Casio PX-S1100 vs Roland FP-10 | Digital Piano Review & Demo Comparison
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 26 ก.ค. 2024
- Intro - 0:05
Sound Demo - 0:51
Speaker & Piano Tone Comparison - 3:05
Other Sound Comparison - 17:45
Action Comparison - 28:04
Other Features - 35:24
🛒 Shop Casio Digital Pianos HERE ▸www.merriammusic.com/product-...
🛒 Shop Roland Digital Pianos HERE ▸ www.merriammusic.com/product-...
💕 Subscribe to Merriam Pianos HERE ▸ bit.ly/SubscribeMerriam
🔔 Click the 🔔 bell to be notified of all videos! ▸ bit.ly/SubscribeMerriam
Hi everyone and thanks for joining us at the Merriam Pianos TH-cam channel. We’ve got another video featuring the new Casio PX-S1100 today as we put it head to head with the highly regarded Roland FP-10.
The FP-10 is about 4 years old now, but it’s a big seller, and widely regarded by many as one of the highest value digital pianos on the market at any price point. The FP-10 and PX-S1100 are in the same class of instruments, so it only makes sense to compare them here.
Piano Sound
Sound to all instrumentalists is absolutely critical. When it comes to sound engines, it’s arguable that we’re looking at the two most sophisticated sound engines available in this price category.
The AiR Sound Source in the S1100 is very dynamic and offers a lot of variety in terms of the tonal palate. It’s offering a very satisfying piano sound overall, especially with the addition of the acoustic simulator which adds things like damper resonance and string resonance.
The FP10’s SuperNATURAL engine offers a very nice sonic experience, with equal dynamic range, though not as much tonal variance as on the S1100. There are also added parameters like damper resonance.
From a speaker standpoint, the S1100 has 16 watts of power, whereas the FP10 has only 12 watts. That said, the FP10 actually holds its own better than we were expecting, to the point that the FP10 is actually pumping out more bass response.
The polyphony is scaled back on the FP10 to 96 notes in order to not sacrifice the complexity of the piano tone. 96 might not sound like a lot compared to the S1100’s 192 notes, but 96 notes will be fine for solo piano playing. It takes layering and adding on effects to really start eating polyphony up, but the FP10 isn’t really made for that or aimed at those users anyway.
In terms of other sounds, the FP10 has 15 in total, while the S1100 has 18. Staples like e piano, organ, strings and synths are covered on both. The non-piano tones on the FP10 are a bit stronger in our opinion, though the core acoustic piano tones are pretty much a toss-up.
Piano Action
There may be folks out there who think that the FP10 must be outdated since it’s several years old. We would argue that this is not the case, and the action is the biggest reason why - the presence of Roland’s pro-level PHA4 action is still very significant in 2022. This same action is featured on Roland models up to around the $2,000 point, which really demonstrates the value of the FP10
In our opinion, if action is your priority, you cannot beat the FP10 for the price. Specs on the PHA4 action include a triple sensor, escapement and a very nice texture on the keys, It’s also a highly durable action built to meet the demands of intensive playing situations.
The S110 Smart Scaled Hammer Action Keyboard has its own positives as well. For starters, considering how light the S1100 is at under 25 lbs, this action feels remarkably solid and stable.
The S1100’s action is also much quieter than the PHA4, which could be a big deal to people who do a lot of playing with headphones on.
Now, the S1100’s action is quite compact with a shorter key length, and as such, uses a double sensor and doesn’t have escapement, though there is a nice texture on the keys.
If action is your only concern, the FP10 is the clear victor here. But if action is merely a piece in a larger puzzle, there are still many people who will find a better fit with the S1100 and will enjoy playing this action.
Piano Features
When it comes to features, there are some differences to note between these two. One thing to highlight is that the PX-S1100 can operate with 6 AA batteries if you so choose, making it extremely portable.
The S1100 also comes with a free Bluetooth adapter which gives you both Bluetooth MIDI and Bluetooth. You also have the option to add a matching stand and triple pedal, and very importantly, the S1100 has ¼” discreet line outputs for gigging.
The FP10 has Bluetooth MIDI but no Audio, and while there is a matching stand available, you don’t have the option of adding a triple pedal. The FP10 does not have line outputs, so it’s not ideal as a gigging instrument as you’ll need to fiddle with the headphone jack if you need to connect to an amp.
Thanks for watching! - เพลง
![[TH] 2024 PMWC x EWC Main Tournament Day 1 | PUBG MOBILE WORLD CUP x ESPORTS WORLD CUP](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/f5Coja1zCzo/mqdefault.jpg)
Excellent review ! Thanks
You're very welcome! Thanks for tuning in! :)
I have tried the action of the PX-S3000, and the FP-30x, I like the Roland's action better, and thus bought it. Thanks for the comparison.
I always find your demo playing inspiring. My favorite piano is my old Roland FP7F which in spite of having only 2 12watt speakers, provides an excellent audio level, without any other amplification required. I always come back to this piano because it speaks to me and has a mic input with reverb.
Your FP7F produces 100 decibels of volume, according to Roland. That is very loud. I did a little calculation to estimate the sensitivity of the speakers: if each speaker has sensitivity x, then two speakers would be x+3 at 1 watt, x+6 at 2 watts, x+9 at 4 watts, x+12 at 8 watts, and about x+13 at 12 watts. If x+13=100, then x=87. So, each speaker probably has about 87 decibels of sensitivity, which is a modest number, even on the low side for a speaker. Yet, a little power is enough to produce a fairly loud sound. In most new Roland pianos, the amplifiers consume about 1-2 watts at medium volume.
This is super helpful-- I took piano lessons for a little while years ago but never got very far-- I'm thinking seriously about getting the FP-10 and picking it back up again. Thanks!
You're very welcome! We're glad you found the video helpful! It is also fantastic to hear that you're considering getting back into piano playing again. We definitely support and endorse that decision! The FP10 would be an excellent choice to restart your piano journey on. Thanks again and happy playing! :)
@@MerriamPianos Hi! For bedroom 10 sq.m. Roland's 12 watts is enough or not?
Have got my Casio last month, just enjoy watching stu playing while I practice my C major scale ~~
Thx for the comparison!
dang just your playing on the roland solidified my choice. tysm. ive been racking my brain about this.
Hi! Brent here! Thank you for tuning in! We're glad to hear that Stu's comparison was helpful in your decision making process! :)
Love the casio sound in this competion.🙂
I've owned an FP-10 for about a year and a half, and thoroughly enjoy playing it. I like to try out other keyboards whenever I'm in a music store, and feel that the FP-10's action is the most like an acoustic piano. I like the Yamaha and Kawai offerings in this general price point also, but I haven't tried the Casio. If the action is your most important concern, you can't go wrong with the Roland FP-10.
Great comparison! You can actually enable the speakers on the FP-10 while the headphone jack is in place (page 8 of reference manual - hold down volume up and volume down while you press function to toggle that setting on and off)
Thanks for the tip! 👍 I confirmed that it does work although it’s not very intuitive.
Please review the Studiologic SL88 Studio and also compare the key action with the FP-10.
I just bought the FP-10 and I want to know if I made the right choice. Because key action is what I care about most but I miss the aftertouch and the joysticks the SL88 has.
Thanks a bunch!
Thanks for the suggestion! We do not carry the Studiologic SL88 model, but we will do our best to tackle a comparison video against the FP10 for you. All the best! :)
Great comparison review video as always! Appreciate the wonderful insight into all the nuances between the pianos in this and other comparison videos. I’d like to remark (as an owner of a FP-10) that the FP-10 is indeed an excellent instrument for beginners especially those with a limited budget. Stu is spot on with his remark that the action on the FP-10 is its biggest asset. However, I would comment on a few minor drawbacks on the FP-10. 1) I don’t know if it’s just me (admitted, I’m only a beginner on piano) or the nature of the PHA4 action, but when I tried to be very soft with playing (PP pianissimo), sometime the keys wouldn’t register/play… maybe I’m being too light/too gentle? Is this also the case on acoustic pianos? Does there need to be some set threshold of pressure applied at a threshold of speed in order for sound to play… (Is that threshold different with digital vs. acoustic)? 2) Roland really should have put the 1/8” headphone jack in the front left side rather than the back. If one has the piano’s back up against the wall, it’s very inconvenient to try to fiddle with the jack every time you need to connect/disconnect the headphones and you have to do it by feel as you can’t see things. 3) Correspondingly, Roland also should have included or made available to purchase some sort of inexpensive plastic or wire hook that you can attach to the FP-10 so that you could hang the headphones underneath the piano. Otherwise, FP-10 is a great starter/beginner piano with one of the best actions for the price. That being said, the dilemma sometimes is… Is it enough of an instrument for the next few years? Should one spend a little more to have an instrument that one could grow into as one progresses in skills and ability? Do you think Roland may come out with an FP-10x soon? I look forward to more comparison review videos in the future. Happy holidays! 🎄
Thank you so much for taking the time to tune into our channel and share your thoughts and experiences with the amazing Roland FP10. :)
In terms of playing at very soft dynamics, a large part of this is of course technique. Finding the exact amount of force/pressure that is required to execute very delicate dynamics like "ppp" or "pp" and gaining consistent in doing so does take time. Many players struggle with this aspect of performance on even high-end acoustic upright and grand pianos.
As for the headphone jack placement, I completely understand your frustrations. Generally speaking, Roland places the headphone jacks on the front bottom left. With that said, the FP10's enclosure is very small and streamlined, so it is possible that it was simply not an option to position it there due to other components getting in the way.
The FP10 is a fantastic instrument to begin playing on and, as far as the action goes, you would have to spend about 4x the amount of money within the Roland line to access the next calibre of action. The only potential hinderance, particularly for those studying/playing classical music, is the lack of triple pedal support. In any case, the FP10 is a wonderful starting point and packs incredible quality and value. :)
I have had both and Roland's hammer action and supernatural sound engine definitely stand out!
It is an impressive combination of touch and tone - that is for sure! :)
Where can you buy a Roland pf10? I cannot find any online.
Can You please do the new Casio CDPS360? not cdps350
Great review. Can you use Bluetooth headphones with the casio? Also, what's your recommendation for casio features with roland action? Thank you.
Hi there! Unfortunately, Bluetooth headphones are not a viable option for any digital piano because of the latency issues. In terms of Casio features with Roland action, I would recommend checking out models like the FP60X and RD88. They are fully-loaded instruments with the wonderful touch of Roland. :)
@@MerriamPianos Have you done a comparison between those two models?
I was surprised at how good the Casio sounded - very lively and pleasant! On the other hand I very much enjoy the action of the Roland FP10. My current Roland instrument has the PHA-50 type instead and I think it’s decent. Yet, when I play the FP10 or FP30 at any music store I’m immediately drawn to the feel of the PHA-IV action. If I’m in need of an instrument again, on a budget, without spending an inordinate amount of time going back and forth deciding which is better, then Roland FP10 is a safe and easy choice for me.
@Walter_B. I was not surprised at how good the Casio sounded. Maybe I prefer the bass notes on the FP10's main sound, but otherwise it sounds flat by comparison to the PX-S1100. The PX range is well established, so the latest PX-S models sound particularly good. To be fair, the FP10 is about 20% cheaper than the PX-S1100, here in Europe.
The FP10 looks inceasingly isolated. It's a tad too expensive for true entry level, but it doesn't offer anything special apart from its good action. In fact, it is downright mean on connectivity and functionality. I don't think the low polyphony is important at this level, but Roland should upgrade the FP10 or lower the price just a little bit. Yamaha needs to lower the prices on the P-125 & P-121 too. The competition will blow them away on price and or functionality.
IMO the following portable pianos are the best value for their respective prices:-
FP-60X
PX-S1100
Alesis Prestige Artist
I had three digital pianos with PHA-4 action and I could not really accept its action completely (clicking noise that developed always after 3-4 months was disturbing for me). I am now playing on PHA50 action and I stopped thinking about it. It is so much better!
@@Zoco101 Roland seems to have stolen the speaker system from the Kawai ES8 to use it for the FP60X, which is now used in the ES520/920. It has the same specifications and look, speaker-wise. I would also put the Kawai ES520 in the same value category as the FP60X. The P-125 still sounds a lot better than the PX-S1100 in person due to its superior speaker system, so the Casio is not exactly a compete package and/or clear winner, as no chain is stronger than its weakest link. I have played the Alesis Prestige Artist, which has an interesting array of little speakers on each side. While it sounds good through its speakers, the sample is weak using quality studio headphones, and still below the P45. I think all digital pianos come with their strengths and weak points, and a selection of the "best" is more personal opinion than absolute facts.
@@Instrumental-Covers Indeed, it gets subjective, and I often point out that certain things are only my opinion, and are not necessarily accepted facts.
@@Zoco101 That's for sure. There is astonishing disagreement on the feel and response of various actions.
the casio has an excellent piano sample
but all the other samples are a bit too obvious that it is digital,
there is where the Roland is superior in my opinion, excellent synth overall
i would pick the px 1100 because i am a grand piano lover,
but if you prefer to play on the e-piano samples and all that, then you should choose the FP-10
thanks for this video, excellent review
i learned a lot on how to choose a keyboard
Thank you kindly for tuning in! We're glad you enjoyed the video!
The PXS1100's grand piano sound is quite wonderful to say the least, but it is a difficult decision between these two instruments. In terms of piano sound authenticity, I personally agree that the PXS1100 has a slight edge, but the Roland FP10 has a wonderful action in the PHA4. So, from that perspective, it is a very difficult decision to make. In either case though, most players will be thrilled with the musical experience they are provided with. :)
casio and roland should release new homepianos under 1000dollar. the casio px 870 privia and roland rp 102 are 5 years old. while kawai and yamaha released 2 or 3 years ago and maybe we will see the arius 165
which one of these do you believe would be better to use for music creation? Like which one is going to be a good «tool» to connect to the computer and, throw a music production software, make songs?
They both have that capability, but I will say that the FP10's PHA4 action is superior for use as a MIDI controller due to its triple sensor detection.
Hi! I'm in the market for a PX-S7000, which you've given a great review. Now just today, I visited an old friend who recently started playing the piano again, and she bought the FP10 after rigorous review checking. He basic argument is the FP10 has a "hammered" keyboard, which is supposedly much better than a simply weighted keyboard. At a fraction of the Casio's price, I have a hard time imagining it being the better instrument. Can you tell me how they compare?
Hi there! The FP10 is an excellent piano given its price point. Arguably, it is one of the best in its price category. While it does have a heavier touch and escapement, which the PXS7000's action does not, every player will have different tone and touch preferences. From a sound and functionality standpoint, the PXS7000 is a far more advanced instrument though. Hope this helps! :)
Well, I'm from Poland and went to your website just to see what are the most "popular" digital pianos on your store. What I've got is a blank white page with this message: "Forbidden - Visitors from your country are not permitted to browse this content."
After my ctk 3500 which i used for a year. I switched to the pxs 1100. The difference in sound was universes apart. It made me.thinking that im a much better at playing becauae of that. :P
You should certainly give yourself more credit as there definitely is something to that notion. A great driver still needs a great car to win a race. ;)
@@MerriamPianos thanks sir, i've been following your channel ever since I started hitting those electric ebony and ivory. Your play inspires a hobbyist like me to try to get better. Choosing the PXS 1100 was heavily influenced on your great comparisons. From the Philippines, I hope your channel continues to grow and educate us. :)
Absolutely addicted to your reviews !!
I'm really undecided re these two keyboards - I think I prefer the action of the casio and some of the sounds. I tried both this morning ,thinking I would come to a final decision. There were a couple of notes in the middle of the keyboard of teh casio that a strange resonance but I wasn't sure if it was just the way the sound was filtering through the slits or rebounding off the surface that was directly in front of it. The yamaha action was heavier and I thought the sounds of the piano were a bit one dimensional. Not all of the casio sounds were great but I hadthe feeling that even though the travel of the keys is shorter thatnthe yamaha's, I was somehow able to dig a lot more into the tone of the privia - this was(in my opinion) lacking in the yamaha..Any thoughts? I should also add that I really wanted tp prefer the yamaha - I always thought casio products were kind of uncool but they've obviously done their homework
Thanks for tuning in! Tone and touch preferences are very personal and subjectivity. It is great that you had a chance to play these two pianos in person though. As you've discovered, our initial bias towards a certain brand name does not necessarily mean much once you actually play an instrument and get acquainted with the musical experience it provides. Casio has upped their game in recent years and they are making fantastic products! Plus, the portability and look of the PXS line are incredible. :)
At 32:44 you say the Casio has escapement but in the data sheet it says no escapement. Is the mistake on the data sheet or did you make an error when speaking about this, thanks. I just sent back a Korg B2 after almost 12 months due to very bad key bed clicking sounds, store owner agreed and lots of this and 'dead keys' on plenty of forums. Seriously considering the Casio due to size and more silent key bed, it was night and day against the Roland. Great review by the way!
Hi Mark! Brent from Merriam Music here! Thanks for tuning in and sorry to hear about your negative experience with the B2. I believe Stu meant to say that the PXS1100 has dual sensors and does not have escapement. Thanks for pointing that out! All the best and happy playing! :)
If you plan to use the built-in speaker system of a digital piano, then you should consider it as an important part of the instrument. Bad speakers will create bad sound. This is an area where most digital pianos are weak, especially in the lower prices. The brand that stands out in this category is Yamaha. The speaker system of the P125 produces a natural balanced sound. The main problem with the PX-S1100/3100 is the speaker system. The PX-S1100 is 24.5 lbs, whereas the P125 is 26 lbs. They are both slim and lightweight. But there is a limit to how much you can shrink an object and keep everything else functional.
How close are the P-125 acoustic voices to the DGX-670? As always latency is a big issue for me since there is none with the DGX-670. As it stands now, I seem to be more of a P-125 guy. I may have played one in the music store a few years ago. While there are issues I don't like about the DGX, it still has to be one of the best buys and most versatile instrument on the market today, as long as you don't intend to move it around. But the FP-90x is a beast too, and I know its sound is not as good as what I have now. When I played it, I found that the voice was good, but not quite there in terms of feeling really satisfying.
@@JoeLinux2000 Well, the P-125 has 24 voices and the DGX 670 has over 600 voices... the P-125 has the old CFIIIS grand piano whereas the DGX 670 has the samples of the CFX. The DGX 670 has a powerful modeling engine that the P-125 doesn't have... how do they compare in reality? I would say the P-125 is still an excellent choice, and those improvements in the DGX 670 are less important when you use actual speakers. Much of the stuff that newer digital pianos get are really not that relevant in practice. As you already know, the DGX 670 has VRM (Virtual Resonance Modeling) and "Natural" voices... do they sound very different? Not at all! They sound the same really. But people want to see a bunch of complexity in the specs, which they believe it translates to amazing sound. It doesn't. I mean, if you take a pair of studio headphones and do a microscopic analysis, you will detect very subtle differences. Does it matter in actual playing? No.
The DGX 670 weight is on par with the Roland RD2000, which Stu uses to move around for his gigs. Both instruments are 48 lbs. I find it relatively easy to move it. Not really a very heavy object for me. And it fits in the front seat of my car with no problem. Of course, I would rather move the P-125, which is much lighter. I used to own the P-85 too, which was only 25 lbs.
@@Instrumental-Covers Everything else being equal, I would always chose the lightest and easiest to move. I'm 79 years old, and can't move heavy stuff as easily as when I was younger. I ended up with the DGX, because it's very inexpensive for what it does. I was rather disappointed with the FP-90x. It's big and heavy but just not quite there when it comes to authentic sound. I have yet to try one of these light weight Casios but most likely I would go for it over a 90x which is just too heavy and too expensive. I like the Kawai DG-30, but I guarantee my set-up sounds and plays just as good at half the price albeit not as attractive in almost any environment. You have a lot of experience, and you have owned many different keyboards. I find it interesting that we both ended up with the DGX. That says something for the DGX. I would take the DGX for it's action alone, compared to almost all Rolands other than the 708. I will say this: The Roland 90x sounds better than the DGX but at 2.5x's the price. Even the 60x costs more as far as I know. I think I would be more inclined to buy a Nord.
@@JoeLinux2000 I was replying on another comment about the speaker system. I have, over the years, created many homemade speaker designs from scratch, exclusively intended for digital pianos. It is difficult for me to share what this task has meant in practice: lots and lots of work with wood, cutting holes of all sizes, from 1 inch to 15 inches and everything in the middle, painting open baffle panels and boxes, wiring, amplifiers, tests and more tests... putting the speaker drivers in all sorts of positions...
But I would say this: I am not impressed with any speaker system in digital pianos out there anymore. They can be made at home. And even better. They will not look pretty, but sound better.
I will also say this: the speaker system can't be ignored. No matter how good your piano sample is, if you don't have a speaker system to make it justice, then you have nothing. Unless you plan to play with headphones.
The Roland LX 708 is basically a large box with speakers on each side. You have 10" woofers on the bottom, two small full range drivers facing down the keyboard, two more full range facing outwards at ear level, and a couple of tweeters facing at an angle and up. That can be done at home.
You get your DGX 670 with a custom-made tower speaker (which I have made) and your search for the perfect digital piano is over.
I have been primarily interested in a speaker that is portable, large, powerful, and plays back with authority backing tracks along with piano samples. And that has consumed my efforts, and I basically come to the conclusion that I can't have all those requirements in a single speaker system.
The most "portable" I currently have, and I am tired of building speakers, is a 4-foot tower with open baffle design, tweeters on both sides (player and audience) plus a subwoofer. Of course, it will laugh in the face of the DGX 670 speakers, or Kawai ES920 speakers, or Roland FP90X speakers. And this Casio PX-S1100 can't even be taken seriously, speaker-wise.
I wish there was a company that specialized in building speaker systems for digital pianos, so I wouldn't have to build anything.
The Casio piano sound is definitely more fuller , the Roland sounds a little lighter sounding , I would have to pick the Casio even with the heavy back action.
I was going to buy the Px-S1100 cause I really like how it sounds and how it looks, but now I'm having second thoughts. I am an absolute beginner and I'm not willing to become a professional classical piano player. Do you think I should then go on and buy the PX-S1100, or should I go for the Roland FP-10, although it has a heavy action, quite not suitable for an absolute beginner like myself? Note that, unfortunately, I can't try any of those two pianos where I live, so I have to rely solely on reviews and comments. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated!
Hi Nicole! Brent from Merriam Music here! Thanks for reaching out! The PXS1100 and FP10 are both excellent pianos that present some of the industry's best cost-to-value ratios. The choice between the two will always be a matter of personal preference for the player. With that said, the FP10's PHA4 action has a little heavier of a touch and also has "escapement" emulation, which gives it a more comparable feel to an acoustic grand piano for some. The good news is that, in either case, you will be going with a wonderful piano that will provide a very enjoyable musical experience! :)
What did you end up going with? I’m at the same crossroads lol. 😅
@@alexaciancia7255 I went for the PX-S1100, I'm loving it! ❤
I'm a beginner, looking forward to play classical pieces and into more of the classical side of things. Confused between the fp-10 and pxs 1000. Fp-10 is around 40-50 dollars more than the pxs-1000 in my country. Also, I'm an android user. What would you suggest? If I wanna become a classical pianist, is the action that big of a difference that I can't train on the pxs1000 at all?
I would say for serious classical playing, the presence of escapement will be very helpful. From that perspective, the FP10 is a wonderful solution given its PHA4 action. It will certainly assist with proper technique development and dynamic control. :)
I bought the Casio because it was on discount ($450). For that price it would be impossible not to be happy with it. But it also feels nice to play it. Sure, the action is not accurate compared to an acoustic, but with the slim design it fits into my 7 m2 tiny room... I swear, the few cm difference matters a lot when you have space issues... Plus...
If Hayato / cateen can play it with joy and decides to use it while on the go how bad can the action really be? Of course, a truely talented pianist can play on anything... Like Stu 😊
Congrats on your PXS1100! It is a wonderful piano and I certainly agree with your sentiment regarding its unique slim design. It is a gigging musician's dream! :)
Was expecting a update to fp10 and p125 this year but after this review i don't think there is going to be any upgrade.
I hope Casio can upgrade its own speaker system. I don't remember having played a Casio that sounds good in person using its built-in speaker system. Maybe they could upgrade their PX-360/560, and put the piano sample of the PX-S1100 in it, plus fixing those speakers firing sideways and make them fire down, and keep the tweeters that the PX-360/560 have firing up, which is how the Yamaha P-125 speaker system works. If Casio can do that and people can get a really nice sound without connecting external speakers, that would be a treat.
@@Instrumental-Covers LoL have you heard the FP-30X in person? It's awful!
@@JAnx01 Yes, I found it in a Guitar Center store next to the RD2000, the Yamaha P45, and the Casio PX-S1100. It is the same thing I had before when I owned the FP50. I never liked that PHA-4 action, which I think it replicates the feel of an old beaten up acoustic piano. The Casio PX-S1100 has a very weak speaker system, and the sample itself is very muffled, kind of like a Kawai ES920. The piano sounds distant and muddy, as if it had been covered with a blanket. If you play hard, then the sample clears up, but it produces some annoying resonances in some keys. Casio samples are still not as refined as Yamaha samples, even the Yamaha P45 still has a clearer sample, although being an older design it doesn't offer as many nuances in the tone. So, you get more expression in the PX-S1100, but at the expense of being muddy with less resolution. It will work well with some type of ambient piano style, but not if you want a proper piano sound. I have also played the Roland F701, RP501R and FP90X side by side recently. I would say that the FP90X has a better piano sample than the other three Roland pianos I mentioned.
Thank you for another fantastic review/comparison. I do have one question which I hope you can address - as someone who heavily prefers the sound of a bright piano - which instrument should I go with ? Not just among these two, but of all the similar 88 keys pianos of similar price range. From listening to videos like this, I think that the Kawhi 110 sounds like the most bright sounding piano, but it's really hard to tell through youtube videos. For instance, in this video it definitely sounded like the Casio had the "brighter" bright piano sound but i'm just not sure lol. Can you (or anyone else) give me your opinion on this ? Thanks in advance :)
If you prefer a ‘brighter’ sounding instrument then you might want to consider the Yamaha P125. The GHS action is alright but the sound is very nice.
I think the word "bright" can be somehow misleading. Some people seem to like those "New Age" piano recordings with ethereal, dark, "warm", ambient sounds, and they believe that's how acoustic pianos sound. So, they look for digital pianos that produce that sound. Although the word "bright" is typically associated with Yamaha, the newer models produce a sound that should be labeled more accurately as "natural" rather than "bright". A good example is the new Yamaha DGX 670. Its CFX piano sample is actually "darker" than the Kawai ES920, but you can can match the level of "brightness" by using the powerful built-in equalizer through its large color screen. If you prefer a clearer piano sound for mixing and cutting, the DGX 670 has also a "Pop Grand", which is a sample of a Yamaha C7, the most recorded piano in studios and the main piano of Keyscape, regarded as one of the best vst piano software. The DGX 670 also has a powerful modeling engine that allows you to modify the sample and make it darker or brighter. In addition, Yamaha offers better speaker systems than the competition in their lower range of digital pianos, because they include tweeters, which the other digital pianos typically don't have. Tweeters are important to produce more detail and crispiness in the sound, since full range speakers facing down or sideways (like those in the ES110, FP10, FP30X, PX-S1100/3100) with no tweeters are not the best choice for detailed sound, which is sometimes confused as being "bright".
@@Instrumental-Covers Thank you. Fwiw - right or wrong - I associate "bright" with a sound similar to what Elton John uses if that makes any sense.
@@d.s.6268 Oh, Elton John is a Yamaha artist. I recommend you buy the DGX 670, P515, or P125. I expect Yamaha to release the successor to the P125 soon, so maybe you want to wait. Keep in mind that piano recordings are equalized in the studio, meaning the sound can be made brighter/punchier than it really is in person. The DGX 670 is such a great instrument: solid entry level action, great sound of CFX and C7 (which you can modify to taste via numerous parameters), large color screen, high quality speaker system. It is relatively heavy at 48 lbs, but that is the same weight that the Roland RD2000 has, which is Stu's personal gigging board, so the weight is really not an issue. The Roland FP60X is 42 lbs and the Roland FP90X is 52 lbs, and nobody complains that Roland is heavy.
@@Instrumental-Covers Thank you so much for taking the time to respond :)
O som do Casio tá lindo.
I certainly agree! It is a really impressive, authentic sounding tone. :)
i love the supermarket hall music,niec review
Thanks Chris! We appreciate that immensely. Thank you for tuning in! :)
Hello Stu, I want to learn piano first before learning organ. I’m not sure whether I should buy the Casio PX-S1100 or the Roland FP10. 😢
Hi! Brent here! I would personally say that the FP10 would provide a more authentic piano playing experience given its heavier action. Thanks so much for tuning in and all the best! :)
I'm not surprised at the speaker results. Roland has always done well with modest nominal wattage. I guess it's a combination of amp component quality, speaker efficiency, and clever speaker mounting.
Downward pointing speakers tend to work well if the floor surface is hard, and I can see how the bass would benefit from this direction. Bass notes should "shake" the floor, not the musician in front of you, and not the chandeliers, but if there are no separate tweeters pointing up, downward can sound rather dull. Notably, neither of these pianos is close to a wall, so outward pointing speakers won't sound as good there to Stu, unless that ported foldback system is really efficient.
I have a similar system on my Yamaha P-255, and I must admit that it works well in my studio (though I usually incorporate my studio monitors and sub) but on stage it's a problem if other musicians (bandmates) are standing right in front of my speakers. Then these bandmates are absorbing the sound and my speakers (acting like foldback pointing the wrong way) can even annoy my bandmates. We can see why few stage pianos have built-in speakers. So for stage work I rely predominately on separate monitors.
Outward pointing speakers are great for solo cocktail piano and for duo performances. Then if you wind them up quite high, they almost cover the job on their own, as well as providind stereo monitoring. One extra 8" or 10" speaker will usually do it (mainly to help out the bass) but sometimes you need a "stereo" PA anyway for sound dispersal.
IMO the best speaker design directs most speakers straight at the pianists head (not out, not up) but one or two extra woofers pointed at the floor would be nice. I think some home pianos have this.
I was never a fan of the P255 speaker system, although it still had the benefit of having tweeters firing at the ceiling, which this Casio does not have. But it was similar to the PX-S1100 in the sense that the woofers were firing at the "audience". Yamaha no longer uses that approach, and it has better designs nowadays. The ported back of Casio is not good, in fact, it can't be made good: the back wave of a speaker is always dull, even when fully exposed. You still need tweeters.
I have designed speaker systems in an open baffle configuration for digital pianos, which is a rare design, and tweeters on both sides of the panels, aided by a subwoofer. That way, what you hear is what the audience hears. Open baffle speakers are dipoles, not monopoles. This design allows you to skip stage monitors and PA speakers, as the sound is identical to both sides.
There is another design that works well, which is similar to the Ohm Walsh speakers, where the woofer fires horizontally and the tweeters are directed to the listener. I have implemented that one as well in my homemade speaker designs.
But those are not commercial designs, maybe because it is much easier to simply put a PA facing the audience while some stage monitors directed at the player. High frequencies are critical to hear a good piano sound, so you need tweeters facing the audience and the player.
Most high end digital pianos divide the frequencies in 3 parts: lows, mids, highs. An example is the Yamaha CLP-685 or Roland LX-708. Such a speaker system can be easily replicated at home using affordable speaker drivers and several amplifiers, so you get the premium sound reproduction without the premium cost.
@@Instrumental-Covers my P-255 speakers have their limitations, but I like how they sound in my studio and in restaurants. On stage I notice how the P-255 is only a portable piano so I rely more on other speakers, both for audience and for me.
I wonder where I got GH and CFiii(s) from for the YDP-164? Your superior spec info matches my experience with that home piano. I certainly had a good impression the times I played one. Is it possible they changed the spec? Anyway, you forgot to mention Yamaha's Balanced Action, as featured on the CP-73. 😁
@@Zoco101 Now that you mention the BHS (Balanced Hammer Standard) on the CP73... there is also the NW-GH (Natural Wood Graded Hammer), as featured on the CP88.😛I have one bad news regarding the sound of your digital piano... what you hear is not what the audience hears. Sound decreases both in volume and quality very rapidly when you move away from the speakers...😟
@@Instrumental-Covers Yes, I'm aware that the P-255 speakers are mainly only useful as monitors for me (and sometimes not even that) or are you saying that the sample does not carry well into the audience no matter what speakers I use?
I think the latter is a little true of most portable DP samples. They are set up for the player, sitting in front of the keyboard, particularly the stereo aspect. It's one of the reasons why I sometimes talk about mono samples intended for use as mono samples, as opposed to stereo samples coming out as mono on a big stage. There is even a percebtible difference in stereo output recreated as mono at the mixer vs mono via the left lineout only - but it might only matter to the performer, who probably notices every nuance. Anyway, as you know, some stage pianos have one or two mono piano samples in the banks, and there is a reason for this.
Fortunately, performing being so psychological, getting the monitoring right is a large part of the battle won - well certainly at the more creative gigs, as in jazz concerts. It influences our playing so much that while the audience would typically be content with a much diminished fidelity, its enjoyment often does hang on whether the pianist is happy and on form.
@@Zoco101 I was referring to the P-255 speakers, but now that you mention the piano sample, I will share my take on that as well. Your P-255 has a beautiful piano sample that carries well into the audience, and you don't need to change it or upgrade it for any other keyboard. Yamaha has a very musical midrange. I was playing some real acoustic Yamaha and Kawai pianos (both vertical and grand pianos) side by side a few weeks ago, and Yamaha has a "happy" midrange when "activated" during playing.
Going back to speakers and mono/stereo patches: if you collapse a stereo sample into mono, you will mess up the sample. When the sample was recorded in stereo, each microphone leaked sound into the other, and there is the need of keeping the speakers and sample content separate, so the portion that is common to both microphones does not cancel each other out when they arrive out of phase in the mono merge or the speakers. This is why forcing a stereo sample into mono typically sounds so bad and thin. I have heard that Nord have a built-in algorithm to remove the out-of-phase part of the sample that collapses in the center. I don't think other pianos have that, so you would be better off using mono patches. Mono patches will alleviate the issue of having to use two speakers.
Yes, you are right, if the sound is mediocre, you will not perform well because you are aware of it.
And i know Professional Musicians who use the roland fp10 at gigs. here is a opinion of one of them:
Over the past few years, I've played various stage pianos for extended periods. There was always something bothering me or something missing. My 7th stage piano is the Roland FP-10, and I'm completely satisfied with it.
Keyboard:
As someone who has always played piano (not electric piano), the FP-10 keyboard suits me best. It has a nice weight to it. With the Yamaha P-125, the keyboard felt too light for me. Sometimes when playing white keys, I would inadvertently "move" black keys when playing between two black keys. This was distracting and disrupted my playing. The "weight" of the FP-10 keys prevents this irritation. The space between two black keys on the Roland seems wider than, for example, on Yamaha (which was definitely too narrow for me).
Sound:
For my taste, the Roland comes closest to a real piano, especially in the bass. I initially got the Yamaha P-125 for its sound but then sold it because I wasn't convinced by the bass sound on stage. Last week, we had a performance with the Roland FP-10. Fellow musicians in the audience confirmed how well the basses were "tuned," even though I hadn't specifically adjusted anything. When I explained that I had played with my new Roland FP-10, I received surprised looks. There was a Yamaha faction present ; o
Operation:
I give it only 4 stars here because I don't like the digital volume control. It works wonderfully but takes some time getting used to. Otherwise, everything is great.
Features:
I only need the piano sound on the stage piano and no other features. However, under this aspect, the connectivity options also matter to me. I would like an audio output for a 6.3mm jack. I had to get an adapter for the 3.5mm headphone jack. When working with a PA system, I like to have a consistent output signal at the piano. With Thomann SP-5600 or Yamaha P-125, the PA can be easily controlled via a separate jack with a stable signal. The Roland FP-10 does not offer this option. I like using the built-in speakers as a "monitor" for my playing. With the FP-10, I now have to either work with an external "monitor box" or consider that during the performance, when turning up the FP-10 on the PA, I need to adjust it back down. It's not as convenient. From a stage piano in this price range, you shouldn't expect features from higher classes.
Conclusion:
Playing feel and sound perception are personal preferences. So no general recommendation can be given for this. For my taste, I am spot on with the Roland FP-10. I don't want any other piano. I chose the smallest model in the Roland Stage Piano series because of its low weight of 12.3 kg, as I am often on the move with the piano.
PS - Small Extra:
For me, the mobility of the stage piano includes battery operation. Even though I was told by Thomann and Roland that the FP-10 cannot be operated on a power bank, I tried it - and it works wonderfully. I just had to get the right plug made.
Thank you kindly for sharing your experiences with the amazing Roland FP10! It is unquestionably a compelling option for gigging and stage use. The combo of excellent action and portability makes it a very attractive choice. :)
Did that FP10 have the "popular" key clicking issue after some time?
I read this everywhere and it makes me not really wqnt to buy it, because people auggest to use aome kind of lubricant or what and open up the piano, and no way I'm gonna open it, even after the warranty ends, I'm just a customer piano player not an electrician or digital piano fixer if that's a thing.
@@kaisfpI honestly want to know about that! That's what worries me about buying this keyboard :(
Hello everyone.. i am very confused between Roland fp 10, yamaha p125 and Casio pxs1100 i am just not getting that which one should i go with.. i humbly request all here to plz sugeest me your opinion..
Well i hope u will reply.. thank u
Hi! Brent from Merriam Music here! It is a matter of personal preference really as they are all very solid pianos that offer something a bit different in terms of tone and touch. The best bet would be to try out these various models at a showroom to see which one you resonate with the most. For me, the FP10 offers the best value given its excellent action, but I personally prefer the piano tone of the PXS1100 a little more. :)
@@MerriamPianos thank u for ur reply sir.. but can u plz tell me that if you have to choose one to buy for yourselves which one would u buy??..
And yes thank u man for replying..
If having both of them not in a piano stand but in a wooden desk which one is going to sound better?
I would say that the PXS1100 would have the slight edge sonically in that context due to the performance of the onboard speakers.
Also doesn't this Casio have different weights on the black keys than the white keys?
Yes, most reviews i have seen that go over this issue don't think its a big deal including the review on this channel. I have an acoustic piano and a PX-S1100 and I cannot tell the different weight wise. Its probably only something you notice if you are very experienced
@@colehealey2925 Interesting
It does, but it is not a big deal because it is Casio. If it had been Yamaha, it would have been readily pointed out in the video and the comments. See, 10 grams of difference between the white and black keys is not a big deal as long as it is Casio, and it is still considered 100% enjoyable and functional, according to the previous review of this piano. But 10 grams of difference in a Yamaha would have been unacceptable, as in that case it would have caused beginner piano students to develop the wrong finger skills and advanced piano players to break half of their fingers. 🤨
@@Instrumental-Covers i cant imagine if a yamaha with this issue came out and everyone started digging them like pianoforever did with the PXS line. Idk if i could handle it
@@Instrumental-Covers The finger breaker? 🤣
Seems you refer to Yamaha's P-515, and Stu's comment to offset the bias against Casio's weight innovation thing.
This is my subjective opinion. I tried a P-515 recently. The action was fine - very different to my GH action, and probably better for me in the longrun. I have played on uprights with much much stiffer actions, and they are truly hard to play after GH, but I view the firm P-515 action as a plus. But for everything else (save the 16-track recording) I prefer my P-255, particularly the sounds. Even the EQ works better on my P-255.
Oh, God...Can't really decide between Casio and Roland fp10/30x...The sound of Casio is more natural, but well there is those action rumors..Hard decision, mostly going to play classical music
Same here. I'm deciding between 3100 ($1449) Vs fp30x ($1128). Makes more sense to get the fp30x for my case because of the lower cost.
It is certainly a tough decision! All of these models are excellent offerings with fantastic cost-to-value ratios. For what it is worth, as a classical player, the FP30X may be a better long term investment over the FP10 (budget permitting of course) given the triple pedal compatibility. Thanks for tuning in and all the best on your piano journey! :)
Casio 🔥
The PXS1100 is certainly quite the impressive machine! :)
I really do enjoy learning about these instruments, and hearing what can be said about them from someone who knows what he's talking about. Hope you're not angry that I implied you comb your hair with a balloon. No offense intended--honest. Also surprised that the Roland is so good, since I never heard of the brand before you explained it. Anyway, great work. Keep at it.
Hi Jerry! We're happy to hear that you have been enjoying these review and demo videos! Thanks for tuning in and for your kind words. Stu is certainly not someone that is easily offended, so I don't think you have anything to worry about. Thanks again for supporting our videos and channel! All the best! :)
You've never heard of Roland? For digital pianos?
This video was very helpful! I was torn precisely between these two models. I decided to go with Casio, though I'm sure I'd be quite happy with the FP10 too. Casio's portability and piano sound won me, but that doesn't mean I think Roland sounds bad at all.
All in all, I find them to be quite similar within this price range. I gotta say the comments section confused rather than helped me, as each "side" made the other sound like a terrible and stupid choice. I really don't think you can go wrong with either, both are great. It's just a matter of finding which one suits your needs best.
Anyway, thank you for the video!
Thanks for tuning in and sharing your thoughts! These are both wonderful models with different benefits of course. The portability and aesthetic of the PXS1100 are quite attractive features. Beyond that, the piano sound is excellent as well! I know you will be very happy with what it offers. :)
33:20 "Casio pxs1100 very hard near top ! what no one tells you" (this video bags to differ)
Thanks for tuning in! :)
Why you buy a digital piano that has different weight with blackkeys??
Portability is an important consideration for many gigging musicians. To this point, the PXS1100 is a very attractive option when looking for the smallest, lightest portable digital with a weighted touch.
Thank you very much. For me the Casio is clearly the winner. The Roland action is too noisy for me.
You're very welcome! Every player will have their own preference. The Casio PXS1100 is an excellent piano and it definitely has one of the quietest actions available. :)
Has Casio fixed their keys weight issue already?
No. most players consider it to be a non issue.
@@JoeLinux2000 Even professional players I might add. This piano is awesome!
I tried this Casio in store and played it for about 30mins. I wasn't aware of the action controversy at that time but found I just didn't like the action. The black keys seemed too light and flimsy and I felt my fingers tripping up on fast runs. I've played piano since I was 8/9 and have gigged for years so I'm pretty familiar with various digital pianos. Trouble is it's personal preference. I like a heavy action I can dig into.
vst
As Stu demonstrated PHA-4 action is very noisy. It is even getting much worse after 3-4 months of intensive use and develops clicking noise. I had three digital pianos (and rented another two) with this action and no matter how much some would like it, I would never buy any piano with it again. Stu always says that PHA-4 action is like action of acoustic piano - I disagree. I have been regularly playing Yamaha C7 grand piano and its action is much lighter than PHA-4 (47g vs 64g to move C4).
Michael
Ps. Robert Estrin uses Casio PX-S3100 for practice when traveling. He is not bothered by the action of Casio, as he demonstrated playing a few advanced pieces
The PHA4 does have more mechanical key noise than many other digital pianos in its class. This is partially due to the heavier touch and more pronounced escapement. In terms of it feeling authentic, that is a matter of subjectivity and personal opinion of course. The PXS3100 (and other Casio PXS models) have a wonderful feel (even if they are on the lighter side of the touch spectrum). They are also very quiet actions in my experience.
@@MerriamPianos I think that when PHA-4 is described as “more authentic” or closer to acoustic piano action, it should be supported by more details and perhaps measurements. I have numbers to support my conclusion that PHA-4 is heavier than the action of grand piano (in this case Yamaha C7 which has light actio). I tested acoustic piano actions (including Yamaha) that were heavy but these were actions of upright pianos.
Why is everyone saying that casio sounds more natural… it sounds so digital compared to this roland
It is a matter of subjectivity of course. Every player will gravitate towards a different piano tone. :)
Am I the only person that thinks Roland has very noisy sound as I much prefer the one in Casio and Yamaha P45? Everybody hails FP-10. Is it a matter of personal preferences?
Absolutely! It will always come down to a matter of preference. The PHA4 action of the FP10 is a great action with a heavier weight, but it will have a bit more key noise than lighter actions. In this regard, the PXS1100 has a very quiet touch, which some players may prefer.
Roland has Bluetooth midi... that's amazing.
For sure! Roland is definitely very forward thinking on the technology front. :)
With the downfall of music giant Sam Ash I'm glad to see there is still a thriving music store which focuses on appreciating and teaching the art of music.
Thank you kindly! We appreciate the kind words and support! :)
First
Talking about sound, the latest modification to my DGX-670/Pianoteq Pro set up is that I finally came up with a good scheme for piping the Pianoteq voice into the DGX speakers which are slightly better than the Logitec set I have been using. I have to say the end result is excellent. I found a lltte volume control wire that I can add to the wire leading from my computer to the DGX. It's now simple to balance the two out, and easier then messing with the computer's audio control. I have to say this combination is very satisfying to play. I wish I knew if there would be latency between the Casio and Pianoteq. If that would be the case, I think the Casio would be a better choice than the DGX however, I know nothing of the Casio's action. I've tried the FP-10 action and really don't care for it at all. Almost all Roland actions other than the one in the LX-708 upright feel very sluggish to me.
Polyphony: A layered voice is going to give you 48. In most cases you won't notice a lack of polyphony.
@@JoeLinux2000 As far as I know, the Casio PX-S1100 does not have a built-in audio interface like your DGX 670. It has Bluetooth audio and MIDI, but not an actual audio interface. Your DGX 670 has actual speaker enclosures inside, in a ported design, and tweeters. The PX-S1100 has a couple of full range drivers with a molded plastic cone stiffened with mica and placed inside the piano with no box design, facing the wall. Unlike the DGX 670, with proper speaker enclosures, the PX-S1100 uses an opening in the instrument to place the speaker driver. No deep bass, no high frequency drivers, sound towards the wall... not sure if this speaker system is what you are looking for.
@@Instrumental-Covers I'm not interested in the internal speaker system, I'm just curious about the latency issue. With my Casio PX-150 there is very significant latency which means it cannot be played in tandem with Pianoteq. Actually while I have been harsh on the DGX because of the strings and other voices not sustaining with the pedal. The acoustic piano sound I have is completely awesome. It's quite similar to the Roland LX-708 I tried in the store. In my opinion, the DGX-670 has a very good action and as we all know many of the 600 + voices of the DGX are exceptionally good. The bang for the buck with DGX is unsurpassed. Any shortcoming of the acoustic piano voices is immediately over come with the addition of Pianoteq. All that said I like the light weight and slim design of the Casio. It's too bad I have no idea regarding the issue of latency.
@@JoeLinux2000 I think I know what is happening to you... I am not 100% sure, but I will share my theory with you: your Casio PX-150 does not have an audio interface like the DGX 670, so you send MIDI impulses to your laptop, which is using a generic audio interface that has high latency, therefore the MIDI impulse is decoded in Pianoteq with a latency, but not due to the Casio PX-150, but to your laptop. On the other hand, since you are piping the Pianoteq sound through the DGX 670 built-in audio interface and speaker system, which is faster, you hear no latency.
So, I wouldn't blame the Casio PX-150 for the latency issue, but your laptop built-in audio interface. In fact, the Casio PX-150 has no audio interface, all it can do is transmit MIDI impulses to the laptop. A possible solution for you is to get a dedicated external audio interface that will route the sound from Pianoteq directly to your Logitech speakers, in case you want to get rid of the DGX 670.
this is the one review which unfortunarely you let your love for the PHA 4 run away with you.The Casio is afar superior piano,theres not even any contest between these two.Basicaly the features in the sound engine alone of the Casio forbid any contest.But when one gets to the action,you keep pounding on the 2 sensor CAsio when it is a well known fact that the smart software Casio has is far superior to the 3 sensor mechanism Roland has,because it can read every movement between the sensors.This seems to have escaped you completely which is a serious fault for a reviewer of your caliber.Other than that personaly i much prefer the feel of the Casio action to the PHA 4 but this is apersonal preference ,so just completeley disagree with you on this one.
Hi - Brent from Merriam Music here. At the end of the day, everything comes down to subjectivity. Simply put: there is no right or wrong answer. Some players prefer a bright tone, while others prefer a warm tone. Similarly, some players prefer a light touch, while others prefer a heavy touch. I do agree that the PXS1100 is more feature rich compared to the FP10, but, like Stu, I heavily favour the PHA4 action's feel. But, again, it is all subjective and a matter of opinion.
Could never vibe with how Casio pianos sound. The mid range always sounds painfully digital.
@Adam_Yohan I'm not saying you're wrong, but everyone likes something different, particularly when it comes to the centre notes of a digital piano. I haven't got my hands on a recent PX model. Have you? Just going on videos, Casio seems to be advancing rapidly in sampling, but I could be wrong.
Back to Roland: I much prefer the FP30X to the FP50 I briefly owned. For me, the FP50's centre notes were nowhere, and I hear the same dip on the FP10 in this video. The new Roland FPX range is vastly improved IMO. Sadly, this leaves the FP10 trailing way behind in my estimation.
Being a Yamaha fan, I don't insist on long note decay (Roland) or cloudy lower mids (Kawai). I like crispness and clarity and plenty of fundamentals, so Yamaha (and perhaps Casio too) suit me well. Is the sound more or less "realistic"? I don't know and I don't really care. All I know is that the clarity works for me. It helps me do "shell harmonies" and "voice leading" when I play my jazz, and it helps me to cut through the band mix without swamping it.
It's even worse on Roland. Korg C1 is the best in this price range.
@@JAnx01 Well that's really a home piano isn't it? How does its sound compare to the B1 and D1? They seem to punch a little above their "weight". Korg is a bit underrated.
Casio sounds more realistic
That is because Roland believes in the supernatural. Their best piano sounds are disembodied. 😛
@@Instrumental-Covers Ah I've never owned a Roland digital piano but I'm happy there's nothing ghostly about their Z stand, it's been fantastic.
@@The-Organised-Pianist That's true, I think they sampled that Z stand.😄
@@Instrumental-Covers Lol you're in a naughty mood today!
@@Instrumental-Covers That was funny! 😅
Roland Tin sound.Casio mid high note sound like toy..😭
If you not an absolute beginner, please avoid the casio px-s1100. It's action is horrendous. The roland fp10 is a far superior digital piano in every way