Digital better to learn on than Acoustic?

[knew bee]

Hi All

I previously thought that I'd be content learning to play piano on a Yamaha PSR275 keyboard before shelling out on a proper piano, however after playing on a decent acoustic at my teacher's house, I realise what an idiotic notion that was!

The idea was to learn about pianos whilst learning to play them so that when the time came I'd have a better idea of which type of piano to buy.

I'm now about to shell out £1300 on a Yamaha Clavinova CLP240 and would like to know what the general opinion is of these?

I know it'll never sound as good as an £80,000 concert grand or anything but I actually think the pros outweigh the cons for the beginner?

I can play with headphones, colour the sound differently with some of the effects, use MIDI, play with backing tracks etc.

Why are they so frowned upon by most pianists?

One of the main arguments against seems to be touch, but I didn't think any two pianos would feel the same?

Again, any feedback much appreciated!

[leucippus]

I personally believe that they hype about digital keyboards not being good to learn on is a bunch crap.  I learned on a Yamaha PSR-275 and I had absolutely no problem at all moving on to a real acoustical piano.   However, now that I've been playing on a real piano I can't stand the springy keys of the digital keyboard.  But, to me, that seems like a one-way problem going in the opposite direction that anyone normally goes.  I mean, not too many people start off on an acoustical piano and they try to move on to a PSR-275.  I think going in that direction would cause major problems.

I also believe without hesitation that it is much better to start out on an inexpensive digital keyboard than not to start at all and wait for some future time for an acoustical piano.  All a person does there is waste valuable practice time when they are anxious to practice.

Moreover, I still have my Yamaha keyboard, and while I seldom play it anymore because I do prefer the acoustical now, I'm glad that I kept it.  I just ordered some computer software to help me learn to sight-read by hooking up the MIDI keyboard to the computer.  Although I haven't yet started these computer-oriented sight-reading lessons I believe that they will be valuable in helping me to learn sight-reading.

Having been deeply involved with computers my entire life I am well aware of the usefulness of interactive learning systems.  An acoustical piano simply can't be connected up to a computer for this purpose and so from that point of view the MIDI keyboard is a windfall.

I think for the most part, people who put down digital keyboard are just being perfectionists, (or outright snobs).  I think almost any serious pianist would rather play on a real acoustical piano.  I also believe that most people would rather listen to a real acoustical piano as well.  But that's no reason to belittle the value of inexpensive digital keyboards as learning tools.

I ran into the same thing with the violin.  My first violin was an $80 wonder that I bought on the Internet.  Everyone in the violin community was telling me to get a "real" violin and that my "toy" was going to be nothing but headaches.  Well, a year later I'm still playing on the $80 violin and some people have told me that it sounds better than their violins which they paid from $500 to $1000 for.   So I think there's something to be said for the individual musician. 

If you are serious about learning to play the piano it really doesn’t' matter a whole lot what you start out on.  What's much more important is that you develop good practice techniques.  I can't really see any advantage to starting out on an acoustical piano.  Most people who are starting out can't play well enough that it would matter anyway.

[debussy symbolism]

Greetings.

There is nothing wrong with starting practicing on a digital piano, but in the long run an acoustic is necessary. The sound of a digital piano is always round, no matter you technique, but if you try to play on an acoustic you will find that your sound drowns. This is very important when it comes to actually playing the music. I used to practice on a digital before I moved on to an acoustic Baldwin upright, and can say that practicing on a digital now is impossible. The keys feel very very light and my fingers dont't have to work to get a good sound. On an acoustic I search for a good sound that will help me to know if I am making proper finger motions and if I am relaxed or not. My acoustic has a very tough touch, which I like because my fingers stabilize faster. On a digital you will have to spend alot more time because of the light keys. For these reasons and reasons I haven't mentioned I prefer love to practice and play on an acoustic.

[violinist]

Digital better than acoustic to learn on?

As you can read in the above posts, there is no easy and quick answer.

There are pros and cons to both for learning.

I don't think there's anything wrong with Digital pianos to learn on - for beginners.

But as you progress, an acoustic/grand piano would be worthy of obtaining due to the different tonal qualities and pedaling variations which don't exist on digital pianos that I've played on.


There are many differences as also listed in the above posts between the digital and acoustic pianos, but to a beginner, these differences aren't noticeable.  To learn notes, a digital is a fine instrument, plus you can put the headphones on so you aren't killing off the rest of the family while learning those notes.

I love my steinway grand, but I still play on my digital when it's 3 am in the morning - with headphones on.  I still use the digital to learn new lines of music.  But for me to perfect my phrasing, pedaling, musical ideas (after I've learned the notes) - I have to do this on a grand piano.

I still love my digital piano, as it is the piano I had when I couldn't afford a real piano.\

So.... my final advice is:

Go and get a decent digital piano (as a beginner), one that you can grow into with good touch and look for half pedaling ability on these pianos - then you can keep it as long as it works, even after you get your acoustic.  That way, you can still utilize both pianos, and you won't feel like you wasted your money on Digital.

As for those digital effects to help learn sightreading and notations - I never had the opportunity to try these programs, and thus I can't comment.  I think it's just as easy to learn without these digital features if you have a teacher - but if you don't, digital might win out over acoustic for these digital learning features.

In summary,

I was happy with my digital (Yamaha p200) - it was better than no piano, and I felt it was better than a crappy upright.  I still have it and it still helps with my piano practice with my grand acoustic piano.

[jgarnao]

I used to own an upright acoustic piano which kept getting out of tune.  I sold it and bought a Clavinova CLP 240 which I have had for 10 months now.  There is definitely a big difference in touch.  Real pianos have a tougher touch which offers more resistance to your fingers.  Needless to say, this would greatly improve your technique and touch. The Clavinova has a simulated piano action, but why is it that I can't play fast scales like I used to?  I just can't get my scales to be even like I used to with my acoustic no matter how I try to modify my technique to adapt to it.  It feels like my fingers are flying over the keyboard without any resistance from underneath.

Having said that, I would like to say that I have the following advantages with my Clavinova:

1)  It's maintenance-free.

2)  Being able to practice using headphones and so not drive my wife and kids crazy repeating phrases over and over again.

and

3) Being able to hook up the keyboard  to a software piano (in my case Ivory, Akoustik Piano, Sampletekk, etc.) so that I could practice and record with these.  So it's like having many different pianos.

If I can afford it later, I'd like to buy an acoustic again.  If you notice, the previous poster mentioned that he has both an acoustic and a digital.  Nothing realy beats a real piano, but for now I'm in piano heaven with my Clavinova and software pianos.

[debussy symbolism]

The biggest concern in my opinion is the touch. Before I practiced on an acoustic, my teacher's piano seemed to have really heave keyes, and it was hard to adapt to it when I came to the lesson. However, when I started to practice on an acoustic piano, the touch on it was very tough, and when confronting my teacher's piano, the keyes seemed weightless.

[violinist]

I agree with Debussy Symbolism's statements about the weight of the keys.

And they are not adjustible on the digital - the sensitivity is adjustible on some, but that doesn't mean that the weight is adjustible.

[debussy symbolism]

A digital piano will always have a round sound, so your fingers will not get used to searching for one. On playing on an accoustic, one will find the sound choppy or otherwise harsh, perfectly unsuitable for performance.

[benjaminb]

dont have the time to read all posts allready made about this.

I'm an owner of a digital piano, in fact one  I really liked when I bought it, a yamaha P90.
I'm taking courses again and am playing on a Blüther, after my 4th lesson I feel I really NEED to buy an acoustic cause i'm not liking the sound or touch of the digital piano anymore...

ie : when I hit 3 keys, C chord, in the low range of my digital, it sounds a bit heavy but its doable to do while playing with the right hand at same time. When I do this with a real piano it sounds to heavy... I'm learning wrong playing techniques with the digital...

The keys are not heavy enough for me now versus an acoustic. Pieces I play easily on the digital piano, each time I play an acoustic again my fingers seem to have difficulty with the heavier keys :p

Of course the digital is a perfect instrument when * learning to play, i'm playing 10 years now and am an average piano player, playing jazz blues and boogie woogie...

If you're learning to play the piano buy a digital, if you're playing couple of years allready stick with an acoustic ! You won't regret it

Hope this was helpfull

[oceansoul]

Greetings.
I am going to buy a digital or an acoustic piano soon, but I've not decided. My mom doesn't want me to buy a "keyboard" as she says. "Some keyboard with a stand. For that you have that little toy there!", she says. lol
I've seen alot of digital pianos on the internet and I think a Clavinova would do fine, but my mom says that one day I am going to need a real piano, and if we are going to buy something, we should buy something really good.
I'm not yet a good player. I don't have a teacher yet.
Do you think it's better to spend €1800 on a Clavinova than buying a new acoustic piano €4000? For a student starting to progress, should I start with the real thing? In a year or two I would have to buy an acoustic, don't you think? Would it be better to make the investment all at a time?

Help.

Thanks in advance,
       OceanSoul.

[ccnokes]

First off what exactly is half pedaling?

Because I'm pretty sure I can do that with the digital piano that I have now.  You depress the damper halfway and the notes sustain but not quite as long as they would under full pedaling.  I'm guessing that's what your talking about.

As far as touch, I find my digital to be a harder touch to play/ practice on then an acoustic, but still reasonably close to the Baldwin and Young Chang grands that I play at church/lessons.  Almost every time I play on an acoustic the songs that I've been practicing are way easier .  I experience this more on uprights then on grands.  In some ways I find that to be an advantage and a pleasant suprise.  All the uprights I've played have a really light sometimes squishy touch and don't have the dynamic possibilites that a grand or even a digital has. 

Also with digitals you can record yourself playing easily which is VERY helpful.  With a digital you can hook it up to software as well. So there's some nice pros to them.   I'm talking a fairly nice digital(not the cheap kind you get at best buy with no pedals). So bear that in mind as well.

[debussy symbolism]

Half pedalling doesn't work on a digital to the extent of my knowledge. The pedal on a digital is pretty much an on/off sustain button. When depressed, the notes are sustained, no matter how much it is depressed. Maybe they have new ones; I don't know if they do.

Overall, if you are beginning, a digital will do no harm, plus it provides an apportunity to play with headphones. After some time, an acoustic is necessary or at least recommended.

[oceansoul]

Well, I don't know what to do.
I would like a digital in which the weight of the keys could be chosen. lol
But, no matter if it is an acoustic or digital, I have to get a piano! I can't keep training with a 4 octaves toy, small keys, and that kind of stuff. lol
After some time I will need an acoustic, so I think it will be better if I buy it already. A digital would be great for recording and headphones... I really don't know what to do.
I've decided! I think I'll just buy some toy in sales at Toys'R'Us.

Later.

[debussy symbolism]

Get a digital, so that later on you can exchange it for an acoustic.

[pentatonic_blue]

Half pedalling doesn't work on a digital to the extent of my knowledge. The pedal on a digital is pretty much an on/off sustain button. When depressed, the notes are sustained, no matter how much it is depressed. Maybe they have new ones; I don't know if they do.

Overall, if you are beginning, a digital will do no harm, plus it provides an apportunity to play with headphones. After some time, an acoustic is necessary or at least recommended.

Yeah I have heard of digital pianos which handle half pedalling.  Some don't handle late pedalling too well so thats always something to try.  The best thing about digital pianos is definately the volume control.  You can play excersises all day with out a family member tempted to cut your strings or something or bust out with a dark rachmaninoff prelude late in the eveneing after the neighbors go to bed.
On a side note I played a bosendorfe (yeah I'm positive I screwed the name up but oh well) concert grand today after practicing on my digital piano the whole day yesterday and man, I was left speechless at how good it felt and sounded - something you forget when you spend all your time on a digital piano

[mwf]

Hi,

I have played for many years and consider myself at an advanced stage now, practicing on digital pianos has made me as good as if I had practiced on an acoustic upright, I know this for sure because I can play both types well.

If you are not sure what to buy, I strongly reccommend the clavinova clp270 or 280 if you have the money. I played on them a couple of times now and compared them to other uprights which didn't have the gorgeous tone that the clavinova had. The touch is excellent much better than Roland, believe me, so is the sound of the instrument. The clp270 is arguably the best digital piano money can buy at around £2400 RRP, it is a joy to play and responds well to your playing, I compared it to a yamaha used £5500 upright piano in the same showroom, and myself and the showroom owner agreed that the clp270 had a more pleasing tone overall.

I dont agree that an upright is a must for anyone who is not a beginner and would like to further their playing to a more advanced level, obviously the same comparison does not apply to an acoustic grand. A grand or baby grand is more of a must for advanced pianists I will agree, but practicing on digital pianos has done me no harm and I can easily adjust to an acoustic piano. So theres no need to worry, espcially if you buy a top end digital piano.

The comments made on the round sound you always get on a digital piano when compared to an acoustic is almost mindless and too insignificant to mention, its far too trivial and does not matter at all, the actions on digital pianos are much improved now.

[jgarnao]

On half pedalling...  As I mentioned above, I have a Clavinova CLP 240, and its sustain pedal CAN half pedal.  It's not a simple on-off switch.  When routed to a MIDI sequencer with notation capabilities, instead of the usual p and * to denote pedal on and off, respectively, I see a string of ppppppppp's followed by lots of ****'s which means that the Clavinova spits out gradated signals and is therefore a continuous controller.

I agree that the onboard piano sound of the Clavinova CLP series is better than a crappy upright.  And although an upright has a tougher touch, if it is not well regulated then the digital's touch will be more even. 

But if you want the ultimate in realism in playing a digital piano, you might want to consider routing the MIDI out to a software piano such as Ivory or Akoustik Piano.  Of course, you'll have to spend more because you have to buy these software, not to mention a PC with the latest processor and lots of RAM.  That's why I chose the CLP-240 over the higher models because I was only after the keyboard touch, and so that I could use the extra money saved for software and a PC.  The downside to this setup is that you will have to wait a while for the PC to boot and fire up the software.  But then again, if I need to be able to play right away, the onboard sound is always available.

[debussy symbolism]

Early in playing, one doesn't need half-pedalling too much.

[timothy42b]

I would guess that most people who learn on a digital piano just use it as a substitute for an acoustic, with the identical lesson materials and learning methods.

And of course that will work.  A good digital is at least as good as the average upright, and much better than the junk most students will have around. 

But I think it is missing an opportunity.  I think we could take advantage of the MIDI, recording, and play back functions to make learning faster. 

What if your piano actually enforced Bernhard's methods?  There is no way to do that on an acoustic, but it's at least theoretically possible on a  digital.  You'd have to design a lesson plan, but it could work. 

[maestoso]

i have an upright an old jewett. i like the sound of it but i am debating on whether to put 250 bucks into fixing it ie. tuning repinning replacing damper felts fixing pedals. or getting a digital, i played on a korg and it sounded cool but still had the "keyboard" air to it. i'm okay with this but i really like the sound of acoustic pianos but i also play in bands where i would like to add some piano to the repetoir i have a 61 key casio that is okay but it has small keys and is easily fingered. so finally to my question, you think 250 to get the upright fixed or by a digital. ps a grand probably won't ever be feasible.

[humblemonkey]

Kawai digital pianos are accredited by the Trinity Board for use in its exams. Would this make them suitable for a pianist who is beyond a beginner stage?

[gyzzzmo]

To my opinion accoustic is better than digital (i have a clavinova myself). Provided you have a decent accoustic piano ofcourse. They have a better touche than a digital and the sound is better.
For example, i practised a nocturne on the digital but when i played it on my parents piano, wich is a nice yamaha upright, i discovered great passages wich i didnt hear on the clavinova.

gyzzzmo

[gyzzzmo]

And you must be very careful how you put the settings on the digital. Dont put it to soft, cause its bad for your ability to play softly, and dont put it too loud, that can be very bad for your ears!

[maxd]

Always use the best piano you can, Chopin used to say.

all this crap about learning on cheap instruments and upgradeing as you improve is bullshit designed to keep music shops in business.

buy the best acoustic piano you can. buy it well, buy it used, make sure it keeps tuning perfectly and that the felt on the hammers is almost new.

you will save money in the end and you'll be a much better pianist with an advantage over those who use digital.

[knew bee]

Thanks for all the replies!

I've decided to go with the Clavinova CVP305. I know that for the same money I could get the CLP280, but I figure I'll enjoy mucking about with all the bells and whistles on the 305.

The piano sound is acceptable to me, and I figure it'll serve me well over the next few years. I plan to get a decent acoustic once I've moved to a bigger house, and I think the digital will help ensure I can play the acoustic well once I get it.

 ... all this crap about learning on cheap instruments and upgradeing as you improve is bullshit designed to keep music shops in business.

I have to say I disagree with this entirely.  Cheaper instruments help you work out if you actually want to play as well as learning the instrument. (We all know someone who was forced to play as a kid although they didn't want to, or someone who likes the idea of playing but quickly realises they don't want to put in the effort in...)

As you outgrow it, you realise what things you don't like about it and what things you'd like to have instead, which helps you define not only your playing style as a whole, but also what model you'll eventually buy. I don't see the point in buying the most expensive instrument to start with, before you even realise what it is about it that's makes it so expensive. In my experience (and admittedly this stems from years of guitar purchasing rather than pianos), working your way through from the cheapest to the most expensive results in a more educated, better player.  Starting on the best money can buy usually results in a spoilt brat who has no appreciation of the fantastic instrument they have, and in some cases an ear that is worse than those who have traded up.

[humblemonkey]

My situation for learning next year will be this: I will have a digital (Kawai CN-3) in my room in my flat, and will use that for the majority of my practice. But I will be using an acoustic three times weekly (one lesson, two practices at a friends house). Will the time on the acoustic weekly be enough to alleviate any detrimental technique I may develop by playing on a digital? If one is able to learn to adjust quickly to a different piano, does it matter what you practice on (digital or acoustic)?