Visit to music shop to test actions... (Page 1 of 2)

If GHS is triple sensor, then that's exactly why you can do repetitions that fast. So that's a given.

The Arius YDP-163 is GH3 and has 3 sensors
The Arius YDP-143 is GH and has 2 sensors

Lots of happiness with your new acquisition.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=B4DiaIihK4Q

After more research found a review of the earlier model, the Yamaha YDP-142 by a music teacher. Interesting to say the least!

Kindest Regards,

Chris

I played the YDP-143 at Guitar Center today, and I found the action superior to my PX-160. I wished it had textured keys - not a big deal. And I wished it had the triple sensor.

But it felt very natural to me. I wish they had some other models to try. They just had Casios, cheaper Yamahas and some generic brands.

I have owned both Casio PX5S and NUMA Nero (TP40WOOD 2 sensor) actions. The Casio is bouncier and noisier than the YDP-142 I tried and harder to perform repetitions despite it being tri-sensored. The NUMA Nero was a great dissappointment as it was let down by very inconsistent velocity responses and because the casework of the Nero was mere plastic, the action twisted easily. This was also somewhat of a problem with the Casio PX5S although velocity response was better. This was one of the reasons I decided to go for my first console piano rather than (portable) slab type. The YDP-142 I tried was very solidly built and the velocity response I could not fault.

Sadly, the SL88 Grand appears to be no more solidly built than the NUMA Nero. I had looked at this but previous experience with Studiologic/Fatar boards (NUMA Nero AND Acuna 88) has really put me off this brand. Sad, because the design of the TP40WOOD in the Nero is excellent - just let down by not to brilliant quality controls. Maybe they've improved? Remains to be seen I think.

I am in no way affiliated nor under the employ nor influence of Yamaha. Neither am I loyal to any brand(s)/manufacturers(s)/company/companies. In fact my first ever 88 note (slab) keyboard was a Yamaha P120S which I liked at first but which developed problems with keys rubbing/binding on the front key guides. I never entertained Yamaha again after that until now. If rubbing/binding should occur on the YDP-143, of which was no evidence on testing, it will be covered under warranty.

Yes I agree regarding tri/3-sensor hype. This is what I was trying to say. I also think that many times digital piano manufacturers attempts to mimic the authentic feel of a true grand piano have resulted in heavy non responsive sluggish actions. The best true grand actions have designs enabling pianists to perform extraordinary feats. For example, I know of an action (there may be more than one?) that utilises magnets to "speed up" it's response.

Finally, four things sold the YDP - 143 to me -

1. Fluidity/consistency of velocity response

2. Ease of repetition

3. Controllability of (and) dynamic range

4. Solid cabinet

I will certainly post a review(s) once I eventually have the piano in my home.

Kindest Regards,

Chris

Maybe Studiologic have upped their game, or maybe the triple sensor in the SL88 Grand improves things.

I found that there is just something about the GHS that makes repetition that much easier than most other digital piano actions. It is so free but without being bouncy i.e. the keys come back to a very convincing rest after being played.

I found a video on YouTube of the manager at my local music shop demoing the very ARIUS (YDP - 142 [Cherry] ) that I tested and like so much. I'll post it shortly.

Kindest Regards,

Chris

Yamaha digitals do have lighter, bouncier, faster keys.  I think it's just their style because their acoustics are like that also.  Really good for fast playing -- press down just a bit and you're all the way to the bottom.

I'm just not sure this is a good feature for your regular piano.  Might be better to pick a piano with an action in the middle so if you have to perform on a Steinway with heavy action, you can do the repeats on that also.

The fact that the hammers "fly off" on a real piano, is, as I understand it, an undesirable characteristic, but unfortunately, quite necessary. It's my understanding that piano manufacturers try to make the point at which the hammers disconnect as late in the key travel as possible, which means when the hammers are as close to the strings as possible. The reason for this is to give the pianist as much control over pianissimo playing as possible.  If this is true, then the main reason to have hammers that disconnect in a DP is if the player wants their DP to behave as closely as possible to an acoustic piano.  If the player doesn't care about having their DP feel exactly the same as an AP, then quite possibly, the current "locked" design is technically superior.  ;^)

Anyway, even if the DP did have escapement (hammers that disconnect), three sensors could still make sense, IF the velocity is measured using the time taken for the hammer or key to move between two points, because we want to take the velocity at the point at which the hammers disconnect, which means two sensors fairly close together at the point of escapement. The top sensor would be fairly high up, because that sensor is then used for the damper - not velocity.  If on the other hand the velocity is taken with pressure sensors, then yes, I guess you'd then only need one other sensor - the damper sensor.

Greg.

The main issue with the Numa Nero was quality control. Some were bad, some were good. I have one I got second hand and it's not bad at all (I tested it extensively before buying). The keybed is very nice and feels very solid. If you get a good one it's well worth it because second hand they're very cheap (no doubt because of all the now well known problems with QC).

Hopefully Fatar/Studiologic have pulled their finger out for the SL88 Grand and did it properly. One thing though is that it's still using standard MIDI (128 levels, 0 to 127), not high-res, which in this day and age shows a lack of attention to detail. It's not German engineering, it's Italian engineering. I think of it and Fatar/SL as a company as the Alfa Romeo of DPs: beautiful, elegant but not without its flaws and occasional disasters. But I've only heard/read good things about the SL88-G so far.

Yes, GHS!!!

And so is this...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rR-hGy3...ture=share

This one is the GHS in the Yamaha P115...

Hi SteveLy

My first board was a P120 (S). It was very solidly built. I do like the GH(E) GH3 GH3X actions have a more solid feel - more towards the 'wooden key' feel of a real piano - than the GHS action and I must agree, the GHS doesn't feel like a 'real' piano. In fact, I went into town to the music shop today as it happens to pay the balance on the YDP - 143 WH. While I was there, I had a play on several Yamahas. There was a Yamaha Digital Grand with a GH3X Action which, with the lid, onboard speaker system etc., felt lovely to play. It was £3000+ but it was good. I tried another piano with GH3 action and tha felt nice to play and I tried repetitions on this action and it wasn't too bad. When I went back to play the GHS though, repetitions were much easier.

It must be to do with the action design in terms of timing and positioning of the sensors in relation to the action.

The ivory feel on the more expensive YDP - 163 is vey nice (GH3) I must admit. As I say, I'll review more thoroughly in a week or so when the piano arrives. I'll be able to try it through Pianoteq's many and varied instruments.

Kindest Regards,

Chris

Hi Chris, you should try a PX-160. It's as cheap as a P-95/115 but IMHO much more playable with better action (including repetition). Of the most popular budget models, i.e., Kawai ES-100, Yamaha P-95/115 and Casio PX-160, the Casio is by far the best. Just my opinion. You've got to try for yourself. But you should at least try one.

Sorry I missed/forgot you already said you've had a PX5S. Sounds like you've done your research and found the GHS to work best for you. Good luck with it and yes please do tell how you like it once you had a chance to play it for a while.

Hi all,

I'm still (impatiently) waiting for the YDP - 143! I haven't forgotten about reviewing it.

In the mean time however, I've contacted the head of VaxMidi as I am interested in the new Open Source Vax Midi Controller also. Looks absolutely amazing on paper but I'd love to try it!!!

Back soon,

Kindest Regards,

Chris

It's here!

Far exceeds my expectations!

Report later (grandsons birthday!)

Kindest Regards

Chris

I will check tomorrow groovy,

Kindest Regards,

Chris

Hello sigasa,

thank you! If I understand you correctly, the native velocity range of the  YDP-143 is around 35 - 105 (between played ppp and fff). This means a resolution of 70 steps (at best), which is just 55%  of the maximum 7bit-MIDI-Resolution (0 - 127).

I have to admit, that's a bit disappointing for me, as I'm always hoping to find better solutions than the one I have myself. My elderly Kawai ES3 action has a limited native velocity-range also (25 - 104).

Your description of the Yamaha GHS action interested me, because sometimes I'm thinking of assembling a keyboard just for the vintage Electro Pianos in Pianoteq  (Rhodes, Wurly etc.). These benefit a lot of a fast, light-hammerweighted action and are worth the best dynamic resolution one can get (in my opinion). Ahem, and (as a one-trick-pony) it shouldn't be too expensive.

PS: And if a potential candidate lacks those ebony/ivory fakes, the better

Hi all

After further playing / testing I realise that for me personally this is not the best for pure piano work. The fact that one can't repeat a note without a note off in between is quite frustrating after having had a tri sensor Casio. I would advise intermediate-advanced players to look elsewhere.

Any questions welcome,

Kindest Regards,

Chris

0, 32, 95, 127; 0, 1, 126, 127

I believe I used the Medium (Default) curve on the 143.
But I will double check that.

I've been playing the 143 for some time since finding this curve. It might be simple but it really plays nicely for me. I can get really quiet very naturally. I may tweak it later simply to see if I can improve it, but as it stands I must admit I do like it a lot. Certainly makes the 143 a lot more playable.

Hope somebody finds this helpful. If anyone has any thoughts or is able to tweak the curve so it performs even better, feel free to edit as you wish. I'll post the present curve in the velocity curve forum also.

Kindest Regards,

Chris

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/103...Chopin.wav

learning Chopin's 'Raindrop' Prelude on the 143 with the last velocity curve posted.

Kindest Regards,

Chris

Late again all!

0, 28, 99, 127; 0, 1, 126, 127

Enjoy.

See you tomorrow,

Good night,

Kindest Regards,

Chris

Hi all,

Seems like the curve (offset straight line) is simpler than I thought. I have been working today on the black key / white key balance for the 143. I tried working with mezzo hammer hardness but I couldn't find a satisfactory compensation within the mezzo range so I decided to look at adjusting forte hammer hardness. Initial indications appear to show that an increase of the black keys' hammer hardness by 6 (from 1.60 to 1.66) achieves best results. I do need to check this though. The velocity curve used with this voicing adjustment is as follows,

0, 32, 96, 127; 0, 1, 126, 127

I'll do some testing soon.

Kindest Regards,

Chris

Hi sigasa,

I visualized your iterations. It is a symbol, how difficult it can be to find a satisfying velocity response for a given keyboard action. Even with one of the most simple "curve" shapes (four x,y-pairs) the alternatives are endlessly. From my own experience I know, all those differences are clearly audible. And that is "boon and bane" (hopefully the right english words)

Hi all,

By the way Groovy, thank you for your graph. I will try a line down the middle of your graph i.e. a kind of mean average of curves, and see how that performs (unless you or someone else has already done so??? ; )

I do have a curve I'm testing at present that works with mezzo hammer hardness of the black keys raised to 1.66. This curve and voicing adjustment work well together.

Mezzo black keys = 1.66

Velocity curve 0, 32, 96, 127; 0, 1, 126, 127

Dejavu???

Kindest Regards,

Chris