RD-2000 vs FP-90 vs Yamaha CP88

[jalbert]

I had a chance to compare the RD-2000 to the FP-90 and a Yamaha CP88 in one session of trying out instruments. I played Schumann’s From a Foreign Land in the Scene’s from Childhood on all three to see which, if any have the ability to project a singing melody above accompaniment. This is a stiff test for a piano, acoustic or digital, as less desirable instruments lack enough sustain in their tone to accomplish this, rendering them unusable for playing classical piano, as well as some jazz that requires similar expression. I did not compare the actions responsiveness for fast passage work although I think the FP-90 and RD-2000 may have the same action.

I was surprised that I could play this music successfully on the FP-90 and CP88, but not on an RD-2000 either using its modeled or sampled pianos. The FP-90 has Supernatural samples that are post-processed with V-piano modeling techniques to create piano sounds that are not available in the RD-2000, and are noticeably superior for playing piano solo.

There were things I liked about the CP88 pianos more than those of the FP-90, and things I liked better about the FP-90, but overall I liked the FP-90 pianos slightly more. The RD-2000 was a major disappointment.

[SledDriver]

Did you test all 78 pianos models/variants on the RD-2000?

[jalbert]

Possibly. I tested a lot of them. I could not find a piano on the RD-2000 with enough sustain to be usable for classical repertoire. I think the instrument is optimized for different applications. If you want a piano for playing solo piano, I consider the FP-90 to be superior to an RD-2000. The RD-2000 can of course do many things that are out of scope for an FP-90.

[jalbert]

I tried all the pianos in the Concert Piano and Studio Piano categories. Many could be dismissed by just playing the first measure of the piece in question a few times, lacking the sustain to connect the notes of the original theme (a well known 5-note melody) in an even, singing manner. I played through the entire piece for the patches that got through the initial screening.

[torhus]

I think the RD should have all the same piano sounds that the FP has, any many more. Are you sure it's not just that the RD's presets are set up with less reverb or something?

[SledDriver]

I must say this seems like the biggest load of rubbish I've heard in a while. As a classically trained pianist who also plays many other styles, I choose the RD-2000 specifically because it was the closest I had heard to a real piano, including sustain times/profile and levels. I tried many other instruments before making the choice, and the RD-2000 was definitely the one for me.

There are far more factors to consider in determining these things than just playing the keyboard. You haven't mentioned your playback system, environment etc etc.

I've had my RD-2000 coming up on 2 years, and it continues to satisfy my very fussy ears. I play it through a high level studio reproduction system including speaker and room calibration, and I want for nothing. Just a beautiful instrument.

Not to mention the outstanding keyboard action. I can easily play pieces with clear melody lines with sustained notes soaring above the other notes in the harmony etc.

I worry about people who say a particular keyboard doesn't sound like a proper piano etc. Did you ever spend a couple of hours going round a proper piano showroom trying them all out. Many of them don't sound like a proper piano either - if you see what I'm saying. There is no such thing as the perfect piano sound. There is only the piano sound you prefer, and that is fine. But to say all the others are deficient, just doesn't make any sense. Same thing goes for digital pianos.

Finally, "the ability to project a singing melody above accompaniment. This is a stiff test for a piano, acoustic or digital". REALLY? This has far more to do with technique than the instrument.

[Stormchild]

I haven't had a chance to compare the RD-2000 and FP-90 in person, but at least from looking at the specs it seems they have different piano engines.

The FP-90 has "SuperNATURAL Piano Modeling".
The RD-2000 has "V-Piano Technology" and "SuperNATURAL Piano" (note the lack of "Modeling", which I think is important).

I recently looked into this stuff while researching a digital piano, and I ended up buying the new HP704, which has the same PHA-50 keybed and SuperNatural Piano Modeling as the FP-90. The "Piano Designer" feature only works with the grand piano (if you enter this mode while using an upright piano or some other instrument, it takes you to the grand piano). There are a dozen or so things you can adjust, such as lid position, string resonance, hammer noise, and so on.

The upright pianos and some of the other instruments are also based on SuperNatural sampling, but you cannot edit them in the same way as the grand piano, and as far as I can tell that's the difference between "SuperNatural Piano Modeling vs. "SuperNatural Piano". I don't know whether that means the "Modeling" version is simply user editable and otherwise the same, or if it actually has more of the nuances of a piano's sound. For what it's worth, I think the upright pianos sound perfectly nice too.

In Roland's digital piano lineup, the LX705 is the next step up from the HP704. It has the same PHA-50 keys, but has the newer "PureAcoustic Piano Modeling" engine instead of SuperNatural. Is this the next generation of V-Piano? Is it just rebranded, or is it entirely new technology? Who knows. As far as I can tell, the main thing offered by the new "PureAcoustic" engine is modeling of the acoustic space.

When I compared the HP704 and LX705 in the store, the latter mainly seemed like it had more reverb and sounded farther away from me. To be honest I didn't care for it. It's probably adjustable, but I would most likely just turn it off. The HP704 already has some acoustic space simulation, and I find it more subtle and tasteful. I'm not a big fan of most spatialization effects and usually disable it immediately, but on the HP704 it seems to be just right. The first few times I played it with headphones on, I had to double check that the headphones were plugged in, because it sounded like the sound was coming from the piano.

All this is a long way of saying there might be a legitimate difference between the piano sounds on the FP-90 and RD-2000, and if it's anything like the HP704 vs. LX705, I could see why someone might prefer the FP-90's pianos. That said, I think it's a wild exaggeration to suggest one of them is usable and the other is not; they are far more similar than different, and are both expressive, dynamic instruments that sound as good or better than any real piano most of us could reasonably afford.

I'd have to agree that it's more about the performer than the instrument at that point.

[jalbert]

By unusable, I don’t mean unusable for all music. But there is a moderate amount of material in my repertoire that I could not play properly on an RD-2000. If I cannot use a piano for any piano music I am able to play, the piano is uninteresting to me.

[Gus]

Hi jalbert.
I do not know your level and your tastes pianistic, so I suggest you buy a Steinway or a bosendorfer to play your repertoire and leave the "rd2000" to pianists who like this instrument, since you do not find it at the height of your abilities.
Cordially.
Gus

[jalbert]

cost aside, a Steinway or Bosendorfer is not portable. sufficient sustain of tone in the upper end of the keyboard separates good pianos from less good ones, whether acoustic or digital. some pianos do not have sufficient sustain of tone to project a singing melody over the accompaniment, but you do not have to buy a steinway or bosendorfer to get that. it is hard to understand why an instrument with a modeled piano sound would not have a long tonal sustain, and maybe it is fixable with parameters in the instrument.

[Gus]

Hi jalbert.

The "Rd 2000" does not seem to suit you at all (Chick Corea leaves this body), in this case, definitively give up any idea to buy one, and go to other manufacturers (yamaha, clavia north, kawai, kurzweil, dexibel etc ...) there is surely one that suits you. I stop this childish discussion.
Cordially.
Gus

[rd2000fan]

WELL...

IN CONCLUSION

READ BELOW, CAREFULLY:

Be careful, I suspect Jalbert sells for another brand.

I have been studying this user from a little while. All his posts are focused on to dirt out the RD 2000, confuse you, and ultimately buy a digital piano from another brand.

He may probably change some of his posts after reading this. But what I read it's all about creating confusion to major prospects and current users, to make you believe that you should sell your RD 2000, and buy another brand (he mention the other brand/s, I will not mention it), or he wants to make you buy another Roland piano that does not competes with flagship digital pianos from another brand, and then convince you to ultimately buy the other brand/s he mention. That's he's posts all about. But, in a subliminal way.

So I suspect Jalbert is one of those sellers with no Fair Play, who sells for other brands.

I have personally had both the RD-2000 and FP-90 in my house, compared it, and I kept the RD-2000. And it's for a reason. Read below:

FACTS:

* RD-2000 costs $2,500+, and the FP-90 only $1,800+. When comparing prices, please note, they are both from the same brand. Roland will not sell you a digital piano that is much more expensive and inferior in everything, no, that doesn't work that way. Does it makes sense to you? That does not works like that.
* The RD 2000 is designed for the stage, while the FP 90 is more focused on home digital pianos (not stage). That's why the performance features in the RD 2000 are superior.
* RD-2000 piano sounds are superior. And you can find much better pianos in the RD-2000. Just take your time, because it's too many piano sounds. The RD-2000 also wins on this.
* Sound engines are the same in both the RD-2000 and the FP-90. There is no trick with that. Same sound engines.
* Both have same PHA-50 keybed, however, make sure the key action settings are the same before you compare, by default may not be the same, but you can adjust it.
* Don't get confused with the polyphony. The V-Piano sounds in the RD-2000 have unlimited polyphony.

Since the original V-Piano looks to be discontinued, the RD 2000 is the flagship Stage Piano from Roland at the moment.

The RD 2000 was created to be at a higher level of quality than the FP-90. In fact, check in the Roland website, they put the RD 2000 on top of the FP-90 in many different ways. Just check out the prices too.

MOREOVER:

SuperNATURAL sounds are not processed trough V-Piano engine. No, no, no and no Jalbert you are wrong. Those are two completely different piano engines. One is Physical Modeling, the other one is Sample Engine with Modeling features (that's what confuses you). Don't get confused. Roland has never said that the SuperNATURAL pianos in the FP-90 are processed through V-Piano, that's a false statement. What you see is that the parameters are very similar. That's why you think SN is processed through V-Piano engine, but is not. Clear up your mind, and stop confusing people.

Now, make sure you tried a RD-2000 piano with the 1-50 system update. That's another thing that confuses most people.

[spottingjonah]

I have an RD-2000 in my home studio, and an FP-90 upstairs in the kids' media room. They're both great boards, and through the same sound system they sound identical... same keybed feel. My son loves the FP-90 whereas I prefer the RD-2000, but that is merely preference for the sound and workflow.

As for the CP-88, I played one for 30 minutes at a GC and was surprised how much I liked the keybed and the S700 piano sound together. Those two things almost had my money, but I couldn't get past the limited number of sounds, and the tiny toggles above the keys (they felt like they would hurt if you hit them wrong).

[rd2000fan]

I have an RD-2000 in my home studio, and an FP-90 upstairs in the kids' media room. They're both great boards, and through the same sound system they sound identical... same keybed feel. My son loves the FP-90 whereas I prefer the RD-2000, but that is merely preference for the sound and workflow.

As for the CP-88, I played one for 30 minutes at a GC and was surprised how much I liked the keybed and the S700 piano sound together. Those two things almost had my money, but I couldn't get past the limited number of sounds, and the tiny toggles above the keys (they felt like they would hurt if you hit them wrong).

Hi spottingjonah, as I always say, it's all about preference. What sounds great to you, may not necessarily sound good to me, and vice-versa.
I love Roland.

[jalbert]

Geez, I have ZERO interest in the sales or production of any type of piano or musical instrument. Moreover, I currently own a Roland Jupiter-50, and have owned other Roland keyboards and midi modules in the past, so I'm hardly biased against Roland.

I did not mean to ruffle any feathers. Were there an FP-90 forum, I would have posted there.

I was just discussing ONE PARTICULAR ISSUE with the RD-2000, which is that, at least out of the box, it is not suitable as a practice or recording instrument for much classical piano repertoire. It just lacks enough sustain. I'm sure it would work splendidly for many styles of music out of the box.

I think a much more considered response would have been to point out that that the sustain of tone is a configurable parameter with the modeled piano sound, so it could be that the issue may be easily addressed. But out of the box, sustain is inadequate for much classical repertoire with the piano sounds in the RD-2000