🎹Yamaha vs Roland | Yamaha YDP-184 vs Roland HP-702 | Which Piano is Right for You?🎹
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 4 ก.ย. 2024
- 🛒 Shop for Roland HP-702 HERE ▸geni.us/Roland...
🛒 Shop for Roland Digital Pianos HERE ▸ geni.us/Roland...
🛒 Shop for Yamaha YDP-184 HERE ▸geni.us/Yamaha...
💕 Subscribe to Merriam Pianos HERE ▸ bit.ly/Subscrib...
🔔 Click the 🔔 bell to be notified of all videos! ▸ bit.ly/Subscrib...
1:02 - Yamaha Playing Demo
1:48 - Roland Playing Demo
2:41 - Video Overview
6:02 - Roland Piano Sound Review
14:20 - Roland E-Piano Piano and other sounds
16:06 - Yamaha Piano Sound
22:42 - Yamaha Other Piano Sounds
27:49 - Speaker Comparison
34:10 - Piano Action Review
40:22 - Piano Features Review
Hello and welcome to the Merriam Pianos TH-cam channel! We’re back with another piano shootout video for you here as we compare the Yamaha YDP-184 and the Roland HP-702.
Both of these instruments are upper mid-range level home digital pianos, priced similarly, and ultimately compete very well against one another.
Background
Many consumer goods, especially household items like TVs or dishwashers, offer the shopper an absolute plethora of options at just about every price point.
When it comes to home digital pianos in and around the $3,000 range and above, the selection starts to lean out quite significantly, and you’re often left with about 2 or 3 models to choose from.
The Yamaha YDP-184 and the Roland HP-702 are two such options right above the $3,000 price point, and they’re competing for the exact same customer, which is someone seeking a nice instrument with a full tone and solid action, without venturing into the territory of the top-end part of the market.
Despite the similar price and appearance, these two pianos actually have very different musical experiences to offer. Let’s start by comparing the sound engines.
Sound
A big tone difference between Roland’s and Yamaha’s, in general, is that Roland tends to produce a more Steinway-Esque tone with a strong mid-range presence, while digital pianos of course sound like their acoustic pianos - brighter with more high frequencies.
The HP702 certainly attests to this, especially in the mid-range, but the treble also has the same shimmer you’ll hear in a NY Steinway. The timbre also happens to be very dynamic as you change your level of expression as a player.
The HP702 also has Piano Designer built-in, meaning you can go in and customize the sound to your own liking with a variety of parameters. The HP702 also happens to offer full polyphony on some piano tones by virtue of the fact that the piano sound engine is fully modelled as opposed to sampled.
Moving into other sounds, we get into the standard Roland SuperNATURAL sound engine, which is sample-based. The electric pianos sound great as do the strings/pads, and plus there’s also a wide selection of other sounds with over 300 in total. The core focus is definitely acoustic pianos, e pianos, and strings/pads.
Moving over to the 184, there’s much more of a V curve frequency-wise with more pronounced upper harmonics, as is the case with their acoustic pianos. There are also more lower-mids here as well.
There’s a good amount of tonal variation here as well, but it is less dynamic overall - it’s much easier to play quietly on the 702 than the 184.
The 184 is using a sample-based engine built off their CFX concert grand, with some additional resonance engines overtop. It also has a built-in sound editor with Yamaha’s Piano Room feature, so you can also edit quite a few parameters.
Like the 702, there’s a host of acoustic piano patches here on the 184, as well as e pianos, strings/pads and others, but the 702 definitely has a wider selection of tones.
When it comes to the speakers, the 184 has a pair of 30-watt speakers, compared to a pair of 16-watt speakers on the 702, suggesting that the 184 should blow the 702 away in terms of sheer power.
In practice, due to some clever engineering, the HP702 sounds just as powerful.
Action
The touch between these two pianos happens to also be quite different, even on paper. The HP702 has Roland’s PHA4 action with a triple sensor, escapement and textures on the keytops. The YDP183 has Yamaha’s GH3 action with a triple sensor and textures, but no escapement.
Does escapement matter? If you’re a finesse player and will be playing in the lower dynamic ranges fairly frequently, then yes - escapement does add a level of control. Other than that, there’s not really a huge difference to be felt here due to the escapement.
The PHA4 action is weighted pretty much exactly the same as a baby grand, and it’s a well-built action with good durability.
The GH3 action feels a little bit shallower, but the textures on the keys are a little bit more noticeable which is a great thing.
Other Features/Connectivity
The HP702 offers Bluetooth MIDI and Audio, while the YDP184 does not offer any Bluetooth at this point. Both companies make great apps so we would recommend checking those out.
I will never get used to how phenomenal Stu's playing is! It's a pleasure go over all these models with such fantastic playing to listen to too.
Thanks for the great content as always!
Gotta admit, I come to your channel because I’m trying to select the right digital piano for my home but I often just rewind to listen to Stu’s playing. Wish I took my piano lessons more seriously.
Thank you kindly! We appreciate your support of our channel immensely. :)
Thank you for showing this difference in dynamic response! Wow, that’s what I needed to listen when choosing my piano. Sure I will go and try but that’s really really helpful.
You're very welcome! We're glad that you found the comparison helpful. Thanks again and happy playing! :)
I chose the Yamaha YDP 184...and am thrilled I did...thank you for your help in this decision
does it have bluetooth? can't find info
no@@francespurcell-abbott6147
Well, a substantial difference when listening with the room stereo mics. For me, the Roland is a superior sound. Yamaha is nice but sounds "canned". The dynamic range of R. is also, to me, superior. Thanks for this one.
You're very welcome! We're very glad to hear that you found the review and demo of these two models helpful! :)
I like the sound of the Yamaha more :)
Hi Stu & Crew.
19:33 Bloopers 😄
The reflection in the background is awesome and adds liveliness.
The natural light that is pouring from the window makes a difference.
Vibe → just jamming for fans on YT.
27:52 😀😃😁
Amazing! Seeing is believing, wonder if it pays off...
Roland wins!
Guys you have missed the 0:00 stamp in the timeline again.
The most significant difference here is that Roland is probably a modeling piano. I got the YDP 165 recently and it is very inspirational with the CFX Grand sampling.
The Roland HP series instruments do use a modelling engine, which, of course, has a bit of a different character to it in certain regards. It ultimately comes down to a matter of personal preference. :)
Stu I think you should release an audio album of you playing your favorites : ) I always enjoy your reviews, and the beautiful, soulful and calming playing.
Hello The Mastermind, I enjoy his piano playing too. I collected together "Stu Harrison, pianist - an appreciation" list & among it are some things that I hope will be a starting point in exploring what you asked about there. But it is just a start.
Stu has actually a CD titled "Volume I", which you can buy for $15. I believe I have listened to the 10 songs in the past. It is a trio (bebop): piano, drum, bass. You can also find him playing in several TH-cam videos outside Merriam Music.
@@The-Organised-Pianist Oh that's really nice to have an appreciation list thanks, will check it out.
@@themastermind4967 You're welcome. Thanks for your nice message to let me know. Happy listening!
Great comparison - the one thing you might do differently next time is the microphone placement when you were comparing the speakers. Both mics are pointed away from the Yamaha and towards the Roland which resulted in a very tinny and hollow Yamaha sound and a much warmer, fuller Roland.
Thank you for this comparison. I have the YDP-184 for 2 yrs now. Not bad but I need to figure out how to get the optimal recorded clean sound you presented here. Always love your videos. 😊💕👏👏
The Roland is a much more mellow sounding instrument than the Yamaha, & more enjoyable from that standpoint. The Yamaha sounds tinnish.
I have the older YDP-223 from 2006-2010 and I know the concert grand sounds more authentic than the 184. I also have a choir and I think they dumped that, and my choir is surprisingly good. However, MIDI implementation is old style and complicated not very useful, so I always direct record with it. I'll be sad when it finally goes.
WOW! I was feeling pretty confident about the Yamaha as a choice, but hearing the Roland gives me pause! I'll need to see them in person. Thank you for the video!
You're very welcome! It is a tough call for sure. The Roland HP series instruments are really impressive. The HP704 is even more spectacular given its four speaker array and PHA50 action! :)
@@MerriamPianos I'll have to do my research then! Thanks again! :)
Impressive dynamic response from the HP. I knew they had improved, but to hear such a difference here was surprising.
Any chance of getting a comparison between something like the HP704 and the LX705 soon?
Roland does provide a good dynamic response in their pianos, at least in terms of "low" to "high". But their weak area is piano authenticity. The Yamaha seems to focus more on the authenticity of the sound, not so much on the dynamic response.
@@Instrumental-Covers I can believe that, though the modelling in the HP sounds superior to the Yamaha, in my estimation. Cleaner and prettier tone, and much better than the sampled Roland sound, though that doesn't exactly sound bad, either.
@@Biozene The thing about this is the real life experience: I recently played the YDP184, the Yamaha P515, the Roland F701, Roland RP501, and Roland FP90X in the same store. I have also played the RD2000 a few times. The FP90X has the piano modeling engine, and to me it sounds better than the regular SuperNatural sampling, but it doesn't sound as authentic as the P515, in person. Maybe if you listen only via these TH-cam videos, you might think the Rolands sound better, but in person they always have something fake in the sound. After all, the Yamaha CFX you hear in their digital pianos is a real instrument, recorded with microphones, whereas the piano modeling is a piano sound that doesn't exist in the real world.
@@Instrumental-Covers If we're talking live speaker experience, then I can't say, this is true, but I don't doubt what you're saying, especially cause I've heard it before in reviews. The direct signal of the Roland modelling engines (particularly Pure Acoustic) sounds great to me though.
I can definitely hear the difference that Stu talks about between modelling and sampling in these videos: how sampled pianos have a certain blending quality that modelled pianos don't achieve. But, as always, it comes down to preference and context. I like the clarity of Roland, even if it doesn't sound entirely real. Real enough.
@@Instrumental-Covers Authenticity? Sampling vs modeling are two different ways to reproduce a real piano sound.
Nice. Your playing reminds me of Stephen Melling. Think I'g go for the CLP 775.
I’ve had 2 Roland digital pianos and 1 yamaha in the same price range and always enjoyed playing the Rolands much more. That being said, my 2nd Roland just died after 7 years. 💔
I'm very sorry to hear that your Roland piano has died. :(
In either case, the Roland digital line is amazing. Their physical modelling technology is state-of-the-art and their PHA4 and PHA50 actions are some of the finest on the market!
Thats raises the question of japanese reliability v american er uhm… whatyoucallit…er woke built quality🥴🤣
@@kosiekoos9408 it raises the value of a real piano. ❤️
Thank you, super helpful. Very grateful for all the insight shared.
You're very welcome! We're glad you found it helpful! :)
Thanks Stu, I enjoyed the review. I guess you'd agree that an instrument is much more than the sum of its parts/features/sounds. So despite it being a simpler and cheaper piano, I enjoyed hearing the YDP-184 more.
This is subjective of course, and clearly they are both great instruments. But while listening to a sound is not the same as playing it, I think I have enough experience of the brands to be satisfied that I'd enjoy the YDP-184 a lot. I think it is listed as a CLP in some countries.
But Roland has been impressing me lately, particularly with the new'ish line of FP portable pianos. I'm astonished that Yamaha still has no portable offering to challenge the FP-60X head on.
I would agree with you. Walk into a real piano store and play these pianos, as I have been doing for years, and you are likely to go with Yamaha. It just sounds and feels better in person, despite the alleged better specifications from the competition.
In a way, you could say the P515 is the FP60X competition, while the FP90X is just an overpriced product that offers nothing over the P515. I have played the P515 and the FP90X side by side, and the P515 wins in action and tone for me. The FP60X is the same piano tone of the FP30X with the speakers borrowed from the Kawai ES8/ES520/ES920, which are a small couple of oval speakers. I guess Yamaha prefers to give you a more reasonable price than just racking up the prices for a 3-band equalizer and upper-firing speakers, which is what the FP60X gives you over the FP30X. By the way, the FP30X, which I have played in person, is still the same thing I had before when I owned the Roland FP50. The P515 gives you a solid wooden action on the white keys, the NWX, which provides a much better feel than the PHA-4. Wooden actions usually are pricier, so for $300 extra here in the US, you get that over the FP60X, which I think it is a fair price to pay. You also get a two-way active speaker system with 4 amplifiers, as opposed to just two full range speakers in the FP60X.
So, you could look it also at this other way: I am astonished Roland manages to sell an overpriced FP90X for about $1,000 more than a Yamaha P515, while offering nothing better. But I guess that modeling piano is kind of expensive to sell. Still, not better than a sampled CFX and Bosendorfer samples.
@@Instrumental-Covers So you had an FP50 too? It was the cheapest FP with lineouts and USB. I sent mine back because I couldn't get a piano sound I liked without lots of tweaking. Even then, I felt that the mids weren't right. I do believe that the new X models are improved in these respects. Certainly, the FP30X is, so the other two must be also. But it seems that when it comes to producing a satisfying sound (while playing the instrument) we both agree that Yamaha is usually the winner.
@@Zoco101 Exactly! I bought the FP50 without ever testing it, thanks to TH-cam videos that promised an amazing piano sound, because the claim was that Roland had the SuperNatural technology etc, etc. So, I ordered it from Sweetwater. I also purchased the Roland arranger module at the same time, the BK-7M. The FP50 had a lot of parameters, but they were pretty much useless. I just couldn't make it to sound right. The individual notes in the midrange sounded fake, but it sounded better with full chords. I have tested recently a few Roland models, but I would have to go back to form a solid opinion. The Kawai KDP75 was between the Roland and the Yamaha piano-sound wise (better than the Rolands but less grand piano-like than Yamaha). The KDP75 has no dynamic range, it is just a soft muddy sample that changes in volume. At least the Rolands do have dynamic range, but harsh and unrefined during fortissimo. What I liked about the KDP75 was the pipe organ sound. Yamaha has very ugly pipe organ sounds, at least in their lower range models, whereas Kawai gives you a nice pipe organ even in the KDP75.
@@Zoco101 yeah. All I want is a digital that already sounds good the second I play it not one I have to edit to make it sound good🎹🎶
@@MERCEDES-BENZS600GUARD_V12 I was lucky enough to find that ready-to-use dp about seven years ago, when I bought my P-255. I actually like it better than its successor, the P-515. It is certainly lighter to carry, but it also has a few extra stage piano aspects, which I value greatly. At home, I just switch it on and play.
Stu, I love your videos, your playing and knowledge is phenomenal. Keep up the great work, they are lucky to have you. Someday would,love to meet you. I bought HP704 in Syracuse NY area. Thanks for the help! Carol
Hi Carol! Brent from Merriam Music here! Thanks so much for the kind words! I know Stu appreciates them as well. Congratulations on your HP704! They're wonderful pianos and I know you will be thrilled with it. All the best and thanks again!
Roland sounds warmer. Yamaha typically has a colder buy more authentic sound. So for me the questions is what else and what other sounds can these pianos perform. The answer as to which is the better product lies there.
Ultimately, it is very hard to determine objectively what the "best" piano is at any price point. Beauty is in the ears of the beholder when it comes to instruments. The most important thing is to find a tone and touch that you resonate with and inspires you to play the piano every day! :)
Roland allows you with its modeling to change the soundboard, reduce the bold character of each key to be warmer and there is the built in EQ. You really need to try both in person to make a decesion. I think both are good, I personally prefer the Yamaha when the Roland is not tweaked to my taste
Keef Richards, your words echo what many of us have been saying on these threads. Yamaha digital pianos sound good straight out of the box. Rolands typically need tweaking, sometimes too much tweaking, but there's the benefit of personalising how your piano sounds.
Repetition and escapement are brother and sister genes !
Great comparison with a grest performance👍
Thank you so much! We appreciate that. :)
Love your videos. The Yamaha looks a bit dusty. ;-)
It probably sits in the showroom for used pianos. The Roland (brand they carry) is against the wall while the Yamaha seems to have been pulled in front of the Roland just for the comparison.
This is exactly the level that you should be looking at, IMO, if you want something to play on and be in your home for 10 or more years.
Yamaha, Roland, and Kawai (the CN series) are your three choices. And that's about it in this middle-ground. But they are a major step up from the $800-$1500 consumer models that flood the market. But, no, these are not your $4000 pianos, either.
You should place your mics straight down to give a fair comparison because you compromising the sounds to get an even review. The Mics is in towards the one piano which give more openness. 🤷♂️
The sound that you're hearing of the vast majority of these reviews/comparisons is usually a direct line out feed from the instrument. Sometimes, we do use microphones to showcase the speaker sound, but, in those cases, we use the same microphones with the same positioning.
I am surprised to hear that PHA-4 has a static pressure to move the middle C of only slightly more than 50g. I had three digital pianos with PHA-4 and they were always 62-63g on middle C. Yamaha plastic action is usually ~52g
Hey Michael - prior to the PHA-4 of current release there were several ‘versions’ of the pha4 action including pha4 concert which was into the 60 gram range. Wondering if perhaps you had one of those versions?
Touch weight data on each piano reviewed would be very welcome. It seems like a basic & important part of our playing experience. Not everyone gets to a showroom before ordering, especially during the pandemic. Perhaps it could be added to the specifications table?
@@MerriamPianos Thank you. I had FP-10, A88 mkII and FP-30X
@@The-Organised-Pianist I think there is something that cannot be adequately measured, and that is how the piano keys feel under your fingers. I would rather have the Yamaha GHS action than the Roland PHA-4 action. I have owned pianos with both actions, and more than once. In addition, I play the latest instrument from each company regularly. I still prefer the GHS action over the PHA-4. My criticism on the PHA-4 is that is feels like an old Steinway piano you find in a piano store. It is stompy, as if you were walking on a wooden floor. In addition, the NWX of the Yamaha P515, which is supposed to be super heavy, according to people's measurements, it actually feels lighter and more responsive than the PHA-50. I have played the Yamaha P515 and the Roland FP90X side by side several times. The PHA-50 is more cushioned, makes less noise, but it is sluggish and less responsive than the NWX. You can't just judge pianos by numbers. You have to go to the stores to experience them. Only then you can say you have a truly personal opinion. Reading specs and watching TH-cam videos can be more disorienting and misleading than helpful.
Yes, how it feels to play can't be adequately described in 1 number - I totally agree about that. Touch weight is indeed only 1 component of how the piano actually 'plays'. In particular, there's that sluggish / responsive feeling, as you point out, which is hugely relevant & can make it feel as if you are playing 1 with a different touch weight. Even so, for me the number is still meaningful, or at least I feel better for knowing it! During the pandemic, I (reluctantly) managed to choose a piano that suited me without actually playing it. The successful outcome was almost entirely due to the reviews I found right here, as they went into such a lot of details (verbally & with visual demos) that I badly needed to know. I'll always be very grateful for that. Of course, I did some other research too & gradually formed my own opinions.
Really enjoy your reviews, and your playing! I wish I could play like you! Quick question if you don’t mind…I have heard the speaker output on the Roland 702 is a little weak…while I’ll be playing with headphones for some of the time, the room I am looking to buy a piano for is a larger room and I’m worried about that…would really appreciate your take on that concern! Thanks!
Thank you so much for checking out the review and for your kind words! The dual speaker configuration on the HP702 is not as substantial as say the HP704 and LX models. However, it is quite robust for nonetheless. The one saving grace when it comes to speakers/amplifier power is that you can always get more power if required by using the piano in conjunction with a PA system or external amplifier.
@@MerriamPianos thanks very much for taking the time to reply!
Great comparison. They're both fine pianos. Well built, reliable pianos. You get to choose the action you like and tone.
The one thing I would not agree with is calling the CFX "bright." There's a huge difference between the "pop grand," the way Yamahas used to sound to the "CFX." There are some other grands too that have a different tone. And you can turn "brightness" up and down on the Yamaha as well as the Roland. All in all, it's not going to be near up to the level of richness and color you get on Garritan or VSL virtual pianos. So, in that way it may seem brightish.
Mallet hardness distinguish the pianos to me. Yamahas still seem to have the stronger mallet (hammer) attack over other pianos.
It's easy to tell why Yamaha is used for jazz. And it's not the "cut through" reason to me more than the way it produces harmonies and articulation of tones. The Roland's strength is a range of dynamics and timbres as well as a particular type of "sweetness" to the tone. So, it's up to personal preferences. You can play different styles on either quite well though the Yamaha seems particularly well suited for jazz.
YDP184 is the best Arius. It overlaps a bit with the more expensive Clavinova series. I like it over the CLP725. But the CLP735, though more expensive, beats the YDP184 in action, it has the Bosendorfer piano binaural plus other piano sounds, and more voices. However, the case of the piano is almost identical as well as the speakers and wattage. YDP184 is CLP635 light and doesn't have the "enhanced CFX" tone engine as the 700 CLP series.
I don't know if you have had the chance to play the YDP184 and the CLP735 in person. I have played the YDP184 and the CLP795GP in the same room, which is the top of the range of the Clavinova series. There is a difference in the piano tone. Of course, when we are talking about refinements, the improvements are slight differences, but noticeable. Although I haven't played the lower range Clavinovas yet, they have the same piano engine than the CLP795GP, as far as I know, and there is something the YDP184 doesn't have that the CLP725 has: Grand Expression Modeling (in addition to have a newly sample CFX).
I don't know if you say you prefer the YDP184 over the CLP725 after testing them in person, or you are making an inference based on specifications.
But if the CLP725 maintains (which I believe to be the case) the same tone engine that the CLP795GP has, I can tell you it sounds more refined than the YDP184. I think Yamaha is still giving their customers the edge in the CLP725 over the YDP184, at least when it comes to piano tone engine and touch.
I have the Garritan CFX full version, and no matter how much I have tried to make it sound better than the CFX built-in in the DGX-670, the DGX-670 CFX still sounds better than the Garritan, after being tweaked.
The Garritan definitely has the edge in the high registers, as it has more color and character. But overall is inferior to even the DGX-670 CFX sample. The tone is distant and weak, and the bass doesn't feel as authoritative as the DGX-670.
So, although you are right that the CFX in these pianos is not going to be to the level of color and richness than the Garritan in the upper range, they still perform notably better overall, after you have tweaked the sample and added enough reverb to compete with Garritan. What I am reporting to you is based on my personal experiences. I you just listen to TH-cam recordings, then the Garritan may sound much better. But it lacks power and presence when you actually own the software.
You are right it is wrong to call the CFX "bright". In my DGX-670, it is a rather dark sound, which that classical flavor. Of course, you have a powerful 5-band parametric equalizer, plus all sorts of parameters to tweak the sample, and you can change its character.
@@Instrumental-Covers OK, I'll say I prefer the YDP184 over the CLP625. Why? The CLP625 doesn't have Piano Room and all the ways you can "voice" the instrument. I think the CLP725 also lacks piano room. I can see where the CLP725 does have its advantages over the older sample of the CL600 series which is exactly why I'm waiting for the updated P515. I want the new sound engine vs. the current one. But the old engine isn't bad at all.
What I like better about the Garritan is the sustain. If you want the tone to "sing" and have some more of the "tinge" that's a big part of the acoustic instruments, I found it to be minimal in the CLP600 series. It would only be there a bit but then the tone would sustain some but without that tinge. There's a good amount of that tinge in the Garritan virtual piano. I also think there's more variation in timbres in Garritan. I haven't played the 700 Series, just the 600s. The actual acoustic CX or SX or CF have the acoustic "wash" and the "tinge" in the sustain so they're a different experience that the virtual instruments try to replicate but don't quite do so.
The CFX sound has some darkness to it and the treble is actually less bright than a lot of other instruments. It's that way on the acoustic instruments as well. They don't get as saturated in the tenor and upper bass tones as much as say Kawai or Bechstein or Steinway but the lower bass notes seem even deeper for that reason. The upper bass and tenor tones then seem clear and distinct and each register has a clear and distinct tone though something is consistent throughout the range. The treble and upper treble still keeps a particular characteristic vs. the bell-like treble in Steinway and other ranges have other tones yet the piano has a lot of blend and thunderous FF tuttis (where the Yamaha feels more separated and not quite as saturated and big yet more punchy). Kawais are even more saturated but at the same time more delicate so the tuttis are strong and the piano brightens up noticeably in FF form its fairly dark sound at lower volumes).
The thing is with all of the digital insturments, the reviewers tend to play them out of the box. But a lot of people customize the out of the box sound and it changes the character. So what you hear in reviews may not be what you end up using if you purchase one of these instruments.
@@benjaminsmith2287 The CLP725 does not lack Piano Room, you can access it via Smart Pianist. We were talking about the new 700 series, not the 600 series. The CLP725 is a better choice than the YDP184 in the areas I mentioned before, which are the relevant areas for a digital piano.
The Garritan does have more sustain and color than the CFX samples in Yamaha digital pianos. That is the reason I have tried my best to replace the digital piano samples with Garritan. Unfortunately, as you will discover if you have the actual software (as I do), what you hear on TH-cam is a bit misleading in a few areas:
1) Presence: The Yamaha digital pianos have presence, right here. Not 10 feet away from the piano, which is Garritan style
2) Power: the Garritan sounds weak. The bass is gargled. The midrange is nowhere near close to the projection power in the digital pianos.
3) Clarity: even with the full version and full samples, the Garritan doesn't sound as clean as Yamaha digital pianos. There is a clarity in Yamaha digital pianos that Garritan can't touch
4) You can't add sustain to the digital pianos (I have tried to add it using several functions like Release and Decay, but it doesn't work). However, you can add reverb and you get somehow close to the Garritan sound in terms of expansion and envelope.
I wish Yamaha digital pianos had the sustain and color of Garritan. But all in all, I still find Yamaha digital pianos win over Garritan in real playing situations. Unless you just want to create an album with a distantly mic'ed piano, in the style of classical music, where you are not close to the piano.
Hi Stu + Merriam Pianos, first off great reviews! My question is in regards to Nord Pianos, how come you don't review these? It would really be nice to get your take on the new Nord Piano 5. Maybe you don't sell them in your store, however, it would make a great and interesting digital piano review. Thanks!
I would also love to see some more reviews!
is there a reason why you never demo strings sounds whenever there's a Roland piano in the comparison?
Hi there! There definitely isn't any type of intention to avoid showcasing the string sounds on Roland pianos. With that said, the priority of the reviews and comparisons is the piano sounds (usually, the primary piano sound). Thanks for tuning in! :)
I believe it is the Roland HP-706 that really sounds very authentic which is probably double in price.
I like the directly in front of your face controls of Rolands.
My suspicion is that Pianoteq as a deal with Roland to provide the modeling engine to Roland which is then branded as Roland's own. Of course Roland has been dealing in sound synthesis for a very long time and is a giant in the industry. The CFX in the Yamaha you are playing sounds much better than the one in the DGX in my opinion.
Internet Privacy Advocate, could you possibly answer my question about amplifier rated power of Yamaha and Roland Pianos? I could not find explanation anywhere on the Internet. Yamaha digital pianos always have higher rated power in a given class or price range. for instance, Roland LX706 has (25 + 7 + 5) W x 2, Yamaha CLP775 (42 + 50 + 50) W x 2 and Kawai CA79 50W x 2. It is the same in any price range. What is about this power difference? Is it all RMS? How is it rated or measured? Thank you, Michael
@@mfurman You have to ask Instrumental Covers. I really don't know anything about the power of internal piano amplifiers as it relates to the sound. All I know is the DGX has plently of power for home use, and probably schools and small to moderate sized churches. I've mostly been working up the timbrel quality by combining Pianoteq with it and then using the speaker system I have which only cost around $75.00. My feeling is the audio system with in the DGX is pretty good over all. You could spend a lot of money and not improve the sound much. Pianoteq adds complexity to the Yamaha tone, but in turn the Yamaha tone provides support to the Pianoteq sound as well. Each improves the other.
@@JoeLinux2000 It is the same tone engine, but the YDP184 might be tweaked by Yamaha in a way that makes it sound better than the default DGX-670. Let me give you some specific numbers to adjust your DGX-670 to sound closer to the YDP184 as you hear it from Stu's recordings:
1) Go to the Master EQ and set the 2nd EQ knob to 250 Hz (from default 500 Hz), then reduce 3 dB (-3 dB)
2) In Master EQ, also adjust the midrange: set 1.0 kHz to +4 dB (from default 0 dB)
3) In the last EQ knob: adjust the 8 kHz knob to +3 dB
4) Go to the CFX voice and choose "Voice Set" on the bottom, then adjust "Touch Sense" to 65. Do it to both Depth and Offset Touch Sense. If you want, you can go to 66.
That should take you closer to what you hear in this recording.
Don't assume your CFX sound is the best you get from the default setting.
This dude play mad good
Stu is a monster player! No doubts about that! :)
Anyone have any thoughts on the Yamaha 165 vs Roland 701?
Hi! Brent from Merriam Music here! Thanks for your question! At the end of the day, the preference of one piano's tone or touch over another is highly personal and subjective. Each player will have their own idea of what makes the ideal playing experience. With that said, I am personally a massive fan of the Roland RP701. In addition to a wonderful and versatile piano sound via the SuperNATURAL tone engine, I think the PHA4 is arguably the nicest playing action at its price point. The actions weighting and escapement simulation makes it quite rewarding to play and provides a great sense of connectivity to the instrument for the player. :)
@@MerriamPianos thanks so much the feedback. I just had a chance to demo both and I can get them for $850 USD here in Japan right now. Yodaboshi also gave me a deal on the Yamaha and I wouldn't have to wait a month+ like I would on the Roland. So went with Yamaha. Crazy strong USD right now and they are like $600 cheaper in Japan anyway.
So I bought this for my daughter and have some thoughts for anyone else that comes across this.
For me Roland just makes more sense, way more features, bluetooth, aux in, but to me the Yamaha keys felt a little more realistic, less plasticy, which bothered me a little on the Roland, and I felt they Roland had more left and right wiggle but being able to adjust the tension on a scale of 1-10 was great and it helped to turn it up. So many amazing settings on the Roland.
However Yamaha sound had a little more presents right out of the gate but I could get the Roland just maybe as good with tweaking. But still felt the Yamaha sounded nicer at low volumes, just overall more full at any volume. On the Roland samples on their 1. Preset sound you could also here some clear almost changes in tone between notes like the sample reset at that octave which always bugs me about sampled instruments. 702 from what I understand wouldn't have this problem as the sound is fully synthetic?
Also my daughter was a little distracted by all the sounds on the Roland, and I just want her to have as simple situation without distractions to learn. Plus I don't want to hear police sirens helicopters, trains and gunshots all day for when my other kid gets a hold of it.
If it was for me I would do a Roland, I would actually go up a few models for better keys since prices are so cheap in Japan (704 had wooden keys) but for my daughter the Yamaha made more sense for that great out of the box sound and less distractions after playing and sitting with both for like 2 hours. :) And the keys felt higher quality and box design was a little more classy on the slim model.
The thing is, with that Aux in on the Roland, I could set it up with NI and Ableton with just a laptop and theoretically be able to play anything out of it plus use it as a room speaker.
But the wife also liked the Yamaha right away and the daughter liked it as she wasn't overwhelmed by the 300 samples.
In conclusion, after watching my 7 year old daughter's behavior, who has been taking lessons for over a year, Yamaha is probably better for kids learning. As it's simpler overall and defaults on all the sounds and actions seemed a little nicer and it sounded so close to my brothers Grand.
Also on the slim models the Roland top does not close even or level so you couldn't really use it as a mini desk.
Thanks for all the great vids!
Do you have a favorite digital piano or hybrid digital? The tech sure has come a long way.
Stu purchased a Kawai Novus NV5 hybrid piano a couple of years back. The NV5S has come out since, but he said he's still content with his NV5. I know that he sold his German upright piano to make space and cash for the purchase. Supposedly, practice time on his main instrument was too short without headphones. It's very significant to customers that he did this.
The Kawai NV5S and NV10S instruments are amazing alternatives to acoustic uprights and grands when space and noise constraints are a factor. I would definitely encourage anyone to investigate the incredible Novus line if they fall into that boat. :)
I purchased the Roland HP702. Within one week it had issues with some of the black keys making a loud knocking noise when released. The piano store where purchased swapped it out for another HP702 and am experiencing the exact same loud knocking noise on several black keys on the first day. I'm waiting to hear what they plan to do next. They have not had anyone have an issue as I have. Is this a common issue experienced with the HP702 action?
That is very strange to hear. For our floor models and customer purchases, we have not had any issues with the HP702 or other PHA4 action models. We have always found the PHA4 action to be extremely reliable and durable. You may have just experienced a little bad luck. In either case, I hope things get resolved for you and you get a good HP702 specimen, as its an incredible model. :)
I'm told they have not experienced this issue with any customers before. They are going to work with a Roland Rep to resolve this.
Can you please do Yamaha e373 and casio ctx 800?🥺
They don't review keyboards. That's what Jeremy See does, but not this channel. I owned the Yamaha PSR EW410, which is the 76-key version of the PSR E373. I have also played the Casio CTX300 and CTX5000, which are the bigger brothers of the CTX800. Basically, Yamaha piano is more authentic, but the CTX series sounds pretty good. The Yamaha styles are more authentic too. Yamaha gives you a USB audio interface, so you can record directly to the computer. You can also use the "Rec'n Share" app to record your video using a cell phone and record high quality audio via the USB cable at the same time, so your videos sound good. Avoid the CTX800 and go for the CTX3000 if you are going to use the styles: the CTX800 has 2 variations and the CTX3000 has 4 variations. Does it matter? Big time, especially with Casio arrangers. Casio lower model arrangers like CTX800/CT-S410, etc., only have two variations, and Casio is bad at programming their styles, particularly transitions. They go from too simple to way too busy, with nothing normal in the middle. Yamaha gives you smooth transitions, even with only 2 styles. At least the CTX3000/5000 gives you 4 variations, so you get much better transitions.
The CTX5000 has pretty powerful speakers considering the size. They sound pretty good for a cheap arranger keyboard. But Yamaha will make you sound more professional out of the box in the $200 range. By the way, if you get the Yamaha PSR E473, which I have also played recently, you get to turn on and off each individual track, which can be very useful, plus you get to create your own accompaniment styles. If you don't care about the built-in accompaniments and only want to record tracks using a DAW, and simply plan to use the built-in sounds, it really doesn't matter much whether you choose Yamaha or Casio, they both have pretty good sounds. And for that, I would suggest the Casio CT-S410: sounds really good, nice organ sounds, nice piano, nice key touch (synth action), and very slim. Pretty good deal. Just keep in mind that Casio doesn't offer USB audio interface, like Yamaha, so you will need to buy a separate audio interface, which can be expensive.
@@Instrumental-Covers Wow thankyou soooooooooo much🥺,i doesn't want to break the bank so i was thinking about budget friendly like under 200$,I understood that both ctx 800 and psr e373 excelles in some way and i doesn't want to regret after buying a wrong one so I've been searching for a long time about which should i buy,I was asking this to every single keyboards I see on TH-cam,still i can't choose one,btw once again thankyou for your review
@@Instrumental-Covers and also can you please say that what's the use of USB to device port on ctx 800 , what does it transmit and receive?
@@nikhilna3294 My pleasure. If you don't want to go over $200, then the Yamaha is a better choice. It has a more realistic piano sound, better transitions on the arranger accompaniments (styles) between the 2 variations, USB audio interface built-in (that by itself is usually very expensive). For live playing, the Yamaha will be more professional than the CTX800. And you can connect it to a computer and using a DAW (there are a few free), you can create pretty high quality arrangements. For example, you can lay the melody, the drums, bass, strings, pads, etc., on different tracks. It is very fun to do. If you need any ideas, let me know. I will be happy to help.
@@Instrumental-Covers Yeah thanks for helping☺
rockin 😃😃👌👌👌👌👍
:)
Where are they manufacture? Roland in Malaysia? Yamaha where?
Hey Oscar - yes Roland made in Malaysia, Yamaha's made in Indonesia.
Both Yamaha and Kawai digital pianos are made in Indonesia. That includes the Kawai digital hybrid models, such as the NV10. They have in a factory in Karawan, Indonesia (you can check their FAQ's at Kawai's website).
@@Instrumental-Covers At least one of Yamaha's low end digital pianos are made in China. Also, the Yamaha Modx8 is made in china. Yam Montages are made in Japan. YC models are made in Indonesia. Per my email to Yamaha. Also, Kawai - I'm waiting to see a video that shows the place of manufacture. Because the channels ive seen are trying to sell piano's, they may think its not in their best interest to disclose if somethign is made in china. if its made in Japan they make a deal of it sometimes, but, if not, they won't mention where its made at all. 29/30 times they won't say where its made which is a shame. because each of us has out way of feeling inspired to want to sit down and play an instrument for hours on end.
@@oscarsheen3045 Kawai has one factory in China as well. My understanding is that they assemble digital pianos with traditional sounds and accompaniment styles (for example, the KCP series). I think "made in China" is used as a way to say "lower quality", which may or may not be the case. It is a sort of stereotype. For example, the high-end speaker company Martin Logan manufactures their conventional loudspeakers in China. Just because something is manufactured in Indonesia or China does not mean it is automatically low quality. TH-cam piano dealers will also do a puff piece/hatched job on products, depending on which side they stand. Often times, it will be done very discreetly, so if you are not aware of who they are, you will believe their entire presentation.
Please aim the microphones at each keyboard when you do the internal speaker comparison. The comparison is meaningless since both mics are aimed at the Roland.
I believe the microphones are being used in omnidirectional mode, to be able to capture the onboard speakers of both pianos.
Roland HP series is not fully modeled, it uses SuperNatural engine which is samples with interpolation between layers and randomization at sample tails to avoid loops.
The acoustic piano tones on it are modeled, which is what gives it the limitless polyphony. This is a recent upgrade, as you’re correct that prior models in the HP series used the Supernatural Sample based engine. Cheers! Stu
@@MerriamPianos HP700 uses SuperNatural, it's specified on the Roland's website, I can't put a link here but you can check it yourself.
Unlimited polyphony has nothing to do with modeling/sampling, it depends solely on CPU's processing power.
Hey ekklesiast - Roland lists the Soundsource as "Supernatural Piano Modelling" for the HP702 and HP704. This is different than the "Pure Acoustic" engine, and also different than the standard SuperNatural engine found on the FP30x, FP60x, F701, RP701, etc ... but Roland still considers this a full modelling engine. It can be seen here www.roland.com/global/products/hp-702/specifications/, and the same listed on the FP90 www.roland.com/global/products/fp-90/specifications/. The polyphony on a modelling engine would definitely be limited by CPU, but sample-based synthesis would additionally require an appropriate RAM capacity and data bandwidth transfer from the ROM/HD. And for whatever reason, regardless of how hefty the machines equipped with them were, sample-based VST's and pianos ALWAYS list a max polyphony, whereas limitless has only ever been used to describe modelled. Thanks again for the comments! -Stu
@@MerriamPianos I'm not sure which part of the sound is referred to as being modeled here, Roland is very vague in its descriptions, but its SuperNatural has always been sample based.
"Pure Acoustic Piano modeling" is used in LX series and in FP-90x, which are the ones that are fully modeled according to Roland.
And you can hear the same familiar samples in HP700 as in previous SuperNatural pianos. I own HP307 (the first SuperNatural), and I played FP30, I can recognize these samples by ear.
If you have information on how "SuperNatural modelling" is different from just "SuperNatural", I would love to know.
My head is hurting from the above. Roland is very slimy when it comes to transparency in many of their products (I've been burned by them in the past which is why I tend to default to other brands these days if possible.)
If you have a rep for them Merriam Pianos, I think this back and forth should be sent to them so that they can take some responsibility and make a clear statement somewhere of exactly what they are putting into their products.
I myself have not been able to get a better understanding reading the documentation myself.
V/r,
M.G.S.
You looked as if you were enjoying the Roland more.
That's expected. He works for Merriam Music, which is not a Yamaha dealer. They give you an Amazon link for the Yamaha (they get commission on the Amazon sales, though), but they give you the actual company website for the Roland purchase. Merriam Music sells Kawai, Roland, and Casio, not Yamaha. They only have a few Yamaha models they probably purchase to compare with the products they sell, and it is pretty obvious they are trying to present the Kawai/Roland/Casio in the best possible light. You will never see here the best from Yamaha, which will always be depicted as somehow below the other brands. It is expected from a dealer.
Hey James! Yes, I'm a pretty open fan of the Roland product - I've personally used it for professional use for close to 20 years to great satisfaction, having previously used Yamaha. Having said that, I enjoyed several aspects of this YDP184, specifically the tonal variety in the upper range of the core piano tone, and some of the e-piano pads and organ.
Regarding @instrumental cover's response to your comment.... (himself a pretty die-hard Yamaha owner)
@instrumental covers and I have a bit of a long-running debate/discussion on whether it's possible for a retailer can provide objective commentary. As he points out in various threads on the channel, I'm a direct Roland dealer (selling to Ontario Canada) but also benefit from any Yamaha sales through Amazon sales/commissions (throughout the English speaking world). He considers this difference in our relationship with the Roland brand and the Yamaha brand to be the motivation for many of my opinions when it comes to comparisons - though dealers of both products often contend with incentives and shifting margins from suppliers that would potentially exert the same influences on a retailer's commentary. And as I've pointed out to try and counter this argument, a small commission to the entire world is a far greater potential than direct sales of Roland to one province in Canada - were this what was driving our channel's agenda.
I take quite seriously the dialogue on the channel, gladly make room for constructive dissent (after dozens of these discussions I still welcome Instrumental Cover's comments, expertise, and musical passion) and focus my thoughts and opinions around my genuine observation and preference. Beyond that, I trust viewers like yourself to decide whether TH-cam - or this channel specifically - is a good place to seek out info...and I hope you enjoy the material and derive some helpful perspective from it. Cheers, Stu.
@@MerriamPianos Hello Stu, I appreciate you make room for constructive dissent. If the difference in relationship with Roland and Yamaha is not the ultimate motivation for your opinions, then I guess I could say you are more partial to Roland, Kawai and Casio than Yamaha, based on the videos I have seen in this channel. I don't think I am the only one who finds comparing a Roland HP with a Yamaha Arius unfair, just because they have similar street prices. You probably know that the Yamaha CLP 735 is the instrument that Yamaha intends, specs-wise, for a Roland HP702. Why would you not buy the CLP 735 instead of the YDP 184 for the comparison? As somebody pointed out in another thread, the CLP 735 has a similar price to the HP702. If you had used a CLP 735 in your comparison, and end up preferring the HP702, then that's fair, as it would be your choice. But if you don't like Yamaha very much, and you use a lower-spec model in your video just because they sell at similar prices in Canada, when the CLP 735 also sells for a comparable price, then that's not very fair at all to me. I still prefer the sound of the YDP 184 in this video, though. If you want to complain that the YDP 184 is too expensive, that's fine. But still choose the fair comparison for Yamaha. I am not as pretty die-hard Yamaha owner as I may look. In fact, I have owned 2 Roland DP's, 1 Roland arranger, 1 Kawai stage piano, 1 Korg workstation and 1 Korg professional arranger, a couple of Casio, a few Yamahas... pretty much all over the place. I have noticed your channel take a hard beating at Yamaha not only from you, but from your audience, but then they glorify products that are not even better, so I also comment on those products. I hope at least some of my feedback is appreciated.
@@Instrumental-Covers those are fair comments - and though I stand by my original assessment to compare them based on a comparable price point (I don’t put quite the same weight on the concept of lines being compared…and to your point about NX vs LX, many aren’t intended for direct comparison) however it’s clear that a CLP735 / HP702 would be even more relevant a video than this one. And yes, also fair to say that generally Kawai and Roland’s of a few various price points - most notably the lower 1/3 of the market, I favor over Yamahas. And yes, many of your comments are most appreciated by both myself and the rest of the channel.
Separate question: I’d really like to start introducing more musically-oriented piano videos on the channel…any suggestions or topics you’d like to see covered? Improv? Voicing? Practice stuff? Lmk, and thanks!
@@MerriamPianos Thank you for the feedback, Stu. I think it is great that you will also have new topics in the channel, in addition to acoustic and digital pianos. Since your work is primarily in jazz, I would like to see a series of videos on the topic, if that's possible. I have always wanted to learn jazz chords, they make the music so stylish and sophisticated. But anything you come up with will be very enjoyable for sure. I look forward to your new series!