Roland F107, Yuck!

amc252

Hello everybody,

Today I got my new Roland F107 digital piano. Since there are no Roland dealers in my area, I bought it online (used but like new).

What a disappointment.

Compared to my 20 year old Clavinova CLP115, it feels and sound like a toy. The keyboard is terrible, cheap and plasticky, the sound is awful even compared to the old Yamaha. The cabinetry is cheap. The specs might be impressive on paper, but in reality it is an inferior product.

The only good thing is that I got it very cheap and can resell it without problems.

Pete14

I’ve been trying to tell you people all along:

Roland markets itself as premium, but in reality it’s average (at best).

Wait and see the new LX-XXX; I assure you it’ll cost as much if not more than an NU1X-A on the basis of hyped-up specs!

They’ve gone from the SuperNatural to a more earthly PianoReality, but that doesn’t change their underlying philosophy: “let’s milk them for all they have…..”

CrisOliveira

But the F107 isn't Roland's premium. It's an entry level model. An entry level portable piano glued into a cabinet stand.

Pete14

CrisOliveira But the F107 isn't Roland's premium.

….yet still, they market everything they make as “premium.”

BTW, I’m not bashing Roland for the heck of it, but rather to protect the little man from this scam perpetuated by/from Roland for many years!

The V-Piano: good, but what have you done for me lately, Roland?

As a public servant it is my duty to observe & report, and yes, I’ll continue observing Roland, but I don’t foresee any worthwhile improvements to report on…

kawafanboi

Pete14

pianism itself needs to get off its high horse. everything is expensive and marketed as -Classy-, despite the fact that if we categorize the art form by modern standards, at best, piano is an INDIE Game level of sophistication.

the reality is, a piano professional is not above a dedicated video game speed-runner.

until piano, and its industry REALIZE what they are, and what they're up against, they simply can not become economically relevant/ successful.

they are operating and managing their public mindshare under the wrong context.

the piano industry is trying to sell horse karts against teslas.

the only people who's confused about the situation is the piano industry itself. why won't people buy our horse karts which haven't advanced for 50 years.

CrisOliveira

Pete14 I'll not gonna argue against that. But OP seems to have had too much expectation toward an entry-level instrument. Regardless of how Roland markets itself, the F107 is the second most entry-level of its category in Roland's catalogue. If OP were disappointed with Roland using the same engine and the same action in more expensive instruments, that would be a different thing (and Roland does that, their poor old cow being milked dry). Now, a cheap build, with cheap speakers, that doesn't surprise me.

amc252

The Roland F107 wasn't my fist option. If fact, I was perfectly happy with my Clavinova. But when the opportunity to buy the Roland set in new conditions including headphones and bench at an excellent bargain price came up I said why not?

I live in a small coastal town with no piano dealers nearby. I have no way to test digital pianos. But all the reviews and forum comments I have read were positive. The specifications for this piano are very good. I didn't expect the F107 to be state-of-the-art, but at least to sound better than a 20 year old CLP115. I could accept less than great craftmanship and an average action.

The main disappointment is the piano sound. It is harsh and muddled at the same time. The speakers aren't great, so it improves a bit through the hedphones and even better if recorded and equalized on my laptop. But still, I expected better. Perhaps I'm naive, but I think that in 2024 a piano building company might get anything wrong except the sampled instrument.

Then again, there are lots of people perfectly satisfied with the F107 'Steinway'. So I could be just me.

CyberGene

kawafanboi pianism itself needs to get off its high horse

Why? I still can't get your point (and that of your disciple). There are a lot of digital keyboards since the 1980-s, all offering a keyboard with black and white keys, enough polyphony, interesting sounds and so many other features. If you think the piano is snobbish and needs to get to the ground and appeal to everybody, well, there they are, all the digital keyboards. What's missing in them that they don't deserve to be called "pianos" by you? And then, what is wrong with real pianos that you despise them so much, yet you apparently keep talking about them? I don't get it.

SouthPark

In cooking, the golden rule is taste taste taste, to make sure it at least satisfies ourselves first. In piano buying - where possible - test test test. That's to cut down on chances of the instrument not satisfying ourselves. As for design flaw/glitches and reliability … not much can be done about that - except for waiting to see if many people detected and reported issues.

If there is the need to not try before buying, then not much can be done about that as well, except if the unit works ok with vst etc. This is assuming ok with the feel/behaviour of the key mechanism.

CrisOliveira

amc252 I own a Roland FP-E50. Its core is very similar to your F107. The build is very good, though. Maybe it's a model thing, same components, different build quality, idk. The speakers are awful, no question about it. I used to have a Yamaha P-95 (just sold it today) and its speakers were much better, despite being old and of a lower tier. However, I think using good headphones makes a huge difference, night and day. About the action, I have no complaints. I knew all along its pivot length is not big and it's not wood. For what it is, it's good and, compared to the P-95, it is a huge step up. I know the action is the same as yours (at least on paper), but I don't really know if the keys themselves are the same. Mine look and feel fine, at least to me.

Now, the notorious Roland piano sound is usually a love or hate relationship. I'm not gonna try to convince you you should like it. It's a weird piano sound, too bright and with a jump in harmonic complexity on forte/fortissimo. I'd recommend setting the velocity curve harder in order to make dynamics sound more natural. And maybe some EQing. I listened to the CLP115 on YouTube and although the samples in isolation may sound better than Roland's, I don't think the whole thing sounds better. It lacks articulation and resonance, which is to be expected from a piano that old.

What headphones are you using with the F170?

amc252

CrisOliveira Thanks for the feedback. I started using the ISK HP2000 heaphones that came with the piano, then switched to my old Sony studio which sound better (cleaner at least).

I agree with you, the Supernatural is rather bright. I might get to mold it into something I can use for recording with EQ and tinkering, but the Yamaha patch, though certainly less complex and advanced, has a timbre that suits me better.

I play jazz, so I favor mellow sounds. The 'mellow piano' on the F107 sounds more dulled than mellowed though, and I prefer the default grand to it.

CrisOliveira

kawafanboi Although I'd love to bash multi-million dollar corporations, I don't think they are to blame here. There hasn't been much time since digital pianos became good enough (some say they are not good enough yet). It's hard for the piano to remain popular when people are not able to carry it around. Keyboards, as in electronic keyboards, are very popular, though. Portable digital pianos may raise the instrument's popularity, but it takes time.

CrisOliveira

amc252 Have you tried Roland Piano App for Android/iPhone? It will probably allow you to tweak F107's onboard EQ.

amc252

CrisOliveira No, I use Linux, so it's tricky. I might set up a virtual machine to run Android apps, but wanna see if it's worth the trouble first. I actualized the software (the piano is from may 2022) but I don't think that makes a difference as far as sound and functions are concerned.

I found a way to make the Roland play my SFZ patches and then send the sound back and listen to it through the piano speakers. Too bad there seems to be no way to turn off the sound engine, so I hear the piano own sound too.

CrisOliveira

amc252 The volume on my FP-E50 is independent from the audio that comes from the computer. I just turn the onboard piano down and whatever I'm playing on Windows will sound through the FP-E50.

amc252

CrisOliveira That's how it should be. I've sent an information request to Roland customer service. Let's hope they tell me a way how to do it.

kawafanboi

CrisOliveira

sleds, became wheelbarrows, carts, chariots, horse carriage, automobile, formula 1, tesla, formula-E, soon drone quadrocopters.

reeds, became strings, harp, harpsichord, pianoforte, pianos, 1886 Liszt died, the modern piano has since then stagnated with little advancement in core concepts, modern pianism still focuses on the acoustic piano, they're 100 years behind.

it's not just the technology itself, it's the FRAMING and utility of technological possibilities.

the person paid the most in piano, is still the boring speed-runner that's been the same for 100 years.

the context of what pianism is, needs to change, who are its heros, updating its synergy with modern entertainment devices.

kawafanboi

CyberGene There are a lot of digital keyboards since the 1980-s, all offering a keyboard with black and white keys, enough polyphony, interesting sounds and so many other features. If you think the piano is snobbish and needs to get to the ground and appeal to everybody, well, there they are, all the digital keyboards.

piano is in the same class as horseback polo. it's something very old rich people did, and only rich old people want anything to do with.

not just technology, the whole context, users, performance, integration with modern entertainment (games), much more.

peak pianism of today, is still a guy in a suit, everyone shuts up, he bingbongs for an hour, and everyone goes home.

CrisOliveira

kawafanboi sleds, became wheelbarrows, carts, chariots, horse carriage, automobile, formula 1, tesla, formula-E, soon drone quadrocopters.

reeds, became strings, harp, harpsichord, pianoforte, pianos, 1886 Liszt died, the modern piano has since then stagnated with little advancement in core concepts, modern pianism still focuses on the acoustic piano, they're 100 years behind.

it's not just the technology itself, it's the FRAMING and utility of technological possibilities.

the person paid the most in piano, is still the boring speed-runner that's been the same for 100 years.

the context of what pianism is, needs to change, who are its heros, updating its synergy with modern entertainment devices.

Isn't that why we have synths? And what about physical modelling? Piano simulation -- you can't go more hi-tech than that.

kawafanboi

CrisOliveira

synth were indeed the last glimmer of hope in terms of pianistic evolution. alas the music schools did not adopt it as the path forward for pianism. so we're still stuck.