Roland RD700NX vs. Yamaha CP5 vs. Clavia Nord Stage 2

[pjstingray]

Roland RD700NX vs. Yamaha CP5 vs. Clavia Nord Stage 2

When I was looking for a new stage piano, I trolled all the keyboard forums looking for reviews and comparisons of my shortlist, but never found anyone who had owned all my choices. So here is my contribution, maybe a little lengthy, but hoping some may find it useful.

My background – I started classical piano at the age 8 and succeeded in attaining my grade VIII at 15 yrs of age. When leaving school, I worked as a professional musician for many years, playing most styles of music from jazz to rock. This resulted in me playing a variety of top of the range grand pianos, Yamaha Electric Grands and Fender Rhodes. I have my own 120 year old Gors & Kallman grand at home and still own my Stage 73 Mk1 Rhodes, which I bought new way back when. I mention these things only to give a benchmark for my caparisons.

Originally the Rhodes was may main keyboard, adding various synths (Roland JP8, Prophet 5) for other tasks. Having moved to a Roland A90 as my main piano board for many years, I had added the Oberheim OB32 for my organ requirements and a Roland VR760 for small gigs and rehearsals. The VR760 didn’t last long as I couldn’t live with the piano sounds or the waterfall keyboard. It felt ready for an update so my search began. Having done much research, I decided on the Roland RD700GX, which I added the extra piano board, so essentially an NX.

The Roland RD700 GX – I had made the right choice – the action was excellent, the sounds all very impressive and the programming and storage of patches was very user friendly and it fitted in the same flight case I had for the A90. Then things started to go wrong – one day whilst playing I went to wash my hands as it felt like I was playing through grit. This didn’t help, as I then discovered the keys had started to wear and had become rough especially around the center of the keyboard. With all due respect to Roland, they changed the keybed very quickly without any drama. Unfortunately, this wear appeared again after only a few months, so this time they replaced the whole keyboard for a new one which they said was from a later batch and the problem had been sorted. Unfortunately no, the same happened again after a few months and this time Roland very kindly refunded me for the keyboard. I would add that I know several people with the RD and, although they all show signs of wear, it doesn’t bother them. I was concerned what it would be like after 10 years, which is how long the A90 had been used for. I also pointed out to Roland, that after 120 years of use (not by me), my ivory feel piano showed no signs of wear (actually real ivory). I would hasten to add that I would not justify the demise of an elephant to enhance my pianistic comfort. The additional issue I had with the Roland was that I had used it mainly at home through studio monitors and was happy with the sound. Live was different – I found it rather “muddy” and no amount of EQ seemed to fix it. I always ran it in stereo and had a small high end PA as back line. I had run comparisons with these with my studio monitors, but the problem was that a higher live volumes it was plain muddy.

My research then led me to purchase the Yamaha CP5 – another right choice. In my opinion the piano and Rhodes variants were even better than the Roland. There are loads of onboard sounds and the effects processors are top notch. The action and responsiveness of the keyboard were also an improvement and the matt feel of the keys is apparently the same material as their high end Clavinovas. Although it is the same weight as the RD700, it is a substantially larger machine, so had to buy a new flight case. Then we come to the programming. I was quite at home programming a DX7, but this machine had me regularly spending a lot of time with the manual and I never actually achieved being able to switch the Leslie speed with a pedal effectively – I had to keep my foot on the pedal, and no amount of pedal rewires got around this issue. I also didn’t like the fact that a modulation wheel had been omitted. I did manage to assign mod to a pedal but this was either just on or off, with no degree of control. The Roland is far easier to work with, however, once patches have been written the Yamaha has an easy selection process. The Roland has many advantages in being able to play MP3 files, and MIDI files, whereas the Yamaha only really allows playback of your own performances. The built in rhythms may be useful to some, but to me seemed a little home keyboardish. If the Roland didn’t have the key wear issue, I would still choose the Yamaha as the Piano and Electric Piano capabilities are so much better and the unlike the Roland it was easy to get a good live sound with the Yamaha.

Next – The Clavia Nord Stage 2. I have recently started gigging more locally, i.e. one nighters, and am finding the weight of the Yamaha too much for my old back. The only option for a lighter keyboard, which seemed to have everything I needed, was the Nord. I have been using it for a few weeks now, so here is the comparison to the others. Firstly, if you are essentially a pianist and the weight doesn’t bother you then you would probably not like the action or the shiny plastic keys. The black keys are nicely textured, so why not the white? The hammer action is still much better than a waterfall or weighted keybed and is a good compromise for playing organ and clavinet patches. The sounds are very good indeed – the electric pianos are the best I have played, the organ is excellent and with the, albeit digital, drawbars, live performance on the fly changes are made very easy. The ability to easily access the percussion buttons is very useful, as is the abilty to assign pedals to do almost anything and to set up morphing changes between patches. I am still not sure about the piano – in a straight AB comparison I sometimes think the Yamaha is better, but then I start to play a different piece on the Nord and am totally happy. I think I would have to conclude that they are just different and neither better nor worse. There are a lot of different samples to choose from. Programming is quite easy and only really picked up the manual for the Synth section, which I still haven’t really got my head around in full. I hate with a vengeance the joint mod and pitch controller Roland use, although at least it has one unlike the Yamaha. I was always used to having more control with a mod wheel, which the Nord gives me back again. However, I again reserve judgment on the rather strange horizontal spring pitch bend lever on the Nord. When it comes to live work, I am not convinced by the arrangement of calling up patches. The system involves 4 banks, then 20 pages and finally 5 presets, which always involves 2 button presses and a lot of scrolling if you want to get from page 1 to page 20. There is also no visual LED indication of which page you are on, making the whole process a lot more fiddly than the norm of banks and then presets within the bank as employed by the RD and the CP5.

So to summarize – the best digital stage piano is – wait for it – The Roland V-Piano, but with that price tag, weight and the same dodgy key material – no way. But seriously – for piano sounds and action the Yamaha – for portability and piano, organ and EP the Nord – for programmability and flexibility, without the key wear – the Roland.

For me, I can live with the action as, for what is slightly lacking in piano action you gain on the organ aspect and if Clavia could improve the white key material or surface, improve the live patch selection interface and add balanced XLR outputs it would be near perfect.

I hope someone finds this useful.

[pjstingray]

Thanks for the analysis. It is always interesting to hear other people's opinions.
It was also interesting to hear that you included the EP as a good thing in the Nord. A few people are not completely happy with the factory samples.
About kb actions, I played a P80 for quite some time before the NS2-88 and took me a bit of time to get used to the NS2 (it felt not completely right).
But when I went back to the P80 recently, it did not feel as great as I thought it was and I must say that like the NS2 better now. Something I would also like to see is more velocity curves available.

[jazzystu]

Nice Review. Thanks.

I have a similar story, but came directly via the classic gear route.

Initially I was bowled over by the Nord. The more I play it, the less the Rhodes sounds impress. I've got to the point about a year on where they are actually pretty poor. I find the clavinet "response" not good enough. It's not about the key weight, it's about the velocity curves. The sound is pretty good, if a little thin and through a controller keyboard with adj curves, it is just right. I don't miss my old D6 that much.

Cheers, Stu

[rb4u1]

I currently have a Roland FP four. I also have a Yamaha P 120 and the original nord stage and electro 3. My observations would have to be very similar to the above. Thanks for taking the time and sharing It with us.

[pjstingray]

I also have a story. I used to have only a Nord Stage that my folks gave me back when it was released. I felt that it was lacking some sounds so I bought the Korg M50 thinking that it will change my world. Then I decided that everything was too complicated and that the NS 88 is actually quite heavy due to what I have to go through just to go to a rehearsal. So I wanted a compact, light keyboard and got the NS2 SW instead of a Kornos 61 or something similar.

My reason for getting another Nord and not the Kronos: When I have rehearsals no one helps me load/unload or setup/takeapart and because of that I decided that I wanted THE lightest and most convinient keyboard taking into account I mostly play EPs and Organs, with some leads and occasional synth pads. It must be light because I live on a second floor, the car is not parked so close and the rehearsal room is also on a second floor. When we have gigs on the university, it implies walking about 2 or 3 blocks inside campus. The Kronos 76 is actually quite heavy and with the M50 I own, I found out that 61 keys are just not enough for me.

So one time I go to a store and decide to try out the Kronos (coincidentally there was a Nord Electro 3 right in front) and I found that the NE3 organs kill the Kronos's and that the NE3 EPs sound more vintage than the Kronos. Korg EPs sounded extremely good, but too polished IMO and not so vintage. Also, I was blown away with its synth things, sounded extremely good. Also tried the Motif XF and that proved to be inferior to the Kronos IMO. So since I needed more than 61 keys and a lightweight package and my playing focused on EPs and B3 with occasional synths. Then I decided to get a NS2.

Nowadays i only regret the decision because I could've bought the NE3 73 instead and then just get a Microkorg XL for synthesizer duties and save up a ton of money and end up with a similar sound flexibility.

[rb4u1]

Most of what I am reading rings true to my own experience, thanks to everyone for sharing.
I would like to see the Nord Line get improved Ep's.
My thought, and I don't know if it's feasible, would be to add
variable amounts of bell, tine, growl, & bark, & release/pedal noise/sample to the existing samples.
I believe that everyone could personalize their sound and still retain their existing
framework. Since the Electro is a replicater of these instruments perhaps it could be setup
Similar to the samples with an Adsr of sorts.
Just sayin.

[parencibia]

Hi all!

This kind of comparison is an old topic, but I always like talking about it, so I'll share my view with all of you. I own a Nord Piano 2 and I haven't owned a Roland or Yamaha, so I am not as qualified as Pjstingray. However, I have EXTENSIVELY tested many Yamaha, Roland, Kurzweil, Casio, Kawai and Korg keyboards before I took my decision in favor of Nord. I am a classical and jazz pianist so my priority is the piano sounds and piano feel.

Considering this, the keyboard that felt and sounded better for piano was the Roland RD700NX in my opinion. The texture of the keys, the action feel and the relationship between the action and the sound was the best one (most realistic) to me. However, I fully agree with Pjstingray that the piano sound is not so "effective" or "versatile". A simple test anybody can do (and I strongly recommend if you are considering to buy one) with the Roland is to test the piano sound in mono and not only doing that in stereo. I found that many of the marvelous sound and feel was coming from the stereo effect. As you know, when you go to a live gig, stereo is not always available, and even if it is, the stereo balance due to the location of the speakers make it work very differently than what you hear with headphones.

The Yamaha's are definitively good instruments. I couldn't try the CP series because they were not available at any local dealer. However, a good seller guy took the time to compare and find out the corresponding Clavinova's to the CP models in terms of the actions and sound generation engines. So I tried different Clavinovas knowing what the CP equivalent was supposed to be. I found the piano sound in Yamaha's to be very "effective". In my personal opinion, the problem with Yamaha is the action. There is something unnatural about it. This may be only me because some other people think differently, but I found the keys to behave in a "strange" way. I am sure the Yamaha engineers have made sure that the weight of the action is correct and equivalent to a grand piano, but there is something that doesn't feel well. It's like if the up force of the key is fine as a resistance to the finger, but the real weight of the key itself is too light. I don't really know how to describe it but to me it doesn't feel as realistic as the Roland.

The Nord (Nord Stage and Nord Piano are not exactly the same, but to me they have similar pros and cons) doesn't feel as good as the Roland at the first try. The key's material is very plastic and it doesn't have any double-escape action as the Roland. However, the relationship between what you feel when playing and what sounds is very natural and realistic. Unlike the Roland, it has an "effective" sound. You can do the stereo/mono test and you will hear that the mono sound is still quite good. As you all know, there are many samples to choose from, but one important thing is that you have some "surprising" samples like the Bösendorfer and you have very "effective" samples like the Steinway whenever you want to play with a band on stage and you need the piano sound to be clear and go through the mix with quality.

Last but not least, when I was buying my keyboard, my colleagues with more experience playing in this kind of keyboards repeated to me all the time that I should go for the lightest one with no doubt. I was not paying so much attention to that suggestion at the beginning, but now I have to say that I thank each one of them for telling me this. Carrying the Nord is already a pain but I can imagine how difficult it would really be to go here and there with the Roland (RD700NX) or the Yamaha's (CP series). This is REALLY a VERY important thing to consider. I was looking for the best sound, best keyboard and I can now say that the weight is almost as important as all of that together. Sometimes I have even though that I should have considered more seriously the Electro 3HP (or now Electro 4HP) even if the NP2 is significantly better in many areas. On top of this, the NP2 and NS2 are significantly smaller than the Roland RD700NX.

For the Kurzweil, I had a similar feeling to the ones with Yamaha in terms of the action not being comfortable enough. I believe the Casio Privia keyboards are really the best option if you have a tight budget. They are as good as any other keyboard of similar price and they are AMAZINGLY light. I didn't like any Korg keyboard and I found the Kawai not to be comparable to Roland, Nord or Yamaha in terms of realism.

In summary: to me the best "piano experience" happens with the Roland RD700NX (or Roland FP-7) but it's not so "effective" and it's too big and heavy. The Yamaha's are very effective and if you get used to them, maybe they are wonderful but I don't find the action to be comfortable enough for my taste (and they are also VERY heavy). The Nord NP2 and NS2 have the best balance of pros for me.

Hope this helps somebody!

[pjstingray]

That's a very interesting topic since I kind of own all the three of them.

In 2008 I started with the RD-700GX that I also updated with the extra piano board.
This sound ist still what I basically like best if played back on studio monitors or headphones.

The programming and storage of patches is indeed perfectly easy, playback of midi-, wav- and mp3-files from any usb-drive is very useful for live performance and rehearsal.
The keybed action is also best to me, above CP5 and NS2 since I don't have that artificial ivory issue.

The internal rhodes sounds aren't what you'd expect a MkI to be like.
So I added the SRX-12 expansion board.
Even though this Rhodes sample offeres just 4 velocity layers it's still one of the best Rhodes sounds on hardware instruments the marketplace has to offer.
To me it outreaches Nord's Rhodes pianos.

Roland's string and synth sounds are legendary anyway.
Tone wheel organ sounds are a bit uninspired and lack some dirty part but are tweakable like the real thing, no samples.

pjstingray is right when it comes to the acoustic piano sound on a PA-system.
That's why I recommended the CP5 to my son when he moved out and needed his own stage piano.

The CP's piano sound is clearly better than Roland on PA speakers.
To me the action is a bit light wheight but the dynamic response is overwhelming.
E-piano sounds are above all doubt.
Strings are quite workable.
Organs are sampled what makes them uncomfortable to use.

I added a NSEX first to my rig because of the much better portability and the more authentic Hammond sounds and later upgraded to the NS2.
For giging it is good enough by far, but to be honest meanwhile I'm no longer satisfied with the Rhodes piano(s).

Grand piano has finally caught up with the contestants by the Italian Grand sample but still is not of that georgeous dynamic response the CP5 offers.
The synth section is quite well customizable with the exception of samples offering no velocity layers.
Organ sounds are way above Yamaha and Roland, that's quite obvious anyway.
The keybed action is a compromise, more or less acceptable.

So the real jack in all trades device is still not in existence (yet?).
Live and studio situations have different needs, so it's much fun to have a selection of pianos available.

Cheers

[pjstingray]

It is good to hear everyone's opinions especially when most agree with each other. I think the main differences with opinions is personal preference, which luckily does differ, otherwise it would be a very boring marketplace.

Update - I have just done a gig where only electric piano & CP80 was needed. The CP80 worked really well, especially the patch I have created layering the Bosendorfer lightly underneath. However the EPs were a different matter. I love playing them at home in the studio and have spent many hours playing my favourite Chick Corea pieces and licks and old Rhodes favourites like Stuff Like That - Quincy Jones and many other tracks by Michael McDonald, Al Jarreau, Tom Canning, Donald Fagan, Greg Phillinganes, Stevie Wonder et al. I discovered that within the mix of a quite loud band the pianos didn't have any dynamics and I was unable to bring little accents through with touch. I initially glared at the compressor as it felt like it was on full but it was off. The harder I hit the keys the more lost the sound got. My real Rhodes could knock over small children at 20 paces, but they would have been safe with the Nord. I quickly got around this by attaching a spare EV5 pedal and controlling the pianos similar to an organ. This is not ideal as I like all control dynamics with my fingers, so I will have to spend some time with the patches to sort this. On an up note - at a previous gig, I received several positive comments from fellow musicians on the authenticity of the Hammond sound. I only use one organ patch, which I then alter in real time - the morphing is fantastic for this. Note to self - need to sort out the preset depth of the fast rotor - slightly too much.

So next question - can I justify keeping the CP5 as well, just to use at home? The money is always handy, but I would feel as if I were dismissing its capabilities by selling it. I have however decided to sell my Rhodes as I can't see me ever gigging that again. This may cause a little sentiment having been together for over 35 years.

[Gustavo]

So next question - can I justify keeping the CP5 as well, just to use at home? The money is always handy, but I would feel as if I were dismissing its capabilities by selling it. I have however decided to sell my Rhodes as I can't see me ever gigging that again. This may cause a little sentiment having been together for over 35 years.

Personally, I'd stay with the Rhodes for sentiment and sell the CP5 because of the weight.

Now for the EP, same happened to me. I then found out it was due to me being too low on volume for EPs. So far I haven't had any gig recently. But on rehearsals what I do is test volumes witht he NS2 at around half the volume. So that leaves me space for going all the way up should any sound be too low. You are always exposed to having different sound levels, specially since most people do not set up the patch levels while playing.

I record most of the rehearsals we have, and here is the last one: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/mmq7qlbgwc32ub9/xxW2qEaAmq listen to "just the 2 of us" at the beginning I am playing softly and it sounds very loud because I am alone then when the drums kick in, I start playing louder. If you can cope with the bad recording quality (too much natural reverb), then it may be worth a look. In that piece I constantly change volumes because the bands plays very soft at times then very loud (which is not very noticeable as the recording camera compensates this)

Saludos,
Gustavo