Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Digital Pianos - Electronic Pianos - Synths & Keyboards My opinion of builtin speakers vs monitors

Talk about opening a can of worms . . .

I think you're making a distinction between "quality" and "naturalness", but you're not defining those terms, and you're not consistent in using them:

. . . what is "the most natural sound as far as the sound itself is concerned"?

I think that "ambience" might be a useful concept, but I don't want to muddy things even more.

One day, a VST maker will come out with a "5.1" or "7.1" version, for use with surround-sound, home-theater speaker systems. That might satisfy everyone.

I don't think they sound too great without at least opening the lid.

Natural resonance, ambience, natural reverb, room acoustics, sound bouncing off walls.
I don't think DP's with cabinets or studio monitors emulate particularly closely what an acoustic is actually producing.
At least with a good sample engine we are tricked into thinking we are hearing these things (really just a recording) ...whether its from inbuilt speakers or monitors.

If the digital piano has samples that derive from microphones, then its speakers should reproduce that sound ... and nothing more. That means NO soundboard.

After all, isn't the digital piano meant to reproduce what those microphones heard?

I agree. Of course, we all have our own preferences but I feel companies try to achieve a more "acoustic" sound with their configurations and using monitors just breaks that "illusion" at least for me. As usual, there is no right or wrong way, just a matter of preferences.

I never played a slab piano with built in speakers that sounded... well.. good. They all sounded (and felt) bad to me.

Peace
Bruce in Philly

VSL already has surround Synchron samples.

I wonder about those numbers stated by DP manufacturers. For instance, Yamaha CLP-745, in the tech specs states (50W+50W) * 2. That sums up to a glorious 200W. Wow! And a couple of lines below we have the power consumption of a mere 18W! Even if using class D amplifiers, they could produce something around 16W, which is more than enough with sensitive drivers.

The same happens with every manufacturer I 've checked so far. Roland for example in HP704 states rated output power 2*25 + 2*5 (although admittedly that is in the speaker system section, which could be what the drivers can handle) and a max power consumption of 30W. Kawai CA58 gives output 100W with 40W consumption.

For comparison a real world example: my least efficient HiFi class A tube amplifier shamelessly eats a hefty 300W from the grid to produce a mere 2x12W output in 4 Ohms load, which easily rocks the house with my speakers at nominal 6 Ohms, 88db@1W/1m sensitivity.

Given all that, I would take manufacturer claims with a big grain of salt and adjust my expectations accordingly regarding power output. Sound quality is a combination of amplifier quality (and its power supply), the quality and the orientation/placement of the drivers. For at least mid range DPs, I wouldn't expect much in this section too, taking into account the profit margins of the manufacturer/distributor/dealer chain and the need to keep the price, oh well, in the mid range. By that I don't mean that they squeeze quality over profit. It's just the result of solving the equation for a reasonable priced piano with nice keyboard, good looking furniture and a somewhat decent sound.

Yeah rated power is completely useless since there is no standard for it.
Like Harman Kardon used to rate their receivers with REAL claims but it was hard to compete with another brand claiming 100W per channel while you were claiming 75W per channel and asking for more money. When in reality that other brand was barely able to hit 35W when ALL channels were driven while Harman Kardon could deliver all 75W with all channels driven

Why?

If you listen to opera, should the speakers be made of meat?

ROFL !!!!!!

I may use that line, sometime in the future . . . .<g>

This wins the prize as best Piano World reply of the year!

Okay, what am I not getting here?

Is this meant to be taken literally or is it some sort of ‘operatic’ reference that goes over my head because I couldn’t care less about opera? Can someone break it down to me in simple terms?

Now, as far as a soundboard being better than speakers, it has nothing to do with the sound-source (samples, modeling, etc.) or recording method (microphones for samples, etc..), but it’s more a matter of dispersion. Granted, this is a layman speaking here, but I don’t think that a bunch of independent and very directional speakers will do a better job at dispersing sound than a soundboard, say the size of a baby grand, that is one solid piece emanating various frequencies that by default will affect each other “physically” (vibrations) and sonically (shades of sound produced by one region of the soundboard affecting the natural course of a partial decaying in another region). In my opinion, speakers, due to their isolated nature, cannot due this as well. It’s all ‘bout the in-between; that’s where the magic happens. The speakers are by nature isolated, so the space in-between is lost/wasted in dispersion.

Anecdotally I will say that I do perceive a better sound-field when playing the CA-95, which only uses half a’ soundboard, over digital pianos using only speakers. Of course, this is subjective, and some notice no difference at all or even think that it’s worse than speakers only.

In conclusion, I stand by my “soundboard is better” statement. Who’s with me?

I have a pair of Presonus Eris E5 XT monitors that I use in addition to my PX-870's four built-in speakers. By combining the speakers/monitors, my piano now sounds quite realistic. To use only the built-in speakers sounds quite lame... the same can be said for using only the monitors. But combining the speakers/monitors gives me the best of both worlds.

Soundboard is better!

You just wait for the NV-20; it will kick off a new era where the “acoustic” starts to look more like an obsolete DVD player (you know you have one somewhere around the house, but you haven’t used it in so long -for there is now streaming- that you wonder whether it works anymore; whilst debating whether grandma will get upset if you simply throw it away to make space for your most recent relic: A huge SD console TV 📺!

As someone who plays an acoustic grand every day and also digital piano via monitor speakers every day, I completely disagree with this.

Kawai NV10's built in speakers sound nothing like the real acoustic - the sound is very boxed in and just doesn't feel natural. The sound, heard through headphones, is quite excellent. So, it is not the audio engine issue. It is the amp and speaker issue.

Compared to NV10's built in speakers, a quality VST via the Genelec 8050B monitor speakers sound so much better and much closer to acoustic grand. The same VST via Kawai's speakers (using Line In) has the same 'boxed in' feeling. So, I have basically been using NV10 as a pure midi controller.

Osho

Always amazed to hear that someone uses a $15,000 piano as a controller for $300 VST software.
Was that the plan from the beginning, or were you just disillusioned with the NV10 after you got it?

Note that Osho has a pair of Genelec 8050B which makes the difference at 2700€ for the pair. This is 30% of the NV10. (8900€ in France).I guess the builtin speakers/amps of the NV10 do worth far less.

About VST, they have unlooped samples... but we have to pay 1500€ for a DP with such unlooped samples (Gewa, Krome). It is quite anachronistic not to have such samples on a DP which costs far more.

Why is this surprising?I use a $30,000 car with a $40 wipers, $45 oil changes, and $10 sunglasses.

Because it's more like parking a $30,000 car in the garage and playing video car-chase games on the dashboard screen