts be available for long after the warranty expires? My old Japanese car and motorcycle still have good engines, but I may have to give them up soon because spare parts are disappearing, and I prefer to save my improvising for music.
I fear that with DPs it's exactly the same story. Please tell me I'm wrong, because I want exciting expensive DPs to be a wise purchase too, not just last decade's caprice.
@@Zoco101 this is what keeps me from thinking of digital pianos as my forever instrument. Though I find these digital grands at times temting, I'd rather wait untill I can get a good acoustic grand. + I know places wher I can get a reconditioned grand if the time is right🎹🎶
Pianoteq just came out on iPhone and iPad so it would be great to review that with the various digital pianos with Bluetooth midi
Hi Geo! Brent here! I know this has been a long awaited release for many. I will certainly pass on the suggestion to Stu and our production team for you. Hopefully, we can tackle a review video soon! :)
What about Android? is it only the "M" series of chips which seems to be a more sophisticated development of ARM?
@@JoeLinux2000 no news yet but I don’t think it will come to Android (quickly, if at all.) it’s not about the power. My iPad Pro 2018 predates the M series chips and runs it fine. Just that iOS has a lot of audio friendly capabilities that it shares with the Mac.
Hi. I don't know how to choose between Kawai 301 and Kawai DG 30. The price difference is more than double, but will one instrument be that much different from the other when it comes to sound quality? I playing in the music band and, accordingly, will often use line outputs. Will the difference in sound quality be so great in this case that it is worth paying twice as much?
Hi! Brent from Merriam Music here! While the CN301 and DG30 will have slightly different piano sounds due to a number of factors, including the cabinet design to some extent, they are quite similar. The main difference between the two and the critical decision making factor for most will be the aesthetic difference.
Thanks for the explanation.@@MerriamPianos
Thanks for an interesting comparison
When I watched your review of the GP3 i said it would be interesting with a comparison to the Kawai DG-30 - you answered it was in the making.
Instead I just watched a comparison with the GP6???
Thats to totally different price ranges, at least here in scandinavia where the DG-30 is 45000sek whilst the Roland GP6 is 65000sek - thats roundabout 50 percent more expensive for the Roland.
And your new graphics and editing is, in my opinion, not as good as before.
And because the speakersystem is so important it would have been great to listen to the instruments via microphones
Btw; skip the captions
Thanks for tuning in and sharing your feedback. In Canada, the DG30 and GP6 are far closer in price than the DG30 and GP3. As for demonstrating the speaker systems, it is a difficult thing to do in a transparent way as the microphones and room the piano is being played in do colour the sound as well. With that said, I will certainly pass along your feedback to our production team.
In the U.S., these two pianos currently appear to be within $200 of each other, with the Roland model being slightly more expensive than the Kawai...
I became interested in the topic of "key pushback"/upweight initiated by another commenter. It seems that there is some agreement that digital pianos generally have greater upweight than acoustic grand pianos. One commenter suggested that this is due to digital pianos being spring-assisted while acoustic grand pianos rely on gravity.
It seems to me that digital pianos which rely exclusively on gravity and don't have any form of spring-assisted mechanism might have the edge. But in addition to that, the geometry of the action will also play a role.
Removing from consideration the Yamaha and Kawai hybrid pianos (which have a full grand piano action, minus the hammers), the only model left (that I am aware of) which relies on gravity and has the geometry of the grand piano action (in the sense of the hammer path) is the Casio GP-310/510.
I have never played a Casio GP digital piano (GP-310/GP510), but I imagine they have the best approximation of gravity-based + hammer path geometry of any digital piano. However, I will quote Brent here when he says, "I would also say that the very top players (concert classical players for instance) in the world are seldom concerned about the spec charts of a given piano. We are fortunate enough to get to work with some of these players at our showrooms and I would say that 9 out of 10 times, players of that caliber make decisions purely on the playing and sonic experience that an instrument provides." In that sense, it seems unavoidable that the evaluation of the action of a digital piano will always have a subjective/personal component to it.
It is certainly a compelling topic and one that is definitely worth more investigation (perhaps in the form of a video of course!). Also, I think your hypothesis regarding the GP310/GP510's action due to its geometry and overall design is very well informed and, most likely, very accurate. There is something to the feel of the Casio GP action that gives it a truly authentic grand piano feel. As always, thank you kindly for your always insightful contributions! They are greatly appreciated! :)
@@MerriamPianos Thank you so much for your feedback. All the best! :)
@@Instrumental-Covers this is unrelated, but have you noticed ThePianoforever hasn't posted any piano review in like a year or so?🎹🎶
@@MERCEDES-BENZS600GUARD_V12 He has been going to college and bought a recording studio. Maybe he got beat down over the controversy related Casio's short pivot length action. As for instrumental Covers, he is spot on as usual.
Concerning the assertion " the very top players (concert classical players for instance) in the world are seldom concerned about the spec charts of a given piano." On the available worldwide evidence, both historical and current, the use of the word "seldom" in the latter statement might reasonably be queried. How so? Well, there is in fact a documented history of some of the most renowned executants of the keyboard (whether of the organ, clavichord, harpsichord, fortepiano and the modern piano) being both knowledgeable about, and much involved in affecting, the specifications of their instruments. This is particularly the case (but not exclusively so) on matters concerning regulation.
For example, Bach, Handel and other of their contemporaries developed and applied to their instruments their own systems of temperament. Vladimir Horowitz specified to the technicians preparing the pianos he was to play, precisely the key downweights, key upweights, key dip and blow distance that he wanted. In the later part of his career Arturo Michelangeli travelled not only with his own 2 concert grand pianos (e.g. one on which he played works by Beethoven, the other on which he played works by Debussy) but also with his own piano technician to ensure that the pianos were regulated and maintained to his exact specifications; Mitsuko Uchida too was/is particularly exacting in regard to the regulation of factors impacting key touch; Maurizio Pollini, perhaps because he has synesthesia (a condition where one experiences one of one's senses through another e.g. seeing sounds as colours or shapes) was/is exacting in regard to the toning of the hammers & the techniques used in doing so.
It is not only in matters concerning regulation that renowned executants of the keyboard have sought to exert a specific technical influence: for example Liszt was consulted in regard to the width of the octave on piano keyboards and it is partly as a consequence of his contribution that the most commonly produced width became 6.5" (165mm - other widths do still exist, notably from Yamaha). As we know, the 'standard' octave width did/does not suit everyone hence the PASK initiative and the involvement of some renowned keyboard players in its work. An earlier example of the active involvement of a renowned artist in specification matters was the keyboard customised by Steinway for Josef Hofmann at the latter's specific request that the octave width be set at 160mm with proportional adjustments (compared with the 'standard') made to the widths of the individual white and black keys (JF's original letter to Steinway about all this is extant). A more recent example is the customised keyboard with a 6.25" (158.75mm) octave width developed by Kluge for Daniel Barenboim's grand pianos, including a customised keyboard to the same dimensions for his customised straight strung Steinway. In the production of copies of authentic instruments such as fortepianos used in Beethoven's time, I know that the renowned artist Melvyn Tan has been deeply involved in specification matters in the production of those instruments.
On another related thread: I agree with the assertion made by another contributor that Roland and others have a good record in the development of the digital piano of seeking to accommodate an increasing range of 'subjective/personal preferences' - as borne out by Roland and others taking advantage of increasingly powerful ISC (such as VST) technologies and the development of variables which the user can customise their instrument to a significant extent e.g. in Roland digital pianos via the 'Piano Designer'. It is apparent that a virtuous cycle has become established in the digital piano world over the last 20 years - a virtuous cycle of invention, technology application, widening range of potential and actual innovations, user education/awareness and the increasing sophistication of user demand. Hopefully that cycle will continue. [Meanwhile I would like Roland, please, to develop an addition to their current key touch affecting key downweight option, specifically an option which allows the user to customise effective key upweight. They also might like to know that I have no other demands of them at present, at least none until I try their new GP-9!]
Can you mic the GP9 from the speakers spaced pair?
Hi there! Brent here! Do you mean for our GP9 review? We have already completed a review of the GP9 and, if I recall correctly, there was a demonstration of the speaker system in the video (I'm going from memory though). :)
@@MerriamPianos The GP9 and the CA901. I did get to hear the CA901 from the soundboard from Alamo Music but it was to narrow. Thats why I dont use XY. ORTF and Spaced Pair sound better
Stu, great review as always. Which action do you think is lighter and how do the two actions compare to the Yamaha ‘s in terms of weight?
Hi! Brent from Merriam Music here! Thanks for tuning in! From my experiences, the DG30's RHIII plays a little lighter than the GP6's action. The escapement simulation is a bit less prominent in the DG30 too. At the end of the day, they're both excellent digital grands with a great touch and tone. They simply offer a different musical flavour. Also, which Yamaha model(s) were you referring to? Thanks again! :)
The issue I would be grateful for your comments concerns 'key pushback'.
Background: An observation often made about the actions on digital pianos generally is that the upweight (both static and dynamic) of their keys, compared with that of the keys of acoustic pianos (whether grand or upright), tends to be relatively high. On some digital pianos the upweight is so high that the impression is given (to some) that the keys when depressed 'push back' against the fingers of the player. Many players like this effect e.g. one reviewer in another place stated that he liked the feel of the keys to be 'up close and personal'. However for some other players, like myself, this effect is somewhat of a downside (please pardon the mixed metaphor), with continual physical tension being experienced - the keys are felt to be 'fighting back' particularly in music requiring velocity technique.
It is of course the case that some designer-manufacturers of acoustic pianos such as Steingraeber deliberately engineer relatively high upweights presumably so as to increase the repetition speed capability of their instruments. Nonetheless such manufacturers do not usually take this relatively 'high upweight' concept to the extreme that the keys are felt to be 'pushing back' (exceptions arguably include the accelerated magnetic actions featured in some Steinway and Steingraeber acoustic pianos, both grands and uprights).
Question for Stu/Brent: using the updated PHA50 action (the Premium Reality Premium Keyboard) of the Roland GP-6 and the Grand Hybrid Action of the Roland LX708 as exemplars, what is your take on this issue of 'key pushback'? For example, in terms of the 'feel' of the upweights of the keys in dynamic playing, how does the Piano Reality Premium Keyboard (updated PHA50) action compare with the Grand Hybrid action in the LX708 and with acoustic grand pianos generally? I noticed in your other GP-6 video review, at 7'56", it is stated on a diagram that the hammer movement in the PHA50 is a "real hammer movement without spring(s)" - I do not know if that is in any way relevant to an answer to my question. Please accept my apologies for the length of this post.
Hi! Brent from Merriam Music here! Thanks for taking the time to tune in and submit your question. Naturally, this is a bit of a difficult question to answer because a lot of it falls into the category of subjectivity and personal preference. While some players are very technically minded and look into quantified downweights/upweights, other players are a little bit more qualitative about their approach and go more on the "feel" of a keyboard. I tend to fall into the latter category. This is mainly because the exact number of grams the downweight/upweight of a key is would only be one element amongst a plethora of elements that determine the feel of a touch. This is certainly something that every player has to determine for themselves. With that said, I will do my best to comment on your question. :)
Personally, I agree that the upweight of digital piano actions is substantially higher (at least perceptually if not quantitatively) than that of an acoustic piano. While I am a fan of both the PHA50 and Grand Hybrid actions, I do feel that the Grand Hybrid touch is more akin to an acoustic grand than the PHA50. The longer key stick and pivot length certainly contributes to this. It also feels as if the upweight is meaningfully less than the PHA50, which, again, to me, provides more authenticity. As Stu typically suggests as well, the best option is always to get your hands on these keyboards to experience things firsthand. While we can all easily get caught up in specs and numbers, sometimes, those quantified differences do not add up to what we'd expect them to in terms of the first hand experience. A good example of this is perceived loudness of speaker systems. People are sometimes confused when they discover that a 100W speaker system is able to be perceptually louder than a 125W system. This is because there is a lot more to a speaker system and the sonic experience it provides than just the power rating.
I would also say that the very top players (concert classical players for instance) in the world are seldom concerned about the spec charts of a given piano. We are fortunate enough to get to work with some of these players at our showrooms and I would say that 9 out of 10 times, players of that calibre make decisions purely on the playing and sonic experience that an instrument provides. I think there is something to that notion in the end. Thanks again and hope this helps a bit!
@@MerriamPianos Thanks Brent for your response and for trying to help as much as you can.
1. Considering for a moment just my own 'playing experience'': I have found based purely on the latter that (to me) the feel of the Grand Hybrid action does not equate to the feel I get from the actions of most acoustic grand pianos that I play, specifically and especially because of the feel that the keys are 'pushing back'.
2. However, as many others have stated on occasion having the same specific 'feel' or type of response to their playing experience whether on digital pianos or on acoustic pianos (e.g. James Pavel Shawcross in commenting on his response to the Roland LX708; Simon Vincent in responding to the Steingraeber 'PS' and 'SFM' actions) then it might be concluded that my own response to the Grand Hybrid action while entirely my own (hence as you point out, 'subjective') response might at the same time have some intersubjective relevance and even also some validity to it. This is not to claim that all others have the same response as evidently that is not the case (as the French say: 'v la difference'!), but rather to note that some others have had the same type to response to some actions whether in digital, acoustic grand or acoustic upright pianos i.e. the response I have had was not a purely idiosyncratic or pathological phenomenon. Nor do I think it plausible that JS, SV, and many others are merely confused in their tactile perceptions in the manner that you suggest that some others have evidently been unable properly to explain the differences in their aural perception and more precisely confused in the explanations which they attribute to those perceptions.
3. Consequently I suggest it might be useful in the spirit of objective inquiry to search for rational explanations for the phenomenon that I and others have reported in regard to the feel of the actions of many digital pianos (not all), even if in the end the validity or plausibility of any particularly explanation will ultimately be tested ,along with other criteria, against the 'feel' experienced by the players of those instruments.
4. In conclusion, I would advocate that one should in general try to maintain the distinction between (i) a given phenomenon and (ii) the potential explanations for that phenomenon. The advantages of finding plausible explanations for any given phenomenon include the opportunity such might provide systematically and thereby more efficiently, to develop solutions/ways forward to address the phenomenon other than an approach which relied only on random serendipity (though the latter has its place of course - hence browsing in bookshops as well as in piano stores can be helpful as well as enjoyable!).
@@donalwalsh1129 I think it's a question of springs verses gravity. I think most players find a gravity action more consistent and satisfying. Given how crude and complicated wooden actions are, it's surprising they have remained as popular as they are. Many digital actions are relatively simple. They just a sensitive switch that is activated by a key. I think too much is made of the various digital actions because for the most part all are playable and the number of pianists that play at Stu's or Yuja's level is relatively small. It's like comparing Formu;la One cars to the average passenger car, most of which are good enough. The bottom line is how expressively can a given instrument be played by a skilled pianist? Roland improved its action by rewriting the software, in turn making it more responsive and controllable..
@@JoeLinux2000 You make several good points. At the risk of stating what you already know (for which apologies) and just taking a couple of those points: Springs versus gravity? Yes, I am also minded that is a 'key' variable. One often comes across the phase a 'spring like action' when the action of a piano is being discussed (whether the action in an acoustic or a digital, whether in a grand or in an upright) and especially where the action is actually partly motivated by spring/s (hence spring assisted wippens, damper springs et)c. Your observations about wooden actions and your other points (implied) about the market economics of instrument development also hit the various nails on the head (please pardon the metaphor).
Just in the same way that downweight via the 'Key Touch' control on Roland and other digital piano brands can be regulated I wonder/ed whether at some future time it might be feasible (technically as well as economically) to introduce a similar control for key upweight. As I expect you already know. altering upweight on an acoustic whether grand or upright, is feasible whether by weakening certain springs or by altering the values of some of the relevant parameters (which are often otherwise interconnected such as blow and key dip).
However, as you also know, altering upweight to a significant extent in an acoustic can be a substantial undertaking quite apart from the fact that some of the options can give rise to other problems (such as the adding of lead weights into the keys consequently adding to the overall inertia of the keys). And I can imagine that anything which deliberately introduces inertia into a digital action could pose software writers some tricky challenges when it came to taking such changes into account in the sound produced let alone challenges to the mechanical engineers in the design of the mechanical parts of the action.
All that stated, am I still nonetheless permitted to hope that one or other of the manufacturers, perhaps one that does not have competing interests within its own company with regard to the production of acoustic pianos, will eventually innovate in this area? Meanwhile does one just have to accept for the time being that for the development of relatively advanced technique by players who prefer European actions as they were in the pre-Liszt era and as they continued to be in some prestigious brands during the period 1910 to 1939), the only available option will, for the foreseeable future, continue to be the appropriately (custom) regulated acoustic grand?
@@donalwalsh1129 I haven't seen JPS upload in a wile. Wonder what happened?🎹🎶
Nice review but there is a $2500 price difference in Australia. the Roland GP6 retails ($7800) at 50% more than the DG30 ($5500). Based on price comparing product I believe the Roland GP3 and the DG30 would be a better comparison as they retail (at least in Australia) at about the same price.
Hi there! Thank you kindly! In the Canadian market, these two pianos are only a couple hundred dollars apart. But, we do understand that the price gap can vary quite drastically from market to market. With that said, the DG30 is a fairly significant step up from the more streamlined GP3 in terms of musical experience and feature offering.
@@MerriamPianos Wow - never realised the DG30 was so much cheaper in Australia than the US. Here it retails for $A5595 ($US3680).
Review of the GP-9 next?
That is certainly in the cards. ;)
Woohoo!
I wish that I could play like this guy.
Stu is quite the talent - that is for sure! :)
The Piano Sound Of Kawai Shguru SK Concert Grand is Nicer & Fuller to my Ear. The Sample Vs Render is the Explanation I Guess.
Every player will have their own preference of course! With that said, the warmth and depth of the SK-EX samples are quite wonderful to say the least. :)
I play Pianoteq, and at least on my set up, I'm not fully pleased with the harmonic blend of the upper treble. My guess is that is probably where the Kawai excels. I think Stu says the Roland is one of the nicest sounding digitals he has ever played. I'd like to play one to see if it is better than Pianoteq. It must be. Speakers could be another factor. I have played a DG-30. It's good, but not knock out. I like the LX708 better.
Stu is the very best at presenting pianos, both acoustic and digital. I am very interested in the GP-6. Beautiful sound, wonderful specs, and a really nice looking piece of furniture in the room.
Stu is awesome! We're lucky to have him! The GP6 is quite the piano. Roland has knocked it out of the park with their new batch of GP models.
I will go for Roland 200%
The Roland GP6 is an impressive instrument to say the least! Both of these digital grand pianos are fantastic, but they offer a very different musical experience. It will ultimately come down to a matter of the player's preferences. :)
Now, play all the Chopin Nocturnes on 'em. Let's hear it. Nevermind.
It will take about an hour and a half.
I'm sure Stu would be up for the challenge! ;)
@@MerriamPianosI challenge him. Chopin is my favorite composer and his Nocturnes are marvelous
¿Para cuando analisis Roland GP 607 vs Roland GP 6? Sigue asi,me gustan mucho los videos que haceis, Un SALUDO
Hi there! It is on our list of comparisons to tackle. We will do our best to tackle that as soon as possible. :)
MODELING IS THE FUTURE
Modelling technology is quite exciting and incredibly versatile! It is going to be interesting to see how it evolves over the next few years. :)
Modelling is the future? Hmmm. I think you've just said two interesting things. 1. That modelled pianos will effectively reinvent the piano, leaving even the acoustic pianos looking inadequate. 2. Modelling isn't there yet, and sampling still works better. I tend to agree.
Yes I made a mistake writing in capital letters
So in a nutshell.... the Roland is a better, more comfortable, listenable sound than what I've expected from that manufacturer. However, the Kawai sounds more authentic and one that I could listen to for an extended period without getting tired of it. The Roland would bother me after a few selections -- enough that I would stop listening. Quality instrument for sure - but not my tonal cup of tea so to speak.
That is certainly fair! Every player will have their own preference of course. The Kawai DG30 and Roland GP6 are both wonderful digital grands, but offer something a little different, particularly in terms of tone. :)
Between the two I suggest the Kawai for home use and the Roland for a venue. I wouldn't trust plastic keys with an army of unknown pianists, but (at an advanced level) you need the best sound you can get when you're playing solo piano for yourself at home. If aesthetics are less important, but the Kawai sounds are valued, the Novus 5s is a better buy.
Myself, if I were shopping for a fantastic home piano, I'd go for a Yamaha CLP-785, or maybe just the Casio GP-310, which is so much cheaper than all of these. I don't need the baby grand format.
sin duda gana el roland gp6, mas claridad y mejor sonido
The GP6 is quite an impressive instrument to say the least! Roland has done some amazing work on the action and tone front with this model. :)
Kawai is more elegant
They are both excellent digital grands, but every player will have their own personal preference between the two of course. :)
The subtitles are a bit redundant on YT. I you're going to have them (a) please don't title-case everything (b) proof read them. Right now they're really distracting for word-oriented viewers.
Thanks for the feedback! I will pass that along to our production team. :)
Button arrangement of the GP6 wins hands down. I have a suspicion that Roland cut a secret deal to license Pianoteq's modeling engine, minus the names of all of the Pianoteq voices.
The control interface of the new GP series digital grands from Roland is very cool! And that is an interesting hypothesis. With that said, Roland has been one of the leaders in developing their own proprietary modelling technology, so it is hard to say as to whether they would license that tech elsewhere or farm development work off to other companies, etc. I have not personally heard anything along those lines.
@@MerriamPianos I have several classic Roland synths such as the D-50 and the SuperJuper JX-10 so I can understand your thinking. However Pianoteq is the only company I know of that really has really perfected a modeled piano voice, and it took them a very long time. It was an effort between French mathematicians at the University level and a highly experienced French piano technician . It's not an easy thing to do. Alongf comes Rolan and they have a voice that sounds very much like Pianoteq without the name. Pianoteq has always lacked a partnership with a top line manufacturer of a physical keyboard controller. It just makes sense to me that each company needs the other. They are both strong brands and neither one would want to give up their own market to the other. A secret agreement between the two just makes sense. Pianoteq gets placement on a top of the line brand albeit undisclosed. and Roland gets a top of the line modeled voice without having to do all the development in house. Finding the mathematicians that would have the abilty and interest is not an easy thing. Of course I'm just applying critical thinking to my conjecture. I have no first hand knowledge of such an agreement, but in the future there could be open acknowledgement of a partnership.
Are those physical buttons?🎹🎶
roland sounds electronic and digital . kawai sounds realistic. period.
It comes down to a matter of preference of course! They are both excellent pianos in their own regard, but different players will gravitate towards different options.
pointless demo without mics.
We're sorry to hear you did not enjoy the comparison. We try to capture the most transparent representation of the core piano sounds, which is usually achieved by recording the direct line out signal from the piano. The issue with microphones is that the microphone itself as well as the room you are capturing the piano in will colour the sound inevitably.
@@MerriamPianos Yes, but I remember you used mics previously, and I love your channel and Stu playing. Coloring doesn't matter, as long as the colour resembles an acoustic piano.
I agree with Michael, especially sometimes Stu were explaining how the sound is presented to the player, and I wanted to hear that, but then the sound came for us from the line out.
@@MerriamPianos Can I wish for a video - I believe I won't be alone to appreciate if Stu can shoot a video and give us some tips about how to setup a small home studio, the equipment, connection suggestions for line-ins, mic suggestions for room capturing etc. A lot of us trying to record videos of ourselves play and at home situations it is difficult for us hobbyists to capture a good enough sound. Thanks!
@Merriam Music Great video as always! You cannot please everyone and if you would have mic'd the piano, it would have been a different complaint. Keep up the great work!
I don't really understand why companies like Yamaha, Kawai and Roland are competing in the "DG" category when they already have hybrid-grands like the N1X and NV10S, and when their high-end digital piano series like the CA series and Clavinova already sample their sounds from top concert grands.
Because people like the look of a grand piano.
As Internet Privacy Advocate mentioned, it comes down to aesthetics. There are many customers that want the look of a grand piano, but don't want to purchase an acoustic baby grand in order to avoid upkeep and maintenance. Or, in some cases, there are space/noise constraints that make a digital grand the only viable option.
I do not understand it either. I am even more surprised to see plastic action in such expensive pianos. Form over substance!
@@mfurman I dont understand why Kawai didnt put the Grand Feel Compact at least on this grand. But maybe in its next model reiteration thatll change. I think the price is high for plastic keys. But thats just my opinion.
@@mfurman Wood isn't that great. It's not consistent, becoming rare. and increasingly expensive. There is nothing wrong with a well engineered plastic action.