Thanks. Everyone says those monitors are are great bang for buck. Might have to invest in a pair or two.

They do quite fine, side by side I liked them more than the ESI Near05 Classic I ended up selling.

Sounds like you have some nice monitors. What are they?

Actually a quiet low end couple of monitors which IMHO do the job excellent.

http://www.m-audio.com/products/view/bx...t66gEDKXlw

BTW I pretty much like how PTQ sounds through the CA97 but I kinda like more the sound on standard studio monitors, wonder how can I let it sound similar through the soundboard (maybe equalizing..?).

Sounds like you have some nice monitors. What are they?

BTW I pretty much like how PTQ sounds through the CA97 but I kinda like more the sound on standard studio monitors, wonder how can I let it sound similar through the soundboard (maybe equalizing..?).

I've been thinking about it and came to the conclusion that nothing will come as close to my CA97 as my CA97, so my initial decision is to keep it for as long as possible.

I'll pay for moving it instead of losing money by selling it and thus downgrading gear.. maybe if a slab with GF2 comes up I'll rethink my decision.

Good move!! And even with a GF2 stage piano you'd still have the speaker system to worry about. The CA97 probably has a very well tuned cabinet + speaker system that would be difficult to match without going to considerable expense.

Maybe a year away, maybe more  ...marketing decisions I guess, the need to show "new and improved" at fairly regular intervals

I've been thinking about it and came to the conclusion that nothing will come as close to my CA97 as my CA97, so my initial decision is to keep it for as long as possible.

I'll pay for moving it instead of losing money by selling it and thus downgrading gear.. maybe if a slab with GF2 comes up I'll rethink my decision.

Least expensive capable Kawai and Yamaha new options are the ES8 and P255. Out of these two I'd strongly prefer the ES8. It's basically an on-paper step up from the MP7: RH3 vs RH2 action, but I can't tell the difference after a few minutes of playing both in a shop. The ES7 can be had for a lot less used, and is similar - same as MP7 with RH2 action.

Just on best-piano-action per Euro, from your list I'd look at the FP-30 and the VPC1 and decide between those two. I'd scratch the rest. (Not because they're no good but you're paying more for features you don't use.) If money was no object, VPC1 and MP11 would be the only contenders. But if you want the best action on a limited budget you should seriously consider buying second hand (used).

PS. This thread made me revisit my own similar query posted on this forum late last year. I've summarised my thoughts in a closing post to that thread: http://www.forum-pianoteq.com/viewtopic...31#p942031

VPC1   1400€
MP11   2300€
RD800  2200€
MP7     1600€
FP30      600€
ES100    700€

They all are in different price range but I wouldn't mind paying more if I get what I pay for, the same applies to the cheapest ones if the value/price ratio is better than the more expensive ones (by example the ES100 seems to be a great value for the buck, after reviews).

Again, not specially caring about sounds.

Any comments/suggestions on that?

I think you're right that the VPC1 is probably best for your needs. If you want to keep the cost down to SL88 Grand kind of prices then a used MP6 could be a good option too (IMO better action than TP40W; similar to MP7); or one of the slightly older MP-**00 (9000, 9500) beasts with long wooden keys and AWA * Grand action. Buying new, the Roland FP-30 may be more to your liking than the PX-160; a lot less flimsy than the Casio PX's and will play better IMO (assuming that it's basically an F-140R minus cabinet).

So far the VPC1 seems the best option out there, although I'm not discarding any other brands yet. My best theoretical bed was the SL88 Grand as it looked like a decent competitor to the VPC1, but I've just watched to the recent review of PianomanChuck on it and it really discouraged me..

Is it really that different/bad compared to the VPC1? Any experiences out there?

I've searched the internet and found many different opinions, some people are so pleased and happy whereas some other just feel disappointed.

I had the chance to try the PX160 and it wasn't bad at all, but personally found it a bit on the light side plus the keys felt pretty flimsy as Steve well pointed out. Didn't care about the sound.

Beto-Music wrote:

Please give us some report about how pianoteq sound connected to Kawai CA97, since this model uses a real piano soundboard as a speaker.  :-)

Some people say it's not a good idea to use a soundboard because it would limite then soundboard charact to a fixed element, even if you change settings in pianoteq. But I disagree, because the soubndboard in this case it's like a speaker and will reproduce what it have to reproduce.

CA97 have extra speakers (conventional) to help the frequencies that the soundbaord alone can't handle well.

Had you tested the pianoteq Steinway-B with CA97?

The sound comes out of the interface Scarlett 2i4 (unbalanced outputs) directly into the in-line of the CA97 (adjust input knob to avoid saturation), that's all.

Yes I tested the STW-B with the CA97 and so far happy. PTQ doesn't sound through the speakers on the CA97 as nice as in my studio monitors, but isn't bad either (the soundboard on the CA97 isn't a pure stereo system, as you well point out). Let's say it's good enough to me and I enjoy it.

It is to be expected that the "soundboard" of the CA97 would provide a sensation that one is playing something more like a wooden piano, since it is essentially a soundboard of a wooden piano. 
As a spinet it is probably OK, but it is a very small board of wood and as such is very limited.
It is STILL a wooden soundboard located about where a spinet has its soundboard, so for "realism" (whatever THAT means) to the player it probably feels a lot more like a piano than a slab played through studio monitors (however good they may be in terms of frequency response, flatness of curve, etc.).
I wouldn't expect such a board to produce the full range of frequencies that PTQ produces for some of the large piano models, in fact I would suspect that it introduces filters that restrict many of the frequencies associated with the sounds of grand pianos.

Short version; For "sense of playing a spinet"; Probably Good.
For fidelity to the FULL range of frequencies produced by Pianoteq; probably better off with good studio monitors appropriately placed - or headphones.

The PX keys do have a flimsier feel to them (e.g. more side to side movement) but one gets over it pretty quick because they are very playable. They are snappier/faster than the Fatar. But perhaps in time I will get used to the Fatar and will like it more. Maybe for training to play acoustic pianos the Fatar is better. The PX is almost too easy to play sometimes.

Whether three sensors on the keys alone make a big difference on the SL88, or whether they just put an extra one on there to keep up with the Joneses, I don't know. As far as MIDI resolution, I find it hard to stay within 5 levels out of 128 while trying to play as evenly as I can, which might mean that 0,1,...,127 is sufficient. But I do like the idea of hi-res MIDI velocity quantisation being so fine that odds are I will get a different sound each time I hit a key: not just getting one of 127 different possible velocity "samples". But I only like the idea. I don't know if my ears could really tell the difference.

You still do have to try them before you buy them you know. I'd give the Roland F-30 a shot too. Had it been out when I bought my PX-160 late last year I probably would have bought that instead (assuming it has the same PHA4-standard keybed as the F-140R).

As for now, I guess the 2 most convincing alternatives seem to be the SL88 and the PX160. I've read some stuff regarding high resolution MIDI on the PX160 but I'm not sure how much difference would it make in real world and whether worth to consider at a decision making.

OTOH the 3 sensor matter, whether hammer sensor or not, seems to me a more important issue..

The SL88 seemed to me on paper the perfect candidate, especially because the programming capacity (nice computer interface) as I could easily change PTQ patches directly from the knob instead of using the mouse for this purpose (willing to plug it to a screenless NUC). It also has all the features a piano player would wish on a digital keybed, but no hammer sensor.. that sounds disappointing but again not sure how much the playing experience may differ from the PX one..