Some comments: 1) There are certain things that a UA-cam video cannot possibly transmit and you have to experience it in person. The one thing I have found that distinguishes digital pianos is: the threshold that separates them from sounding like a digital piano or like an acoustic piano. In the Yamaha world, that threshold is set by the AvantGrand series. In the case of Kawai, that threshold is set by the CA99 (I haven't played a CN901 yet). If you play the most expensive Clavinova, the $10,000 CLP-795GP, it sounds like a very nice digital piano. But it sounds like a digital piano. However, when you play the $15,000 AvantGrand N2, it doesn't sound like an expensive digital piano, it actually sounds like an upright piano, something like a Yamaha b2 or Kawai K-200. Even the $7,500 NU1X sounds like an upright piano. That is an experience that cannot be transmitted by listening to recordings of the samples on UA-cam. 2) No matter how much improvement Kawai or Yamaha puts in a sample or other features, both companies seem to be careful to keep a separation between the "digital piano experience" and the "upright acoustic experience". In Yamaha's mind, a Clavinova is not in the same category as an AvantGrand. More money and newer samples don't buy you the "acoustic upright piano" experience. The AvantGrand N2 has old samples from the CFIIIS while the CLP-795GP has newer samples from the CFX... it doesn't matter. The N2 still sounds "real", the CLP-795GP doesn't. It is a matter of categories. The AvantGrand series is a jump in status. This jump in status is also relevant for Kawai potential customers: you will not get the "acoustic upright piano" experience from Kawai just by buying the latest, newest model. Kawai's entrance ticket to this jump in status occurs, in my experience, in the CA99+, and not before. Everything else from Kawai sounds digital in person. 3) Kawai has 4 different levels of SK-EX: Harmonic Imaging, Progressive Harmonic Imaging, Harmonic Imaging XL, and Rendering. The only engine that will give you the "upright piano" experience is the Rendering, and only when used with the CA99+ level of speaker system, not a cheaper speaker system. The SK-EX sample is only a name: don't think a KDP75 with the "SK-EX" sample sounds like a CN29/CN201 or a CA49, for example. The KDP75 sounds crude on headphones by comparison, because it is the cheapest tone generator from Kawai. When you get to the SK-EX Rendering, the sound quality is just different, and it is what separates Kawai digital piano models that sound like digital pianos from the ones that sound like an upright piano. But again, if you want a digital piano from Kawai to sound like an acoustic upright (a K-200), you have to pay the "entrance ticket". If you plan to use headphones only, then this distinction is not very relevant to you. I have seen people buy a Yamaha AvantGrand N2 to play mostly with headphones... so the entire speaker system goes to waste. You might as well just buy a Yamaha U1 silent piano for $13,000 or a Kawai K-series with similar features. The whole point of my comment is: both Kawai and Yamaha offer digital pianos that sound like an acoustic upright piano via built-in speakers, but it is a limited selection of instruments. In the case of Yamaha, it is limited to the AvantGrand series, and in the case of Kawai is limited to the CA99/CA901 and Novus series.
This confirms my opinion that as expected, these manufacturers will only give away top notch features, for top dollar. All their entry level instruments, just sound like toys, in comparison. Sure the average non musician may not as easily tell the difference.
I don't understand if, as you say, that threshold is set by the KAWAI Ca99 only, what about the CA701 (successor of CA79? They have the identical key action grand feel 3. How a sound board can make a acoustic sound and the digital sound in the one without it, in two digital pianos with the same identical key action? The CA99 has just the wooden soundboard, but the key action it's the same. Because of budget, neighbours and space, I was going to buy the CA 79, but now the production stopped. I can choose between the old KAWAI CA99 (cheapest dealer in the UK £3100) and the new CA701 (£3148). What would you choose between the two?? Actually I was going for the CA701; (even because the only place I can place it is in front of a small wall radiator, where I will put a insulating panel so the hot air goes up only). Then, although it's the same key action it has a total different upgraded technology that reproduces the sound. Had you ever played the CA79 to advise about the difference between the CA99? But you didn't play the CA701 so maybe you can't express properly about?
@@verymozart Hi. Notice that my comment refers to the sound realism only when compared to small upright acoustic pianos, not the action feel. I have played both the CA79 and the CA99 in the same dealer, although not the same day. I remember playing the CN29, CN39, CA79, DG30 all the same day. But I had to wait for the CA99 a few weeks. So, here are some more details: The CA79 speaker system is not identical to the CA99. When I was in the dealer, I tried to study the CA99 sound dispersion, and unlike most people who think the soundboard is the main contributor to its sound profile, I actually think it is the 4 speakers on top. Those created a very realistic, clear sound. I tried to get as close to the soundboard (placing my ears very close) while playing some notes, and the soundboard generated mainly the bass. I think the soundboard (more properly called a wooden resonator, it doesn't even have a crown to be properly called "soundboard") is more of a sales tactic by Kawai than a real effect. They could create bass using speakers, just like Yamaha does. Even the salespeople in the Kawai dealer kept calling it "just a piece of wood". The definition of the sound that we acknowledge as "piano" came mainly from the top 4 speakers in the CA99. Somehow, the speakers on the CA79 seemed to produce an incoherent sound; for example, you could hear the tweeters and the overall sound was somehow boxed-in. Still, it was better than any other Kawai digital piano below it. The DG30 baby grand, for example, sounded very coarse. So, that one is more for looks than sound quality. I played the Novus NV10 when it came out, but it has been a long time and I don't remember much of its sound profile. When I played the first notes back then, I thought it sounded like the Yamaha AvantGrand series. The CA701 has the same speaker configuration of the CA79. I will get in contact with the Kawai dealer I normally visit to see if they have received the new pianos. But I predict the CA701 will sound similar to the CA79. The upgraded technology is unlikely to make a sound difference as large as the speaker system configuration. I have more experience with high-end Yamaha digital pianos because they are easier to find in my area. The first time I was impressed with a digital piano that sounded, to my ears, like an acoustic piano, was the Yamaha MODUS F01. It was Yamaha's premium line of digital pianos before the AvantGrand. No Clavinova creates that acoustic sound profile, and no Kawai digital piano does it either until you get to the CA99 and above. While I was at the Kawai dealer playing the CA99, I thought it sounded fairly realistic and similar to the K-200. The SK-EX Rendering engine sounded, on headphones, like a significant step up from the other SK-EX engines. By the way, I remember comparing the CA99 with the K-200, and the K-200 still sounded better, with much more color in the midrange. If I had to choose between the CA701 and the CA99 without having the chance to play the CA701 first, I would probably choose the CA99. Why? Because I believe it is likely that Kawai is not going to make the CA701 sound better than the CA99 in terms of its speaker system. They had to stop using Onkyo parts and now Kawai dealers are trying to push the "upgraded sound technologies", but ask any audiophile which is the single most important component in their entire stereo system, and that is: the speakers. Nothing else comes close. Just keep in mind that the sound presentation is important for me, but some people are fine with playing using headphones all the time, so the CA701 is likely to be a better choice for them.
Thanks for your reply. I would anyway wait to try the 701, from what I read and heard it's not just about the speakers, but the different technology of coping the keys, also a different system of the pedals. I mean, I repeat, I would wait to try it in person. (Ps. I repeat also that is not ideal to have that part of wood near the radiator)
@@verymozart I think that will be the best decision. From experience, I know that there is always a big difference between what people say in videos and comments, and what I experience once I see the piano in person. I value the sound presentation a lot, so my comment is mostly from that angle, but there are other important aspects that might have more impact for you. I am sure the CA701 is a very nice option as well.
@@verymozartbecause the companies dont want too.... acoustic upright from 5 k til about 50.000...grand piano's from about 50 k till 250 k.... if they really wanted to.....digitals would crush acoustic ones....way way more possibilities to evolve.... just doesnt bring that much money...and a grand piano looks impressive on stage....
17:02 - I didn't understand about the key texture. I didn't like the overly exaggerated texture of the black keys in Grand Feel II and III, which has nothing to do with modern acoustic instruments. Look at the same Novus, which doesn't have these excesses.
I tried then in a showroom the Kawai CA 99/701/901. The sound is not bad, but the action is quite unsubstantial, the touch isn't firm. Especially the 701/901 are unrealistically light. Too lighter and different than acoustic grand pianos. If you study advanced classical music on these models only, you may really struggle to play it on acoustic grand pianos. It's not fair to say they have a similar acoustic action. It's not true. I even played a Novus 10, which has a nice sound but still a very light touch for such an expensive and hybrid piano. Kawai is disappointing. If you need to study seriously advanced classical music and can play on a digital piano only I suggest to avoid these Kawai models
@@verymozart Even during my music college and conservatory years, I always tried to practice on those acoustic instruments with the heaviest keyboard actions. And these Kawai models from the description, even lighter than the average acoustic piano. That, of course, doesn't fit. It is not clear what guided the developers of the keyboard action, and who they wanted to please. Plus this silly exaggerated black key texture, which has been around since GFII. As a result, I get the impression that this action doesn't suit me at all.
@@Oleg__ I wanted to purchase the 701 before trying it. Now is a huge no way. I understand you tried all of those models, right? As I said, it's an unsubstantial Key action, very very light, the touch isn't firm. And another non sense that the,701/901 are even lighter than the predecessors, CA99. What's the point? Within this budget the best, or let's say the least worst I played so far is the Casio GP,510. I thought was much worse, instead it impressed me. Ok it's not the real thing. But the action and touch is firm, nor light, with real hammers hitting the sensors.
@@verymozart Thanks for sharing your experience of trying different instruments. I myself, unfortunately, do not have the opportunity to try any of the listed and other serious models, so I have to orient myself to the numerous reviews of other people, which can sometimes be even contradictory. In the last year or two, I see a lot more positive reviews of Casio GP-series than before. Apparently, some people have gotten rid of stereotypes and have gotten a taste for these models. And also praise the PHA‑50 from Roland, but not its piano sound. Of course, it would be much easier for me if I could try it all myself, I wouldn't need to read forums and other reviews, because I myself know what would suit me better.
@@Oleg__ yes, basically you can't purchase a digital piano without playing it before buying. It would be a non sense. About the Casio GP510 I thought it was much worse before trying it. Also it has a nice settings options of the touch sensitivity. Off, heavy 2, heavy 1, normal, light 1, light 2. The weight of course doesn't change, but it changes the strength and velocity to obtain the same sound/volume, so as consequence it can be heavier or lighter. And I would say that it's totally fine to use the set on normal. It's sufficiently heavy. I also had the impression that the heaviness and lightness varies up to the piano sample you use. Anyway in my case It seems is the only option, because of my budget, space and neighbours, O can't buy an acoustic or more expensive digital piano. I repeat that for sure the 510 has a much more realistic, nicely heavier and firmer touch key action than those Piano toys models of the Kawai. You also feel that the keys are very long and the wood material is nice. Of course I can't know 100 % if and how the Casio 510 can affect the playing advanced classical music on the acoustic grand pianos. But it seems that even if there's of course difference, it is not going to affect dramatically. I will try to have access to acoustic pianos for practicing, but I live in London and studios with great acoustic pianos are madly expensive. I also try Yamaha CLP digital pianos. But those within my budget aren't substantial in Terms of touch and action as the 510. Like the 775 and 785. The 510 doesn't have escapement, it was deliberately avoided, because the action with true hammers allow a highly nice speed of the repetitions of notes. It's not really required a simulation of escapement in a digital piano, and that has a nice consistent key Action. For example few Yamaha and Kawai digital have a terrible and not useful Simulation of escapement
Is there any difference in sound between CA-701 Standard (satin) Finish and Ebony Polish (polished black) finish? The latter weights 3.5 kg (8 lbs) more - is this the finish alone or is that of a thicker/stiffer woodwork frame?
I really like the 701, but the speakers are in the back and you can’t put it up against the wall, which is so silly because you buy an upright piano to put up against the wall 😢
Again a review with "cut out" interface navigation :-). Ever tried to scroll down the "artisan" with out accidently changing a parameter? We is nobody telling Kawai. Even the cheapest touch phone developers understood to "lock" the value change whilst scrolling.
I tried then in a showroom the Kawai CA 99/701/901. The sound is not bad, but the action is quite unsubstantial, the touch isn't firm. Especially the 701/901 are unrealistically light. Too lighter and different than acoustic grand pianos. If you study advanced classical music on these models only, you may really struggle to play it on acoustic grand pianos. It's not fair to say they have a similar acoustic action. It's not true. I even played a Novus 10, which has a nice sound but still a very light touch for such an expensive and hybrid piano. Kawai is disappointing. If you need to study seriously advanced classical music and can play on a digital piano only I suggest to avoid these Kawai models
@@flappybird315 Yes, within the similar budget, I played and impressed me the key action and the firm touch of the Casio GP510. It's much better than I thought before playing it. Within that price I think it's the digital piano with the closest action to an acoustic grand piano. it has also the settings of the touch sensitivity: heavy 2, 1, normal, light 1, 2, Off. Set on normal is already sufficiently heavy and realistic touch.
@@lodewijkvandoornik3844 no I haven't played Roland. But from th descriptions , the material, the length of the keys, the key action, doesn't seem a very high quality.. or anyway not too appropriate for advanced classical music studying
Some comments:
1) There are certain things that a UA-cam video cannot possibly transmit and you have to experience it in person. The one thing I have found that distinguishes digital pianos is: the threshold that separates them from sounding like a digital piano or like an acoustic piano. In the Yamaha world, that threshold is set by the AvantGrand series. In the case of Kawai, that threshold is set by the CA99 (I haven't played a CN901 yet). If you play the most expensive Clavinova, the $10,000 CLP-795GP, it sounds like a very nice digital piano. But it sounds like a digital piano. However, when you play the $15,000 AvantGrand N2, it doesn't sound like an expensive digital piano, it actually sounds like an upright piano, something like a Yamaha b2 or Kawai K-200. Even the $7,500 NU1X sounds like an upright piano. That is an experience that cannot be transmitted by listening to recordings of the samples on UA-cam.
2) No matter how much improvement Kawai or Yamaha puts in a sample or other features, both companies seem to be careful to keep a separation between the "digital piano experience" and the "upright acoustic experience". In Yamaha's mind, a Clavinova is not in the same category as an AvantGrand. More money and newer samples don't buy you the "acoustic upright piano" experience. The AvantGrand N2 has old samples from the CFIIIS while the CLP-795GP has newer samples from the CFX... it doesn't matter. The N2 still sounds "real", the CLP-795GP doesn't. It is a matter of categories. The AvantGrand series is a jump in status.
This jump in status is also relevant for Kawai potential customers: you will not get the "acoustic upright piano" experience from Kawai just by buying the latest, newest model. Kawai's entrance ticket to this jump in status occurs, in my experience, in the CA99+, and not before. Everything else from Kawai sounds digital in person.
3) Kawai has 4 different levels of SK-EX: Harmonic Imaging, Progressive Harmonic Imaging, Harmonic Imaging XL, and Rendering. The only engine that will give you the "upright piano" experience is the Rendering, and only when used with the CA99+ level of speaker system, not a cheaper speaker system.
The SK-EX sample is only a name: don't think a KDP75 with the "SK-EX" sample sounds like a CN29/CN201 or a CA49, for example. The KDP75 sounds crude on headphones by comparison, because it is the cheapest tone generator from Kawai.
When you get to the SK-EX Rendering, the sound quality is just different, and it is what separates Kawai digital piano models that sound like digital pianos from the ones that sound like an upright piano. But again, if you want a digital piano from Kawai to sound like an acoustic upright (a K-200), you have to pay the "entrance ticket".
If you plan to use headphones only, then this distinction is not very relevant to you. I have seen people buy a Yamaha AvantGrand N2 to play mostly with headphones... so the entire speaker system goes to waste. You might as well just buy a Yamaha U1 silent piano for $13,000 or a Kawai K-series with similar features.
The whole point of my comment is: both Kawai and Yamaha offer digital pianos that sound like an acoustic upright piano via built-in speakers, but it is a limited selection of instruments. In the case of Yamaha, it is limited to the AvantGrand series, and in the case of Kawai is limited to the CA99/CA901 and Novus series.
This confirms my opinion that as expected, these manufacturers will only give away top notch features, for top dollar. All their entry level instruments, just sound like toys, in comparison. Sure the average non musician may not as easily tell the difference.
I don't understand if, as you say, that threshold is set by the KAWAI Ca99 only, what about the CA701 (successor of CA79? They have the identical key action grand feel 3. How a sound board can make a acoustic sound and the digital sound in the one without it, in two digital pianos with the same identical key action? The CA99 has just the wooden soundboard, but the key action it's the same. Because of budget, neighbours and space, I was going to buy the CA 79, but now the production stopped. I can choose between the old KAWAI CA99 (cheapest dealer in the UK £3100) and the new CA701 (£3148). What would you choose between the two?? Actually I was going for the CA701; (even because the only place I can place it is in front of a small wall radiator, where I will put a insulating panel so the hot air goes up only). Then, although it's the same key action it has a total different upgraded technology that reproduces the sound. Had you ever played the CA79 to advise about the difference between the CA99? But you didn't play the CA701 so maybe you can't express properly about?
@@verymozart Hi. Notice that my comment refers to the sound realism only when compared to small upright acoustic pianos, not the action feel. I have played both the CA79 and the CA99 in the same dealer, although not the same day. I remember playing the CN29, CN39, CA79, DG30 all the same day. But I had to wait for the CA99 a few weeks. So, here are some more details:
The CA79 speaker system is not identical to the CA99. When I was in the dealer, I tried to study the CA99 sound dispersion, and unlike most people who think the soundboard is the main contributor to its sound profile, I actually think it is the 4 speakers on top. Those created a very realistic, clear sound. I tried to get as close to the soundboard (placing my ears very close) while playing some notes, and the soundboard generated mainly the bass. I think the soundboard (more properly called a wooden resonator, it doesn't even have a crown to be properly called "soundboard") is more of a sales tactic by Kawai than a real effect. They could create bass using speakers, just like Yamaha does. Even the salespeople in the Kawai dealer kept calling it "just a piece of wood". The definition of the sound that we acknowledge as "piano" came mainly from the top 4 speakers in the CA99. Somehow, the speakers on the CA79 seemed to produce an incoherent sound; for example, you could hear the tweeters and the overall sound was somehow boxed-in. Still, it was better than any other Kawai digital piano below it. The DG30 baby grand, for example, sounded very coarse. So, that one is more for looks than sound quality. I played the Novus NV10 when it came out, but it has been a long time and I don't remember much of its sound profile. When I played the first notes back then, I thought it sounded like the Yamaha AvantGrand series.
The CA701 has the same speaker configuration of the CA79. I will get in contact with the Kawai dealer I normally visit to see if they have received the new pianos. But I predict the CA701 will sound similar to the CA79. The upgraded technology is unlikely to make a sound difference as large as the speaker system configuration.
I have more experience with high-end Yamaha digital pianos because they are easier to find in my area. The first time I was impressed with a digital piano that sounded, to my ears, like an acoustic piano, was the Yamaha MODUS F01. It was Yamaha's premium line of digital pianos before the AvantGrand. No Clavinova creates that acoustic sound profile, and no Kawai digital piano does it either until you get to the CA99 and above.
While I was at the Kawai dealer playing the CA99, I thought it sounded fairly realistic and similar to the K-200. The SK-EX Rendering engine sounded, on headphones, like a significant step up from the other SK-EX engines. By the way, I remember comparing the CA99 with the K-200, and the K-200 still sounded better, with much more color in the midrange.
If I had to choose between the CA701 and the CA99 without having the chance to play the CA701 first, I would probably choose the CA99. Why? Because I believe it is likely that Kawai is not going to make the CA701 sound better than the CA99 in terms of its speaker system. They had to stop using Onkyo parts and now Kawai dealers are trying to push the "upgraded sound technologies", but ask any audiophile which is the single most important component in their entire stereo system, and that is: the speakers. Nothing else comes close.
Just keep in mind that the sound presentation is important for me, but some people are fine with playing using headphones all the time, so the CA701 is likely to be a better choice for them.
Thanks for your reply. I would anyway wait to try the 701, from what I read and heard it's not just about the speakers, but the different technology of coping the keys, also a different system of the pedals. I mean, I repeat, I would wait to try it in person. (Ps. I repeat also that is not ideal to have that part of wood near the radiator)
@@verymozart I think that will be the best decision. From experience, I know that there is always a big difference between what people say in videos and comments, and what I experience once I see the piano in person. I value the sound presentation a lot, so my comment is mostly from that angle, but there are other important aspects that might have more impact for you. I am sure the CA701 is a very nice option as well.
start on 7:15, 18:06
It's interesting that there are no comparison videos of Kawai CA 701 vs. CA 501. Talking about the marketing.
Hi , please we waiting for review video for CA901 . Thank you
These comments are deeply rich, WOW!! Impressive.
acoustic piano 100 acoustic.All details are there.Well Done Kawai.
That's totally untrue, it's very far from an acoustic. But really another planet
@@verymozartbecause the companies dont want too.... acoustic upright from 5 k til about 50.000...grand piano's from about 50 k till 250 k.... if they really wanted to.....digitals would crush acoustic ones....way way more possibilities to evolve.... just doesnt bring that much money...and a grand piano looks impressive on stage....
It would be nice if you had an inset video or text of the voice being played throughout the video -- or am I missing something???
17:02 - I didn't understand about the key texture. I didn't like the overly exaggerated texture of the black keys in Grand Feel II and III, which has nothing to do with modern acoustic instruments. Look at the same Novus, which doesn't have these excesses.
I tried then in a showroom the Kawai CA 99/701/901. The sound is not bad, but the action is quite unsubstantial, the touch isn't firm. Especially the 701/901 are unrealistically light. Too lighter and different than acoustic grand pianos. If you study advanced classical music on these models only, you may really struggle to play it on acoustic grand pianos. It's not fair to say they have a similar acoustic action. It's not true. I even played a Novus 10, which has a nice sound but still a very light touch for such an expensive and hybrid piano. Kawai is disappointing. If you need to study seriously advanced classical music and can play on a digital piano only I suggest to avoid these Kawai models
@@verymozart Even during my music college and conservatory years, I always tried to practice on those acoustic instruments with the heaviest keyboard actions. And these Kawai models from the description, even lighter than the average acoustic piano. That, of course, doesn't fit. It is not clear what guided the developers of the keyboard action, and who they wanted to please. Plus this silly exaggerated black key texture, which has been around since GFII. As a result, I get the impression that this action doesn't suit me at all.
@@Oleg__ I wanted to purchase the 701 before trying it. Now is a huge no way. I understand you tried all of those models, right? As I said, it's an unsubstantial Key action, very very light, the touch isn't firm. And another non sense that the,701/901 are even lighter than the predecessors, CA99. What's the point? Within this budget the best, or let's say the least worst I played so far is the Casio GP,510. I thought was much worse, instead it impressed me. Ok it's not the real thing. But the action and touch is firm, nor light, with real hammers hitting the sensors.
@@verymozart Thanks for sharing your experience of trying different instruments. I myself, unfortunately, do not have the opportunity to try any of the listed and other serious models, so I have to orient myself to the numerous reviews of other people, which can sometimes be even contradictory. In the last year or two, I see a lot more positive reviews of Casio GP-series than before. Apparently, some people have gotten rid of stereotypes and have gotten a taste for these models. And also praise the PHA‑50 from Roland, but not its piano sound.
Of course, it would be much easier for me if I could try it all myself, I wouldn't need to read forums and other reviews, because I myself know what would suit me better.
@@Oleg__ yes, basically you can't purchase a digital piano without playing it before buying. It would be a non sense. About the Casio GP510 I thought it was much worse before trying it. Also it has a nice settings options of the touch sensitivity. Off, heavy 2, heavy 1, normal, light 1, light 2. The weight of course doesn't change, but it changes the strength and velocity to obtain the same sound/volume, so as consequence it can be heavier or lighter. And I would say that it's totally fine to use the set on normal. It's sufficiently heavy. I also had the impression that the heaviness and lightness varies up to the piano sample you use. Anyway in my case It seems is the only option, because of my budget, space and neighbours, O can't buy an acoustic or more expensive digital piano. I repeat that for sure the 510 has a much more realistic, nicely heavier and firmer touch key action than those Piano toys models of the Kawai. You also feel that the keys are very long and the wood material is nice. Of course I can't know 100 % if and how the Casio 510 can affect the playing advanced classical music on the acoustic grand pianos. But it seems that even if there's of course difference, it is not going to affect dramatically. I will try to have access to acoustic pianos for practicing, but I live in London and studios with great acoustic pianos are madly expensive. I also try Yamaha CLP digital pianos. But those within my budget aren't substantial in Terms of touch and action as the 510. Like the 775 and 785. The 510 doesn't have escapement, it was deliberately avoided, because the action with true hammers allow a highly nice speed of the repetitions of notes. It's not really required a simulation of escapement in a digital piano, and that has a nice consistent key Action. For example few Yamaha and Kawai digital have a terrible and not useful Simulation of escapement
I got this same model back in January. It feels like it’s too god for me.
what is the nice song played by TED?
I also really like to know that 😊
Could it be something like tam hon thanh than?
7:57 what song is it?
Is there any difference in sound between CA-701 Standard (satin) Finish and Ebony Polish (polished black) finish? The latter weights 3.5 kg (8 lbs) more - is this the finish alone or is that of a thicker/stiffer woodwork frame?
That is cruel treatment of a softcover book, Ted.
you should see the pages!
Why this video is muted!? 😮
The electric pianos on this - sound great. The acoustic pianos sound a bit too bright for me.
I really like the 701, but the speakers are in the back and you can’t put it up against the wall, which is so silly because you buy an upright piano to put up against the wall 😢
Is the music stand removable (can I sit a computer on it)?
You can lie it totally flat or set it in several angles to suit
Are you listening, or just waiting to talk. Patrick?
Patrick the clown 🤡
Should I wait for the CA401 or CA501 or get the CA49 or CA59? CA701 sounds wonderful but it’s a bit beyond my budget.
I am also waiting for CA401 and 501. I hope they are coming soon...
@@erlon1506 they could be announced at NAMM 2023.
How much of a price difference do we think there will be between the CN301 and CA401 when it is released?
$20 dollars.
Again a review with "cut out" interface navigation :-). Ever tried to scroll down the "artisan" with out accidently changing a parameter? We is nobody telling Kawai. Even the cheapest touch phone developers understood to "lock" the value change whilst scrolling.
No. Kawai makes a higher line of digital piano's, the novus line.
Those are hybrids…. Not in the same class …..
I tried then in a showroom the Kawai CA 99/701/901. The sound is not bad, but the action is quite unsubstantial, the touch isn't firm. Especially the 701/901 are unrealistically light. Too lighter and different than acoustic grand pianos. If you study advanced classical music on these models only, you may really struggle to play it on acoustic grand pianos. It's not fair to say they have a similar acoustic action. It's not true. I even played a Novus 10, which has a nice sound but still a very light touch for such an expensive and hybrid piano. Kawai is disappointing. If you need to study seriously advanced classical music and can play on a digital piano only I suggest to avoid these Kawai models
any digital that impressed you?
@@flappybird315 Yes, within the similar budget, I played and impressed me the key action and the firm touch of the Casio GP510. It's much better than I thought before playing it. Within that price I think it's the digital piano with the closest action to an acoustic grand piano. it has also the settings of the touch sensitivity: heavy 2, 1, normal, light 1, 2, Off. Set on normal is already sufficiently heavy and realistic touch.
@@verymozartwhat do you think about Roland Lx serie ? Specially 706 ? Have you ever tried one among these ?
@@lodewijkvandoornik3844 no I haven't played Roland. But from th descriptions , the material, the length of the keys, the key action, doesn't seem a very high quality.. or anyway not too appropriate for advanced classical music studying
@@verymozart thanks a lot for your response