Old Motifator threads are available in the Archive.
dsetto
Total Posts: 434
Joined 01-24-2014 status: Enthusiast |
How does the Yamaha CP4’s Spectral Component Modeling (SCM) better simulate an acoustic piano performance experience relative to what’s possible on a MOXF8? I am comparing the Yamaha CP4 to a Yamaha MOXF8 to complement my Motif XF7. My main objective is to get my most satisfying acoustic piano portable instrument in a sub-50 pound board. (Sub-40 pound is a plus.) I’ve just begun to play them both a bit at the local store. And I’ve begun to go through the CP4 reference manual.
For me, the pros are:
Per Bad Mister’s advice, I adjusted the velocity curve on each instrument, and effected a significant difference to my piano playing satisfaction. And, I was pleasantly surprised to believe I would be fine with the MOXF8 action. But, for acoustic piano playing, after a few tweaks, I did connect really well with the CP4. (I did not spend a lot of time on MOXF8, yet.) And so I ask, what’s SCM got do with it? …
For this inquiry, I would like to learn about the following:
For this inquiry, I don’t need to hear about the following, as I’ve got a sufficient perception of them:
On this internet, I have read that velocity-swapping does not apply to SCM. I wonder if this means, the velocity-swapping is sufficiently high, that it may be mostly imperceptible to most. Perhaps like an Apple screen uses the term, Retina Display, to describe a pixel resolution that is so great as to be experienced smoother. From my observations of sound in time & frequency spectra, smoother is better, for life-like simulation of acoustic/electronic phenomena.
Another way of approaching this question is:
: ) Yes, a wordy, wordy question. I greatly appreciate any insight you may have on this. Thanks in advance. (Oh, & I wasn’t tuned in to SCM when the CP-1 came out; & I have yet to learn about SCM as it applies to the CP1, CP5. I did find one acoustic piano aspect on the CP-1’s SCM that’s not tweakable on the CP4. So, I don’t know how SCM compares between the mothership, but older CP-1 relative to on the CP4.) And I’ve got gratitude for Dave Ferris & anotherscott for their insights that have led me to this point. I’ll post this in the XF forum because all the MOXF comparisons apply to the XF engine, there’s no dedicated CP forum, those here likely have the deepest knowledge of the XF engine, and as such, many may have made this comparison. |
dsetto
Total Posts: 434
Joined 01-24-2014 status: Enthusiast |
So, here’s some info I’m finding on it. But at this moment, not I don’t grasp it. In the coming weeks, I’ll try to play a CP4 & Motif XF8/MOXF8 side by side to see if I can experience the difference. But, if anyone has insight on this, I am curious. From a Yamaha CP-1 Brochure: http://www.yamaha.com/yamahavgn/Documents/Pianos/CP1_Catalog_Y30C.pdf
From a CP-1 keyboardmag.com review (http://www.keyboardmag.com/gear/1183/yamaha-cp-1-cp5-and-cp50/28212):
Scott Healy on CP1, same keyboardmag article:
|
DavePolich
Total Posts: 6820
Joined 07-27-2002 status: Guru |
While the MO XF pianos sound perfectly fine, the CP4 sounds awesome. That’s the simplest explanation. Play it and hear it for yourself, you don’t need a degree in physics or computer
For the upcoming Fleetwood Mac tour, Christine McVie is using a Yamaha CP4 onstage.
|
dsetto
Total Posts: 434
Joined 01-24-2014 status: Enthusiast |
Thanks, Dave. I know, I sound a bit heady. And, yeah, I was taken in by the CP4. While playing the CP4 and MOXF8, I assumed I was only comparing the action differences. Until now, I’ve all but ignored SCM - as I’ve been in Motif land. But now that I’m eyeing a portable piano - & I believe I have a sense of the MOXF8 engine as I’m comfortable with the XF- I’m just biding my time, getting to know more about my #1 contender, until I’m in a position to purchase. And, as SCM has been around for a bit, I figure some here may provide some insight on how it compares to the XF, MOXF engine. In the end, yeah, it’s how I react to each. While at the store, I think I’ve tweaked all the major acoustic piano related SCM parameters on the CP4. |
lekanout
Total Posts: 82
Joined 07-19-2007 status: Experienced |
I don’t want to speak a lot about specs,but i had all the motifs,and today a CP4 and a Rd800 roland.
I’m a gigging musician,i want the best stage pianos available.
I’ve tried the moxf8,i was blown away because for the price i found near all i’ve loved in my ex motif xf.
The moxf pianos sounds good an great in a mix(i already know that because i’ve made so many gigs with motif xf)
Buy the cp4 if you want a pure stage piano,but if you need a workstation and versatile sounds the moxf8 will be a perfect friend! |
lekanout
Total Posts: 82
Joined 07-19-2007 status: Experienced |
sorry bad post(if a moderator could erase) |
dsetto
Total Posts: 434
Joined 01-24-2014 status: Enthusiast |
Thank you, lekanout. I agree entirely with your thoughts regarding the two.
Anybody else with thoughts on the differences of the sound-engine aspect of the acoustic piano experience on a CP4 vs a MotifXF8/MOXF8? Or, in which ways does Spectral Component Modeling improves the acoustic piano experience on the CP4?
Thanks. |
lekanout
Total Posts: 82
Joined 07-19-2007 status: Experienced |
You’re welcome.
Consider the cp4 engine better than the moxf/xf engine for pianos.
There are modelisation in the piano(?)and eps engines in the cp4.
BUT:
Just play the cp4,try to feel the engine on your fingers.
Try to forget all that and to just feel…
I have 7 pro synths,and i must play hours to feel better on each.
For exemple a moxf pianos can feel better on a particular situation while the cp4 is more. The advantage of the moxf is the ability to load different samples with different colors too. |
abdol
Total Posts: 318
Joined 05-30-2012 status: Enthusiast |
The best place to ask this question is not here but here:
Generally speaking, Yamaha’s piano voices suck in all aspects you’ve asked. Yamaha’s sample table technology is archaic and haven’t improved since it was developed! All Yamaha did was to add more elements (layers) to the voice.
Roland is much better in terms of modeling few aspects of a real piano and sounds better than cp series(CP stands for Crappy Piano btw). In terms of MO, even Kronos is better. At this moment I think the only product that sounds worst than Yamaha is Casio.
|
lekanout
Total Posts: 82
Joined 07-19-2007 status: Experienced |
I can speak about that because i have the rd 800,the cp4...and pianotech!
I can’t see your point about the “worst"cp4 sound.
Modelisation parameters are one thing,the sound you play another thing.
The cp4 is a joy to play in many situations,easy to make it sounds right..
Yes,the cp4 just simply sounds right for every situations,easilly!
And don’t speak only about pianos.
If you speak about modelisation,pianotech is pianotech(but who cares?do you think i bought 2 proffesional stage pianos like the cp4 and rd800 to take my computer on stage with pianotech?)
But....the cp4 just sounds right in so many situations!
|
abdol
Total Posts: 318
Joined 05-30-2012 status: Enthusiast |
I never had rd800 nor cp4 I played both of them in the store with my own sony sony mdr 7506. At the out set just to let you know different people experience different instruments differently.
I’ve listened enough time to acoustic pianos and repaired a few (hope you did as well).
Yes you’re right my friend. Before you post sth read the question. It’s about “Modelisation “.... no about the sound you play [???]....
This is you very humble opinion right? If you feel like that it doesn’t mean everyone feels the same. I’ve heard live performances with CP1 and it simply sounded crap. Never think you’re everyone.
Read the above answer twice. This is my very humble suggestion to you.
Sorry to say that, if you say this you didn’t know about rd800 nor pianoteq (no offence). If you couldn’t work with those, and this is your comment your ignorant and illiterate.
Man read the question asked and then start rambling about CP series okey? You didn’t even pay attention to the question itself. CP-X doesn’t do any simulation/emulation (modelization...).
This is your personal opinion based on your experience and knowledge. It doesn’t mean you’re right about it. I said my own opinion and there is no rule here. The person who is asking must read every post and decide what she/he wants to buy. Then again, if you couldn’t get rd800 work or you couldn’t get pianoteq go through but Yamaha did, it doesn’t mean you’re a pro whatsoever. I’ve seen many good musicians that know about keyboards and sound and they believe their DP sounds like Steinway & Sons.
RD 700 simply has more dynamic range. In the lower freqs you can hear the ringing noise of the strings as well(resonance)!
Give me a sample of your recording as a proof then I’ll believe you.
The order of the recordings are:
Here is a youtube comparison as well:
|
joesax
Total Posts: 185
Joined 03-11-2009 status: Pro |
I’m a Yamaha fan owning both a Motif XF and Tyros 3 and to me the RD-800 is much better in all comparisons. This is my subjective opinion. I love, to me, the warmer, fuller and rounded Roland sound. |
dsetto
Total Posts: 434
Joined 01-24-2014 status: Enthusiast |
Hey abdol, lekanout, and joesax. I greatly appreciate all of your experiences & observations on portable piano instruments. I am eager to check out all the various links provided. As it’s easy to get lost in comparing the many different keyboard options & attributes, I would like to focus the scope of this conversation to: a comparison between the sound engines of the CP4 (& related SCM boards) and of the MOXF8 (& related AWM2 boards), with regards to their ability to satisfyingly simulate an acoustic piano playing experience. I wonder if the dynamic response correlated with naturally occurring timbral changes is an advantage that the CP4 has over the MOXF8. Separately, since I have some sense of AWM2 (via my XF7) I am most concerned with observations on SCM.
From my observations playing a CP4 under poor conditions….
Advantages of the MOXF8:
--
I am aware about the potentially contentious use of the word “modeling” in Yamaha’s technology-marketing label, SCM. But as I really want to get some insight on my stated objective, let’s table that for the time being. I am making this focused inquiry because I have deeply connected with AWM2 and the Yamaha factory piano samples on my XF7, and I have begun to deeply connect with a slanted & chest-level seated CP4 as a piano surrogate- via headphones amidst heavy music store clamor. (I.e., would be better at piano position, good speakers, in a quiet room.) I have experienced excellent dynamic responses from a V-Piano, Pianoteq, & an MP11-equivalent console. I’ll leave these & others (NP2, Forte) to other conversations. I know that my attempt to focus the conversastion could be off-putting & I understand the passions at hand. Thanks for bearing with me.
--
|
dsetto
Total Posts: 434
Joined 01-24-2014 status: Enthusiast |
p.s.
Also, I am seeking a 1-board solution. I do realize the powerful combination of controlling the XF7 from the CP4; and that could surely be useful for the times & places where they’d be paired. |
lekanout
Total Posts: 82
Joined 07-19-2007 status: Experienced |
Dsetto:
There ‘s a moment nobody can make the choice for you.:-)))
All i want to say to you,is the fact there isn’t bad choice.
abdol:
That’s not the point,you don’t have to justify your background
No my friend,it’s about piano modelisation from cp4,to moxf8 rompler tecchnology
This isn’t a humility problem,i never said my opinion is the only viable opinion,i’m speaking only for me and share my experience...that’s all.
I’m very proud having lessons from you about humility.
But let me clarify:
Let me explain something to you:
And while yamaha sells a lot of motif,stage pianos etc etc...explain to yamaha engineers how to produce non-crappy piano sounds too.
To conclude:
ok..
-all the kind people don’t write things like “crappy sounds"about a brand..they like or not…
-piano vision is personal,everybody has his own story.
Sometimes bad mister write some subliminal messages to people:
I never spend time to analyse specs,i want to play and let my fingers go,no matter how the sound is made(modelisation or not)
Leave your computer off my friend,make your choice....and go playing your synths.
|
dsetto
Total Posts: 434
Joined 01-24-2014 status: Enthusiast |
cool, lekanout. Sounds like you’ll be in a good position to report on your observations ...
If you already have a sense of the difference, could you try to put it in words? I know, playing them is most important. Every time I go to the store, the room noise overpowers my headphones. But, I do have a sense of the CP4. Next up for me: get a sense of the MOXF8. I suppose, if I wanted to make this comparison exhaustive I would need to assess the most life-like piano sampled instrument that could fit onto a 2GB board in a MOXF8. To that end, I could envision that the MOXF8 sound-wise could fare quite favorably with the CP4. In other words, loading a large piano with ~6 velocity levels and no looping into a MOXF8. So, in the end, it may be about the CP4 action vs MOXF8 action. And perhaps the SCM stuff becomes less significant. I suppose why I want to have some sense of the piano-related SCM things happening in the CP4 is to help me commit the $2k to one choice. I cannot buy 2, let alone more. Looking forward to hearing your current or upcoming comparisons. Thanks, and I enjoyed your CP4 observations in the music player forum, keyboard corner. |