performance on different piano

[mwf]

Hi,

Thinking of getting a new piano as I am an advanced player but want to try a different piano to my roland hp7 digital piano. Was unsure whether to get an upright or a yamaha clavinova clp-270 which I heard someone has (em60... or something), the keys on my roland are damaged a bit now from playing perhaps too hard or often over the past 4 years, was wondering if getting another digital piano would just do the same thing after a while.

Is it best to avoid digital pianos when you have reached an advanced playing technique?

Would anyone reccomend the clavinova CLP-270? I have played it in a shop and it sounds pretty amazing.

Please reply as I need help on this matter. Many thanks.

[dnephi]

Real pianos are much better.  They can't really be approximated, even for practicing.

[lung7793]

I agree, a real one would be better if you're very serious about becoming more advanced.  There are so many subtleties that electricity just can't create.

[e60m5]

I have a CLP-270, and I presume that you were referring to me in your post. 

Firstly, the 270 is a very good digital piano.  As a digital piano within the Yamaha line, it is exactly the same as the flagship 280 apart from its having plastic white keys - and the price difference between the 270 and the 280 hardly justifies half the keys having a wooden core.  The GH3 action is among the best you will find on a digital, and it more than stands up to heavy use - I put that thing through its paces quite often, and am speaking from experience on this front.

Secondly, while the 270 is a very good digital piano, it nevertheless remains a digital piano.  There are some things for which it is very good, but there are other things at which it is hopeless.  I differ here from the other posters in saying that a digital piano can be perfectly fine for practicing, and is in some respects better for practicing, as long as it is kept in mind that it is still a digital piano.  The main difference between a digital and an acoustic to me lies in the comparative inability of the digital piano to produce variations in tone and timbre.  These factors aside, however, a digital piano is just as good as, if not better than, an acoustic piano for practicing fingerwork and brainwork.  I would go so far as to submit that for fingerwork and brainwork, a digital piano is superior to an acoustic, if only because acoustic pianos are subject to many more variations in tone and touch than digitals, and because what should be strived after in such practice is complete evenness and perfection, which will be much more apparent on a digital than on the average acoustic.  (Note that of course considerations are different if the acoustic practice instrument is a Steinway Model D - but that is a rather ludicrous point to make.)  However, the same reasons for which digitals can be superior practice instruments to acoustics in certain kinds of passages are the same reasons for which they pale in comparison for other types of passages and for playing for enjoyment.  Trying to control the purely tonal aspects of sound (that is, generating a singing tone qua singing tone and ignoring variables such as relative timing and dynamic balance) is of course by definition impossible on a digital piano, and some colours and timbres that can be evoked from an acoustic instrument are impossible to coax out of a digital.  For me, the conclusion is that while digital pianos are wonderful for certain kinds of practicing, they are not so great when I wish simply to play for enjoyment and pleasure.

Thirdly, having discussed the relative merits of digitals and acoustics for practicing, it is worth mentioning some of the advantages of digital pianos generally.  To me, the two most relevant advantages are that you can practice them in silence with headphones, and that they will not require tuning (and for a student on a budget, this is a very important concern).  Are these important to you?

Fourthly, and finally, whether you should choose the 270 over an acoustic will depend on your consideration of the above in the context of your own particular circumstances.  Would the 270 be your only instrument to play on?  If so, it may be worth going for an acoustic, as it may prove unsatisfactory when you seek to play for pleasure and enjoyment.  Would you have access to other acoustic pianos (albeit comparatively inconvenient access)?  If so, the 270 may prove to be a wonderful acquisition, giving you a wonderful practice instrument without limiting you to its own limitations.  I think it unwise to generalise along the lines of statements like "digital pianos are worthless", as not only must each case be considered on its own circumstances, but one also runs the risk of displaying elitist ignorance.  So, do consider the 270, but consider your circumstances first and foremost to see whether it would be an appropriate acquisition.

Having said that, one thing you may want to keep in mind is that your 270 will always be yours unless you sell it - you may buy the 270 now, and if one day you upgrade to an acoustic ground, you will still have your 270 around for late night practicing.  When considering the circumstances, don't limit them to present circumstances! 

Hope this helps.  Good luck in your decision!

[mwf]

Hi,

Yes thankyou for the excellent reply from em60, I have been in a piano shop and played a real acoustic piano for about a 1000 pounds but when I compared it to the CLP-270 it was no where near as rich sounding, you would of course expect the acoustic piano to sound better, but after practicing on both for some time I found the clavinova to be much more enjoyable to play on.

The comments made on personal enjoyment, where digital would not satisfy that part compared to an acoustic dont seem to aply in this case.  My real concern is whether or not just sticking to digital piano's all my life, whilest not having an alternative practice instrument, will hinder my dreams of playing proffesionally. I think I should be ok but I am not sure really.

[richy321]

The comments made on personal enjoyment, where digital would not satisfy that part compared to an acoustic dont seem to aply in this case.  My real concern is whether or not just sticking to digital piano's all my life, whilest not having an alternative practice instrument, will hinder my dreams of playing proffesionally. I think I should be ok but I am not sure really.

First of all, it is laughable to say you are an advanced level pianist when all of your practice has been on a digital.  This is impossible.  You may be able to play all the notes at the right time on a digital and sound acceptable.  This does not mean that it will sound anything but atrocious when playing an acoustic (meaning real) piano.  The reason is that the digital can detect only a handful of different downward velocities, which determines loudness and tone color, as compared to an acoustic, which will respond differentially to an infinite number of velocities.  As a result, playing on a digital exclusively will seriously blunt your fingers' ability to control fine differences of velocity, i.e., sensitivity of touch.  Without this, you cannot call yourself an advanced player, not matter how fast you can play notes.  When playing an a good acoustic, you will be shocked at the difficulty of controlling  loudness, and you will probably not be able to play an even pianissimo at all.  Maybe that is why you didn't care for the acoustic that you tried.

I speak from sad experience, having practiced 10 years on a CLP 560.  When I finally wised up and got an acoustic, a fine Seiler, I was horrified at how intractibly LOUD it sounded, so much so that I had to use the soft pedal constantly.  It was only after 4 full years of hard work that I was able to recover much of my former sensitivity.  But you can bet I wished I had never heard of digital.

The only situation where I would concede that a digital is acceptable as the main practice instrument is if you have no intention or need to play on an acoustic, ever.  But, you say you have aspirations to play professionally, so a word to the wize . . .

Rich Y

   

[mwf]

No, my playing level is advanced, sorry, I am not the type to show off or lie either. I am intellegent enough to know whether or not my playing is decent or not. I am above grade 8 standards and mainly play diploma level music such as chopin etudes etc..

Being advanced is not about just touch sensitivity and the infinite, as you put it, tonal colours which can be evoked from the instrument, playing the piano is about the overall effect you can produce through your own inner self, emotion for example like anger or rage. Pieces like the ocean etude for example where when I play it I can let myself go on the instrument, or liszt's dreams of love.

I can understand what you are saying to a degree, but the fact is the only difference you are commenting on is the outcome of the sound an acoustic makes compared to that of a digital. I have played many times on acoustic piano's and my playing is fine on them, I can press the keys softly or loudly to a different effect whenever I want to.  Digital pianos all have touch sensitive keys and respond to the amount of pressure you use, ok they dont have the range of tonal colours as compared to an acoustic, but it means you can still play softly or loudly, and the important thing is the digital piano responds well to this, all you are waffling on about is the overall tones produced from the instrument. This does not mean you cant practice on a digital piano and not be advanced.

I have heard from a great chinese pianist that there is no compelling reason why one should purchase an acoustic (upright) over a digital piano, my piano has escapement which standard uprights dont have for example.  However if you are serious about playing proffesionally there is more of a need to have regular practice on a grand because of the greater dynamic range they possess amongst other things.

I would rather listen to someone who knows what they are talking about instead of an elitist fool such as yourself.  You obviously dont know a great deal about playing the piano do you.  Just because it took you ages to get used to playing an acoustic from a digital does not mean everyone else is as useless at adapting as you are. I can sit down and play an acoustic and play with whatever expression I choose and adapt with ease from a digital. Anyway, many uprights I have played are useless, I played one the other day that had horrible blurred bass tones and only 83 keys.

Bye, bye.

[richy321]

Go ahead and keep playing on the Roland then.  I was just trying to spare you from  serious  damage to your playing ability, just as I wish someone had warned me.  As for ignorance, I don't think I've heard anything more ignorant than your claim that your digital has escapement and that some acoustics do not.      If this is typical of your intelligence, then it explains a lot.

[mwf]

No, there is not serious damage to my playing is there, I said I have played real piano's through the years and there is not enough significant difference between the two types of piano to do 'serious damage' to someones playing, you are just talking about producing the final tone in the instrument, digital piano's cant be a serious threat to your playing otherwise they would not make the dam things surely, digital piano's can be very pricey and I dont think people would spend a lot on something which in your opinion makes them a crap piano player, because that is essentially what you are saying.

Digital piano's make good practice instruments, so when you get to the real deal such as a grand you can play both technically and musically well, all that is left to do is spend time adjusting to the new piano you are playing, its called adapting and converting your musicallity onto something new.

You seem to be lacking in spirit towards playing the piano, you think that someone cant be musical unless they play an acoustic, so what you are saying therefore is the instrument decides whether you are a good performer or not. Rubbish. I know how to play the piano well and have the music in me, I do not need an instrument to dictate how good a musician I am.

I have had enough of your negative comments now anyway.

[e60m5]

  As for ignorance, I don't think I've heard anything more ignorant than your claim that your digital has escapement and that some acoustics do not.      If this is typical of your intelligence, then it explains a lot.

This comment is entirely unnecessary even without taking its extreme irony into consideration.  It's frankly obvious from the context that mwf is referring to the simulated double escapement action offered by Roland on some of their high-end keyboards. 

I take issue with your claim that using a digital piano for the main practice instrument will cause "serious damage to your playing ability".  You claim, in effect, that 10 years of practice on a digital piano left you unable to play anything but loud when you finally switched to an acoustic, requiring 4 years to regain sensitivity and nuance in your playing.  My first objection to this experience of yours supporting your statement lies in the fact that unintelligent practice on any instrument is the true cause of "serious damage to your playing ability".  You make a blanket claim dismissing digital pianos whenever an acoustic is available, and by implication you assert that you would rather practice on a hideously kept and improperly maintained upright acoustic with no dynamic control for all intents and purposes than on a CLP270.  I submit not only that you would be a fool to pick the acoustic over the 270, but, further, that if you practice intelligently on the piece-of-sh*t upright, that, for all intents and purposes, and practicably and realistically speaking, no damage will necessarily be caused to your playing, as long as you practice intelligently.

Digital pianos replicate finite levels of key velocity, as you correctly stated.  But I would like to ask you if you have even the faintest idea of how many different levels of key velocities digital pianos today can differentiate between.  Your statement that it is but a "handful" reeks of literal ignorance of the subject at hand. 

I would make a comment about lamenting the damage that must have been done to the pianism of Chopin and Liszt as a result of their spending hours at the keyboard, but thankfully you have qualified your statement as applying only to digital pianos as the main practice instrument, so this is not necessary. 

My reason for taking issue with your posts and claims lies in my own experience with digital pianos.  For your information, my home instrument is a 2002 NY Steinway Model B.  At law school, my practice instrument is my 270, as stated.  The different instruments have their different strengths.  One truth that has come out of my practice time on the two instruments is the fact that after having practiced and played on a digital for a couple of terms, my control of dynamic and colour has not decreased but in fact increased by a noticeable degree, in my view quite substantially (though obviously not entirely) as a result of practicing on my digital.  Your claim that somebody who has been practicing on a digital piano would "probably not be able to play an even pianissimo at all" is laughable.  If that was your experience, I pity you - whether for the (un)intelligence of your practice on your digital, or for the sheer (lack of) quality of your digital piano, or indeed the sheer (lack of) quality of your Seiler, I don't care.  What matters is that this claim is laughable.

I don't mean for my posts to sound hostile.  I don't deny your experience with digital pianos; I think we both agree that it is indeed a great pity vis-à-vis your own pianism that you practiced on a digital for all these years - and we should both be thankful that you have now freed yourself from the allegedly resultant pianistic insufficiences.  But I would like to remind the OP that your experience is not the norm, and cannot be used to justify many of the claims you make about digital pianos. 

Digital pianos are often dismissed by acoustic players who cannot seem to provide a reasoned and logical justification for their doing so.  I'm not interested in abstract or theoretical whinings - if somebody wants to discuss why digital pianos "suck for practicing" (to express the common viewpoint) then do so based upon evidence with reasoned justification and explain, to me, my own experiences with a digital piano in terms of your claim - otherwise, don't bother.

The intelligent pianist knows the instrument which he is working with.  Whether practicing or playing he knows what he must do to adjust his pianism to accommodate the instrument at hand.  Further, he distinguishes not only between digital pianos and acoustic pianos.  I shall end my post on this note.

[mwf]

Thankyou e60m5 for yet another wise and useful reply, at last I am in complete agreement with someone on this forum, and I would rather take note of your comments than the other person, who I have no more interest in anyway.

Your quote:'The intelligent pianist knows the instrument which he is working with.  Whether practicing or playing he knows what he must do to adjust his pianism to accommodate the instrument at hand.  Further, he distinguishes not only between digital pianos and acoustic pianos.  I shall end my post on this note', does truly sum this up very well.

I have found it very comfortable and easy to adapt to any type of piano over the years and I dont see how you cant play an even passage of notes at any direction of loudness on a digital when compared to an acoustic, it does not make sense, the only difference is the outcome of the sound surely.

Just wanted to ask about the clp270 if it was ok with you, the sound of the instrument to me was incredibly rich to what my roland is like, and even to the acoustic upright I played in the same place. Do you agree with it being a very rich and authentic piano sample? I know it wont compare to your steinway, but do you think as an instrument it is as rich sounding as other uprights you may have played, or is it no substitute? Also would you reccommend it over many other choices of piano, whether it be an acoustic upright or another make of digital piano? (grands obviously not included).

Would be appreciative of any replies or comments on these questions e60m5, as I am interested in buying the clp-270, thankyou again.

[opuswriter]

I may run the risk of being severely burnt on the holy altar of internet flaming but here goes :-)

I practice and play on a Steinway grand in one location and to some extent on a Clavinova CLP-170 at a second location. Given the choice I would play on the Steinway everyday of the week. However, that is not the issue at hand here. To me as a pianist the main problem with digital pianos is not primarily the quality/realism of sound or the availability of nuances. As mainly a practising instrument, I could accept those limitations. The main problem is the fact that the keyboard action and touch is typically way too light, at least to my taste. I have played on several Clavinova (CLP-170/175/270) and Grantouch pianos and if Yamaha would just put in a reasonably firm action/touch the instruments would benefit greatly.

I use the Clavinova for reviewing new music, thinking out optimal fingering and interpretation, doing "brainwork" as someone mentioned as well as playing music up to a certain level. While I feel perfectly fine with playing, say a Chopin nocturne or Schubert impromptu on the digital, I would personally never attempt to play a Chopin sonata/ballade or Rachmaninov prelude/etude.

If you seek to play well on acoustic pianos, you will need to spend most time practicing and playing those. Use digitals as a complement, but beware of the digitally built-in tricks to make your performance sound better than it actually is (smoothing, reverbing and all the other functionalities that are out there). 

If you seek to play well on digital pianos, you will need to primarily play on a digital to learn its possibilities and limitations.

I await future digital models with anticipation. Yamaha - if you read this - put in firmer keyboard actions in future models and you have a repurchasing customer!

[kaiwin]

Would perform on a digital or a real piano?

A real piano.

GET A GRAND IF YOU CAN! 

*sigh* I have an upright...

[pianist0425]

Oh, how I wish..practicing on a brand new Steinway grand...whole day everyday!!hihi

[e60m5]

My apologies for a late reply; this thread must have slipped my attention.

Just wanted to ask about the clp270 if it was ok with you, the sound of the instrument to me was incredibly rich to what my roland is like, and even to the acoustic upright I played in the same place. Do you agree with it being a very rich and authentic piano sample? I know it wont compare to your steinway, but do you think as an instrument it is as rich sounding as other uprights you may have played, or is it no substitute? Also would you reccommend it over many other choices of piano, whether it be an acoustic upright or another make of digital piano? (grands obviously not included).

Would be appreciative of any replies or comments on these questions e60m5, as I am interested in buying the clp-270, thankyou again.

To me, the sound produced by the 270 is very satisfactory within its capabilities.  The piano samples are lovely indeed - you won't get an upright that can produced the sounds that the 270 reproduces!  However, as I intimated in my posts above, my satisfaction with the 270 lasts only as far as its capabilities, and when I play for enjoyment, I find it unable to deliver the real 'breaking-point' tones which I depend on for my playing.  By this, I don't mean volume; the 270 can sound very loud indeed! 

With all due respect to opuswriter, it seems like we have fairly different impressions of Clavinovas - to my hands, the physical touch of the Clavinova does not lack in solidness or weightiness.  In fact, physically speaking, I encounter more physical resistance playing the Clavinova than I do on many acoustic instruments (including my own Steinway).  However, purely physical characteristics of touch are not necessarily what is experienced by the end user, as our perceptions of overall touch are coloured by the various attributes of the tones produced by our physical exertions.  In terms of the purely physical, however, I feel the 270 to be no less solid than needed.

In relation to your question on my recommending it over acoustic uprights - I love my 270, but I will again reiterate that there simply are some things it cannot do.  The basic tone of the 270 is much richer than that of an upright piano - the samples come from a concert grand piano, so that should come as no surprise!  However, as I stated above, there are certain colours and effects I cannot achieve on my 270 which come naturally on upright pianos, so my answer to whether the tone is 'richer' on a 270 would naturally depend on the contextual definition of 'richer'.  Whether I would choose the 270 over an upright would depend on the circumstances - certainly there are circumstances, such as the present in my instant case, in which I would indeed opt for the 270. 

Best of luck in your choice!  Do let me know if you have any further questions.

[mwf]

I see what you are saying and it is good to come at the option of buying a digital piano at all angles as you have stated.

My circumstances, well I would only have the clp-270 to play on as a practice instrument period, but my main practice instrument at present and has been for years are digital piano's, because of the ease of maintaining them and the ability to turn down the volume when needed. Because I live with other people I feel perhaps a real upright may be too loud the majority of the time, I know there is a practice pedal included on uprights, but I am not sure if that still sounds at quite a loud volume.

I wish to further advance my playing overall in terms of musicality and technique and am just a tad worried a new clp-270 may not develop me musically but just technically. However I have heard that clavinova's are used for teaching purposes in top music establishments throughout the U.K such as the royal acadamy of music etc.. and that they provide the students to play at a high musical level, which to me is reassuring at least. I have read these comments on the clavinova web site by the way.

The aspects you talk about concerning colour and effects that you cant create on a digital is very true and I know what you mean because I have tried alot of uprights over the years, you cant beat the natural tonal colours of a real piano, even though as you said digitals can have better overall piano samples.

To me my only real concern therefore is does that matter enough to affect your overall musicality in the long term, I need to advance and so I am hoping by getting the clp-270, which is almost a definate now, my playing will not suffer and I can go from strength to strength. I loved the tone of the clp-270 and could happily sit and play the instrument for ages and ages, which I will.

Thanks for your excellent replies e60m5 on this subject, if you have any comments on these final words I have said above I would be grateful.

Cheers.