2022 our 25th year online!

Welcome to the Piano World Piano Forums
Over 3 million posts about pianos, digital pianos, and all types of keyboard instruments.
Over 100,000 members from around the world.
Join the World's Largest Community of Piano Lovers (it's free)
It's Fun to Play the Piano ... Please Pass It On!

Shop our online store for music lovers
SEARCH
Piano Forums & Piano World
(ad)
Pianoteq
Steinway Spiro Layering
(ad)
Piano Life Saver - Dampp Chaser
Dampp Chaser Piano Life Saver
(ad)
Wessell Nickel & Gross
PianoForAll
Who's Online Now
34 members (C. L., dima5222, brennbaer, drewr, Almaviva, 9 invisible), 457 guests, and 281 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
(ad)
Estonia Pianos
Estonia Pianos
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Hop To
Page 2 of 3 1 2 3
Joined: Mar 2021
Posts: 80
Full Member
Offline
Full Member
Joined: Mar 2021
Posts: 80
On a CLP-785, if you record audio, it will have to go to USB. If you record MIDI, you can choose USB or internal memory. You can convert a MIDI file to audio on USB if you want to.

Joined: Aug 2017
Posts: 1,641
E
1000 Post Club Member
Offline
1000 Post Club Member
E
Joined: Aug 2017
Posts: 1,641
Originally Posted by Franlober
In another thread I propose which piano to choose between the Yamaha CLP-785, the Casio GP-510 and the Dexibel H10, my intention is to replace my good quality Hifi equipment with one of these pianos, my main question now is between the Dexibel and the Yamaha, some answers tell me that it would be a failure to try this substitution, that the Yamaha, despite its power and quality of the sound system, will not go well to reproduce music with quality, have you tried to reproduce music from sources of a certain quality, CD, spotify or digital files FLAC, WAW, etc.? If you have, what is your opinion?

If you are picky about sound quality/fidelity, there is a HUGE chance whatever digital piano, no matter how expensive or how allegedly good its sound system is, will not measure up as a general/hi-fi sound system. There are many posts in this forum where owners of several expensive digitals say their sound system is not that good even for piano sounds whereas there are others for whom they are good or great.

Consider also that room has an important impact over the piano sound as well.

My personal experience, when I play a song on my ES8, whose sound/speaker system is not THE best, but IMO is very good all things considered, it sounds good. BUT I am not picky, as long as the music sounds OK I am satisfied and my main sound "system" is a JBM Charge II speaker. I think a high end digital would be as good or better to me.

Thus, nobody but you can answer your question, though you may get answers with personal opinions that could be helpful (you already know mine, though maybe not that helpful and hopeful smile ).


Kawai ES8, Roland RD2000, Yamaha AG06 mixer, Presonus Eris E5 monitors, Sennheiser HD598SR phones.
Joined: Dec 2020
Posts: 51
J
Full Member
Offline
Full Member
J
Joined: Dec 2020
Posts: 51
Thanks, the CFX recording is a really beautiful sound. Thanks for the tips.

Last edited by JosefPirkl; 01/21/22 08:21 AM.
Joined: Jan 2022
Posts: 15
F
Junior Member
Offline
Junior Member
F
Joined: Jan 2022
Posts: 15
Thanks for your comments, another person in another thread comments that the sound of the CLP-785 is quite good to listen to varied music, of course, this is so subjective that there will be hundreds of opinions about it.
I have decided for now not to get rid of my hifi equipment until I have the new piano at home and do a test and see for myself what quality I get.
The room where I have the hifi equipment and where the piano will go is very well equipped with carpets, curtains and bass traps.

Joined: Apr 2019
Posts: 1,573
A
1000 Post Club Member
Offline
1000 Post Club Member
A
Joined: Apr 2019
Posts: 1,573
Originally Posted by mwf
Yamaha CLP 785 is trash, that's my review. There's almost nothing to like about it... They made better pianos with the CLP300-400 series. They lost their way at grandtouch, the worst possible action you can find on a dp in today's market. I've never played any acoustic piano (and I've played on hundreds) that have the overly resistant and uncomfortable action/touch the 785 has.


What is your digital piano?


Kawai MP7SE, Yamaha MOTF XF6, Yamaha WX5, Yamaha Pacifica 112v
Joined: Apr 2019
Posts: 1,573
A
1000 Post Club Member
Offline
1000 Post Club Member
A
Joined: Apr 2019
Posts: 1,573
Originally Posted by Taushi
Originally Posted by Abdol
The big question:
Are CFX and Bossie samples different from P-515?

CFX = bright and thin

The Bosendorfer sample here is definitely different form the sample used in the P-515. The sample used in the P-515 was not binaural, whereas this one is. There’s a much wider soundstage & clarity, and it feels ever more responsive (perhaps more velocity layers).

As for the CFX, I’m not sure. It *feels* a bit different. Issues I had with Un Sospiro or the Chopin prelude (fast arpeggios and repeated chords) aren’t present with the 785, but that could be owing to the improved action. I can’t say for sure that the sample is different.

I agree that the CFX is on the thin side. I will say theres a bit more roundness, sonority, and timbre when it’s heard through quality headphones or through the onboard speakers, and there’s been some *noticeable* quality loss from the recording process, even though I used the USB host connection to record in GarageBand.

That said, it’s still not better than a good VST or sampling app. I’ve been using Colossus Piano (the $49 with 24 velocity layers) and it’s *miles* above both the samples Yamaha provided. I only have a iPad currently, so I’m saving up for a new laptop to get some better VSTs (or hoping desperately that Pianoteq comes to iOS soon)

I haven't had a chance to play with CLP-785 but my brother got the 735 and he's quite happy with his purchase. I also liked it overall. They're not in the same league but the CLP series are decent digital pianos. I'm sure 785 sounds beefier due to having a better amp and speakers system.

And honestly, I can't see how someone can call it trash. May be overstatement or overexaggeration? but there is no way I'd call CLP-735 trash and CLP-785 is even better in every aspect.

That said, the CFX voice in the CLP series is a very good representation of the actual acoustic CFX piano. When I say CFX is thin and bright, the actual acoustic piano sounds like that too! It has some base and volume to it but its not a round, dark sounding piano IMHO.


Kawai MP7SE, Yamaha MOTF XF6, Yamaha WX5, Yamaha Pacifica 112v
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 9,773
9000 Post Club Member
Offline
9000 Post Club Member
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 9,773
Man enters Yamaha showroom. He's shown the way to the biggest, the best. "In the world!" the Piano-Man proudly proclaims, his breast swelling with pride.
The man looks, and works his way studiously through the lesser pianos, you know the sort of thing. Grotriams, Kawais, Steinways, and finally arrives at the splendid CFX, on a specal pedestal, sits down and plays.
This guy knows his stuff; wealth issues from every pore.

The salesman looks on expectantly with bated breath, for (poor bugger) he was paid commission only.
The man looks up at his eager face.

"Too thin and light! Thin and light!"
He gets carried away with his own rhetoric
"Thin and Light! Load of Shi*te Thin and light, load of . . ."
He got carried away. In an ambulance . . .

Last edited by peterws; 01/21/22 10:39 AM.

"I am not a man. I am a free number"

"[Linked Image]"
Joined: Nov 2021
Posts: 88
D
Full Member
Offline
Full Member
D
Joined: Nov 2021
Posts: 88
Originally Posted by Abdol
When I say CFX is thin and bright, the actual acoustic piano sounds like that too! It has some base and volume to it but its not a round, dark sounding piano IMHO.
Am I right that the sampling in the 600 series wasn't that thin? Or do I need an ambulance?

It is my experience with my rotten ears, that I kept coming back to the Arius YDP 144, 164 and even the CLP725 where the older sample was used. Every time I settled on the CLP735 was a disappointment. Okay, the 745 felt better, but I only found my destination in the NU1X, older sampling and better touch.


Old: a dusted Roland D5 synth. Upcoming: Yamaha NU1X digipi.
Joined: Jun 2013
Posts: 4,851
P
4000 Post Club Member
Offline
4000 Post Club Member
P
Joined: Jun 2013
Posts: 4,851
Originally Posted by deafital
but I only found my destination in the NU1X, older sampling and better touch.

‘Older sampling’, but some argue, “better sampling”, too!

Yamaha gives no official info on sample size/layers/decay, etc; but the rumor is that the ‘AvantGrand’ series usually gets more on all of the above and less in the looping department; there’s probably no way for us to confirm or measure this (scientifically), and perhaps only our -subjective- ears can decide on the veracity.

Now, anecdotally speaking, many seem to prefer the little NU1X to similarly priced Clavinovas, and yes, if we’re playing through the cabinet speakers, that also influences our perception of the ‘samples’.

Personally, I think the magic of the NU1X is the ‘quality’ of the samples/VRM combined with the cabinet and speaker placement/phasing, and some secret sauce reserved for the ‘hybrids’. Oh yes, if we consider the overall playing-experience, then the optical sensors also have something to do with the magic of the NU1X!

Joined: Apr 2018
Posts: 122
L
Full Member
Offline
Full Member
L
Joined: Apr 2018
Posts: 122
Just out of curiosity Pete14...

The CLP 785 does not have optical sensors? What is the benefit of having optical sensors vs "non optical" sensors or whatever the CLP range is?


Currently: NU1X
Previously: VPC-1 / CA-58 / CA-98 / CA-79
Joined: Jun 2013
Posts: 4,851
P
4000 Post Club Member
Offline
4000 Post Club Member
P
Joined: Jun 2013
Posts: 4,851
Well, one benefit is that the optical sensors do not attract dust like the ‘rubber’ sensors do; and this can-and-does lead to issues (loud/odd/erratic notes). Usually a ‘cleaning’ will take care of the issue, but still, the piano has to be opened to access the action for cleaning. Now, if you keep the fallboard closed when the piano is not in use and in a somewhat dust-free environment you might not experience this issue.

Now, this is less obvious, but some claim that the optical sensors ‘render’ at higher values (1028 vs. 127 for the non-optical), and that this makes a ‘real’ overall difference; to what extent this ‘improves’ or whether we can perceive this improvement is a whole other question; and, as always, some will swear by it, whilst others will say it makes no difference at all. Pick your side!

I also speculate that there could be a little something to the fact that the optical sensors never make any physical contact with any part of the key/action, and, therefore, can lead to a smoother and more-natural feeling experience; once again, I speculate on this matter.

Of course, we have some heavyweight engineers ‘round here who could perhaps delve deeper into the matter; after all, Pete is simply a layman living in a van, down by the river.

Joined: Apr 2018
Posts: 122
L
Full Member
Offline
Full Member
L
Joined: Apr 2018
Posts: 122
Thanks for the explanation Pete.
I have a NU1X and really like it a lot so far (have it for 3 months now). I guess it's the special sauce :P
BTW Pete may be a layman living in a van, down the river but got WIFI for the PianoWorld forum smile
Happy weekend everybody!


Currently: NU1X
Previously: VPC-1 / CA-58 / CA-98 / CA-79
Joined: Jan 2022
Posts: 140
S
Full Member
Offline
Full Member
S
Joined: Jan 2022
Posts: 140
Originally Posted by Pete14
Well, one benefit is that the optical sensors do not attract dust like the ‘rubber’ sensors do; and this can-and-does lead to issues (loud/odd/erratic notes). Usually a ‘cleaning’ will take care of the issue, but still, the piano has to be opened to access the action for cleaning. Now, if you keep the fallboard closed when the piano is not in use and in a somewhat dust-free environment you might not experience this issue.

A good reminder to batten down the hatches when I'm done playing...


Kawai CA79
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,019
M
mwf Offline
1000 Post Club Member
Offline
1000 Post Club Member
M
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,019
OK it's not trash, its just plain bad, boxy speakers, average sample quality and a really poor action that doesn't feel like an acoustic piano, i had to return mine because the action was of great concern to me there's no way i could have fun or feel any kind of pleasure with the overly resistant bottoming out of the key, the initial key press is fine, but quickly begins to become uncomfortably resistant, i was too disturbed by this, that's my review.

That is my honest review, what's wrong with me adding my thoughts... I'm not an aggressive person either, but life is tough so why beat around the bush about it. You could save a huge amount of money and get maybe the p515 which will have a better action ironically.

Joined: Jan 2022
Posts: 177
T
Taushi Offline OP
Full Member
OP Offline
Full Member
T
Joined: Jan 2022
Posts: 177
Originally Posted by Franlober
In another thread I propose which piano to choose between the Yamaha CLP-785, the Casio GP-510 and the Dexibel H10, my intention is to replace my good quality Hifi equipment with one of these pianos, my main question now is between the Dexibel and the Yamaha, some answers tell me that it would be a failure to try this substitution, that the Yamaha, despite its power and quality of the sound system, will not go well to reproduce music with quality, have you tried to reproduce music from sources of a certain quality, CD, spotify or digital files FLAC, WAW, etc.? If you have, what is your opinion?

I think the sound of the speakers is sufficient for musical enjoyment and certainly allows you to enjoy high-quality media. I have used Apple Music & Spotify at highest settings, and raw WAV/FLAC files, and been able to discern the difference and quality. That said, I don’t think or any digital piano in this price range will surpass an actual quality hi-fi unit. I have a Samsung Harman/Kardon sound bar that cost about a third what this piano costs, and it is superior. So I think if you want *true* hifi, no digital piano will replace it. Yet, if you want good sound, this should suffice.

Originally Posted by Ostinato
On a CLP-785, if you record audio, it will have to go to USB. If you record MIDI, you can choose USB or internal memory. You can convert a MIDI file to audio on USB if you want to.

True. And one should also be sure to read the manual to guarantee that the flash drive one has will work. It doesn’t take USB 1.1 or anything with a higher power rating than 5V. One of the drives I bought doesn’t work and I thought the issue was the USB port until I tried a different flash drive.

Originally Posted by JosefPirkl
Thanks, the CFX recording is a really beautiful sound. Thanks for the tips.

You’re very welcome. Glad to be of help.

Originally Posted by Abdol
I haven't had a chance to play with CLP-785 but my brother got the 735 and he's quite happy with his purchase. I also liked it overall. They're not in the same league but the CLP series are decent digital pianos. I'm sure 785 sounds beefier due to having a better amp and speakers system.

And honestly, I can't see how someone can call it trash. May be overstatement or overexaggeration? but there is no way I'd call CLP-735 trash and CLP-785 is even better in every aspect.

That said, the CFX voice in the CLP series is a very good representation of the actual acoustic CFX piano. When I say CFX is thin and bright, the actual acoustic piano sounds like that too! It has some base and volume to it but its not a round, dark sounding piano IMHO.

Ah, I see. I understand what you mean now. And yes, I totally agree. THE CFX sample is a great representation of the sparkling & brilliant CFX. I tend to prefer it over the Bosendorfer sample, since the latter has been so heavily muted.

And yes, the entire CLP-700 series is great. While I didn’t get to try the 735, I got to try the 745 which has similar specs, and it was a great instrument too!

Originally Posted by Pete14
Originally Posted by deafital
but I only found my destination in the NU1X, older sampling and better touch.

‘Older sampling’, but some argue, “better sampling”, too!

Yamaha gives no official info on sample size/layers/decay, etc; but the rumor is that the ‘AvantGrand’ series usually gets more on all of the above and less in the looping department; there’s probably no way for us to confirm or measure this (scientifically), and perhaps only our -subjective- ears can decide on the veracity.

Now, anecdotally speaking, many seem to prefer the little NU1X to similarly priced Clavinovas, and yes, if we’re playing through the cabinet speakers, that also influences our perception of the ‘samples’.

Personally, I think the magic of the NU1X is the ‘quality’ of the samples/VRM combined with the cabinet and speaker placement/phasing, and some secret sauce reserved for the ‘hybrids’. Oh yes, if we consider the overall playing-experience, then the optical sensors also have something to do with the magic of the NU1X!

I agree in suspecting the AvantGrand probably get better sampling overall, since that’s sort of their absolute premier flagship collection of digitals. The use of optical sensors probably also produces an even more exacting level of information for the system to interpret, thus giving even greater playability in addition to the true action.

Originally Posted by mwf
OK it's not trash, its just plain bad, boxy speakers, average sample quality and a really poor action that doesn't feel like an acoustic piano, i had to return mine because the action was of great concern to me there's no way i could have fun or feel any kind of pleasure with the overly resistant bottoming out of the key, the initial key press is fine, but quickly begins to become uncomfortably resistant, i was too disturbed by this, that's my review.

That is my honest review, what's wrong with me adding my thoughts... I'm not an aggressive person either, but life is tough so why beat around the bush about it. You could save a huge amount of money and get maybe the p515 which will have a better action ironically.

I certainly respect your opinion and thank you for offering a more clear review. I do disagree, though. I think the speakers on the 785 are just fine, and the sound from them relates to the way the samples are used. For some reason, Yamaha decided binaural quality should only be offered through the headphones. When playing through the speakers only the non-binaural sample is used, and it is extremely bad and nearly mono. When I use a VST/sampling app, or play regular music through the speakers, they are just fine. I’d also say the binaural version of the samples is comparable to all the other samples that the other big brands offer; although Kawai’s SF-EX may be a bit better from what I’ve heard in videos in terms of quality & soundstage.

As for the action, while it’s true that this action doesn’t feel like an acoustic piano, none of the actions in this price range do. *To me*, Kawai’s Grand Feel is mushy at the bottom and light to the touch in a way that doesn’t feel true in forte/fortissimo playing, and the lightness of touch is almost too much. Same with Casio’s Natural Grand Hammer action, which, although on paper seems like it’d be the best, has an extremely shallow keybed & light touch. While the Yamaha is heavier/harder, and while the heaviness can contribute to the feeling of “resistance” or “pushing back”, I find that one acclimates after a week or two. And while it is heavy, it is also extremely fluid.

I think intention, desire, goals, what one is accustomed to, and how one wants to use the instrument is important in how one will respond to the action. For me, my focus is maintaining performance ready-technique, and I find heavier actions good for technical development. I’ve found any technical issues I have on a 785, I’m still going to have on an acoustic. Simultaneously, if you can play something on that warhorse of an action, you’ll definitely be able to play it on any acoustic you encounter. Whereas with the Kawai/Casio/Roland, I was afraid the lightness might make it so that I’d be able to do things on them that I might not be able to do on a more troublesome acoustic, especially under the stress of performing or recording. Certainly playing the 785 can be a bit like weightlifting initially, and at times even once accustomed, and while that has a technical benefit, it may be an undesirable thing for some, especially if your goal is just pure enjoyment of the instrument or an immediate connection.

I’d also have to disagree about the P-515; I had one for a year, and found the CLP-785 to be a marked improvement in action. Where there were some things the P-515 couldn’t handle very well, the 785 responds more authentically to. But the NWX action is superb too & the P-515 is as sturdy and well-built as they come. I would’ve happily stayed with it if I wasn’t able to get the 785.

Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,019
M
mwf Offline
1000 Post Club Member
Offline
1000 Post Club Member
M
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,019
Well the downweight of the grand feel kawai action is very close to a well regulated concert grand, approx 51-53g i think, not sure, the grandtouch yamaha is approx 70g+ and i think the clp600 series older grandtouch was 80g+, in my eyes there's just no need for this extra weight, 70g+ is ridiculous as it is...

Joined: Aug 2017
Posts: 842
J
500 Post Club Member
Offline
500 Post Club Member
J
Joined: Aug 2017
Posts: 842
I own the old p155 and had the p 515 similar to clip 600 and 700 samples.

I have to say I think the p155 , which had samples from clip. 300/400 sounded better , and more body to the attack.. the action was so so on the p515, I ended up getting es920.. I would prolly done the same if I had the cabinet style pianos

I’m much happier with the kawai , I miss the old Yamaha days


Yamaha P155, Yamaha P515
Joined: Dec 2017
Posts: 251
L
Full Member
Offline
Full Member
L
Joined: Dec 2017
Posts: 251
Taushi, please continue to post on this forum, on this and other threads. Your level of knowledge, humility and, yes, patience, is remarkable.

I agree with you that the CLP-785's action is a marked improvement over that of the P-515. Perhaps I had too high expectations of the latter because of its partially wooden keys, but it didn't meet them. I found the 785's to be firm and precise; some may find it a little too firm, but that is a question of taste.

I liked the action on the CA79/99 quite a bit. It felt light and smooth, though rather different from that of my Kawai acoustic grand, which is definitely heavier. I feel that my grand's heavier action allows better control of dynamics, but perhaps it's just that I'm used to it.

To be honest, I find it difficult to compare digitals to acoustics because their sound quality -- especially without headphones -- is so different, and this affects how one plays. I did feel that the CA99's soundboard added a dimension to digital sound that speakers alone failed to capture.

Thank you for your informative posts. I am glad that you are enjoying your CLP-785 and have taken the time to explain, rationally, why you chose it. Others may disagree with your views, some disagreeably, and that's why manufacturers offer alternatives!

Best regards,
Lotus
_____________________________________
Having fun with: Tema con Variazioni from
Mozart: Sonata in D, K. 284, "Durnitz" on
Kawai GM-10 grand / Yamaha DGX-660 digital

Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,019
M
mwf Offline
1000 Post Club Member
Offline
1000 Post Club Member
M
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,019
Your grand may feel heavier, but there's not artificial resistance like on the grandtouch yamaha uses on 785, there's a difference between heaviness and resistance, and other variables.

Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 9,773
9000 Post Club Member
Offline
9000 Post Club Member
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 9,773
Seems to me that one needs a heavier action and a lighter one to be able to cover for any acoustic eventuality.


"I am not a man. I am a free number"

"[Linked Image]"
Page 2 of 3 1 2 3

Moderated by  Piano World 

Link Copied to Clipboard
(ad)
Best of Piano Buyer
Piano Buyer - Read the Articles, Explore the website
(ad)
PianoDisc

PianoDisc
(ad)
Faust Harrison Pianos
Faust Harrison 100+ Steinway pianos
(ad)
Mason & Hamlin Pianos
New Topics - Multiple Forums
Shostakovich Second Waltz piano transcription..
by Petoskeyguy - 05/26/22 09:53 PM
Disklavier MKII : replace power supply?
by carlspost - 05/26/22 03:33 PM
Sight reading progress
by BlizzardPiano - 05/26/22 03:18 PM
13th Piano Composition Competition Fidelio (Extended!!)
by harmonium53 - 05/26/22 01:20 PM
Download Sheet Music
Virtual Sheet Music - Classical Sheet Music Downloads
Forum Statistics
Forums43
Topics213,254
Posts3,194,757
Members105,376
Most Online15,252
Mar 21st, 2010
Please Support Our Advertisers

Faust Harrison 100+ Steinways

Dampp Chaser Piano Life Saver

 Best of Piano Buyer

PianoTeq Bechstein
Visit our online store for gifts for music lovers

Virtual Sheet Music - Classical Sheet Music Downloads



 
Help keep the forums up and running with a donation, any amount is appreciated!
Or by becoming a Subscribing member! Thank-you.
Donate   Subscribe
 
Our Piano Related Classified Ads
| Dealers | Tuners | Lessons | Movers | Restorations | Pianos For Sale | Sell Your Piano |

Advertise on Piano World
| Subscribe | Piano World | PianoSupplies.com | Advertise on Piano World |
| |Contact | Privacy | Legal | About Us | Site Map | Free Newsletter | MapleStreetMusicShop.com - Our store in Cornish Maine


© copyright 1997 - 2022 Piano World ® all rights reserved
No part of this site may be reproduced without prior written permission
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5