Yamaha NU1X "loud note" fix seems to cause another problem

Hey, thank you all for your kind responses!

I called the dealer because I was unsure what to do now. We stick to the decision that I return it. The problem is that there aren't any other NU1X for the next months - they will get a single NU1X unit in the end of January. If there was another NU1X we would have just exchanged it. The dealer said that Yamaha in Germany (Rellingen) is more or less unattended since last year due to the pandemic situation and that the problem description would probably be sent to Yamaha Japan. So the whole response and fixing procedure would take a good while and there is no certainty that the problem could be solved. I also sent him the link to the video and I asked him if he can inform me when he gets some information from Yamaha.

I am bit sad about it, because the NU1X is great instrument! But there are other possibilities. And I don't want to start experiments like trying to install hammer sensors and ruin the warranty or keep the instrument with the uncertainty if it will ever work properly - it's an instruments for 4500 € and I expect it to work, at least in this main aspect (ff input = ff output). And I wouldn't like to sell it sometime in the future to someone with that error.

RIP you can DIY as I mentioned in an earlier message (beware, that is lots of work)

It's something I thought about. I think in Germany it also should be possible to get a proper working action in good shape and/or case of an old grand that is otherwise irreparably (cast iron frame) broken. I just don't have any craftsmanship and technical skills, it would be a very, very long-term project…

RIP It sound like you are like me in that you want something that either does not exist or it's extremely rare or expensive and can't afford it. For example I really wanted a good Janko…. but let's not open that historic thing!

That's true! 😅 But what is A Janko?

RIP you don't like the non-hybrid actions, but frankly some people prefer them to even the NU1 or NV5, so they must not be "that bad" per se, it's just a preference (I don't know of anybody who prefers them compared to the N1 or NV-10, FWIW). So that's another possible compromise.

Yeah I know, I think I saw some people commenting on pianoworld or youtube that they choose the GF3 over the upright action of the NV-5 (which I really can't understand…). But imo my Roland FP-30 is "good enough" for a compromise, so I really don't want to spend another few thousand € for a slightly better compromise. I already had and returned / sold a VPC1 and MP11SE. Then I would rather look for a N1X / NV-10S and

RIP buy it on credit

or buy / rent a

RIP a Yamaha b1-silent

or

TomLC a Kawai K300 silent upright for 100€ month

or

johanibraaten look for a used N1 and plan a budget for a full regulation

These are good options.

johanibraaten One other option is of course the NV5s even if it's quite pricey. I played one the other day and I think it's a lovely instrument.

It is! As RIP mentioned I played it today and I like the action even better than of the NU1X. But it's so close pricewise to a N1X here in Germany, I think I would then tend to the latter.

RIP Is JustMusic the same dealer that got you the NU1x?

Thanks for the suggestion. Unfortunately this is not the case (and even if it was, due to the very high demand and supply shortage of the hybrid pianos I really doubt that this would work).

I will keep you updated if you like. 🙂

I'm sorry that you have had so much trouble with this; I believe it was me who steered you directly to that faulty NU1X.

QuasiUnaFantasia Haha, I just looked it up on pianoworld, true! No need to be sorry. I think I would have ordered it there anyway. 🙂

Eddie, just run the calibration sequence. You've nothing to lose and it won't cause any damage.

EssBrace Eddie, just run the calibration sequence. You've nothing to lose and it won't cause any damage.

Just to make sure this is clear, that is a simple software procedure, fully supported by Yamaha, with no possible downsides on the warranty or the likes, correct?

porco_rosso Janko?

Ok, you asked for it. Achtung, rabbit hole ahead: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jank%C3%B3_keyboard

porco_rosso And I don't want to start experiments like trying to install hammer sensors and ruin the warranty or keep the instrument with the uncertainty if it will ever work properly

Just to clarify, I was suggesting that you might go that route only if "keeping the NU1" was your chosen option regardless of the modification. Otherwise an otherwise broken upright with decent cabinet and salvageable action would certainly cost less. Then the modification would have been a side project for which you would not need to find a separate action and cabinet, to see where it would lead.

porco_rosso I will keep you updated if you like.

Yes, now we are all curious, please.

CyberGene has attached the instructions above. It's only a series of button presses and you follow a sequence. It's in the Yamaha service manual. That's what I would do anyway. On the other hand I could twist myself into knots over-thinking every single element of the issue. But life's too short.

Hey all, I can understand that you want me to try it the calibration, but as I said before I don't want to experiment now anymore. The instrument will be picked up tomorrow already.

I am not sure about what to get now. I really liked the MP11SE GF1 when I played it a few days ago - somehow even more than the GF3 in CA79. It just doesn't send MIDI velocities under 30 (there was a pianoworld thread about it), but the action itself is wonderful.

My candidates would be the NV5 and the N1X. I think NV10 is just too expensive at more than twice the price of a NU1X.

Another NU1X user on PW has reported they cannot reproduce the problem!

RIP I have the NU1 too, but as I said I did not install the anti-loud-note firmware, so I can't test it, but I can speculate.

I think that the link to the loud note firmware is supposition only, so you can test it if so inclined.

spanishbuddha I think that the link to the loud note firmware is supposition only, so you can test it if so inclined.

You are quite right, my friend. I did that test, using PTQ as the MIDI velocity display and no sound (because my daughter was playing violin) and 🎉 I noticed the same problem that @porco_rosso described! I tried to play random notes with arm-weight technique, falling from about 4" above the keyboard and most of the time I got velocities around 120+ and occasionally around 105 and around 88. This is a NU1 with official firmware (no-loud-note-fix one).

Now, you may wonder why I never experienced that while playing and the answer is pretty easy. To achieve these 120+ velocities I had to do the technique described above, which after only a couple of minutes of doing made my fingertips hurts. I never play with those velocities, and certainly never for so long. During that time I must have played about 50 notes, and only about 5 showed the problem unambiguously, so if these statistics are correct, no wonder it went unnoticed for so long.

In any case, I think this is a shocking find! If you haven't already, @spanishbuddha I suggest you try it that way too and perhaps suggest to the PW thread also. You really have to "bang hard on the keyboard" to see this happening, your "banging" must be at a level of surely triggering 120+. As a speculation, the problem could be that on such velocities the downstroke is so fast that it misses the second trigger and reaches it only later after rebouncing from the keybed, resulting in a lower apparent value.

Now, as I said, I experienced no sound, so I don't know on that side, I'll give it a try another day.

PS: I also noticed that the NU1 sends aftertouch signals while doing partial note release, so maybe the loud note fix use those?

Thank you RIP delvento for testing it! Very interesting that it also appears on your NU1 without the lout note fix firmware. And yes, you really have to hit the keys with a lot a weight and speed to get these high velocities of 120+. But imo this corresponds well to get a real ff/fff on an acoustic piano. I would like to share these findings in the pianoworld forum, but can't send a link to this forum there (I think). Would you like share them there on the corresponding thread? 🙂 http://forum.pianoworld.com/ubbthreads.php/topics/3170250/casio-gp-310-510-vs-yamaha-nu1x.html#Post3170250

I was aware quite some time of the issues.
If I remember properly, the sudden 127 notes weren't present on the KAWAI Novus Device I had to mess for.

porco_rosso

To eddiepiano, delvento or anyone who has hands-on experience banging out these “ … lot a weight and speed to get these high velocities…” ffs and fffs on a real AP/GP compared to a midi/dp equivalent, does one really need to strike the keys with arm&hand blows delivered from a starting point of approx 4 inches above the keyboard?

Since there are these techy end-user tools that allow measurements that help’s one so minded to compare common characteristic results of DPs and APs - like tools/apps that allows one to measure midi/dp key velocity 0-127, and tools for measuring resultant SPL/dB values coming out of given AP/DP - is there a tool that measures the actual applied force of keystrokes so that it is known that a force of __ is required to be applied to an AP to produce ff or fff, etc ?

Its easy to presume there is such a (expensive) tool for designers in AP & DP laboratories, but how about a practical tool for end users? ( aside from something like MacMacMac’s “ my ears & hands are my tools “ 🙂 ) …. how do they know, with some certainty, that a respectable DP designed to emulate (or otherwise mimic) the AP experience is in fact performing comparably well regarding force ?

@Drew-r yes they have such machines. Quite expensive and complicated. Look at that video from the upright action improvement that got people excited, there's one in action.

porco_rosso Would you like share them there on the corresponding thread?

I wrote an answer there. But boy, PW is really tedious to utilize. I can't bear it anymore 😀

I did my best, and sorry if I sounded annoyed: I was (at the website, not at the people I was answering to). I don't think I'll have the stamina to continue the discussion there -- bring those people here instead…

RIP I don't think I'll have the stamina to continue the discussion there

That's a noteworthy phrase.

I think that here we have discussions. Over there we don't (or didn't). There were just threads.

Part of the difference is this newer platform. And part of it is the membership here.

Summary: I like it here. A lot.

Thank you for posting it delvento.

CyberGene I tend to the N1X as well. It's "only" 1200 € more expensive than the NV-5S, but

• it has a (short) grand action; I even liked the NU1X super short upright action way better then all regular digitalpiano actions
• I like the Yamaha samples much more than Kawais
• binaural audio samples for headphones
• integrated USB audio interface, that I found very useful with the NU1X for VSTs
• also sends note-off velocity iicr due to hammer and keysensor
• I like the simple but functional interface much better than the slow, low resolution display

The NV-10S has a wonderful action that I like even more than N1Xs from my last impression. But all the other pros of the N1X still apply. It's almost 2000 € less expensive than the NV-10S. And if the AvantGrand action is good enough for a pianist like him it will be way more than good enough for me for the rest of my life (it's the N3 in these videos):

hello, I have tried to replicate this problem cited in this thread. This is the second time I have tried. I have connected pianoteq and the highest values are around 110 (attached image), I have not noticed that they are filtered. To repeat the experiment it would be necessary to know all the configuration both in the NU1X and in pianoteq (which I requested in PW but I didn't get any answer). I am very interested in this topic because I don't like as an owner of this instrument that it is abandoned by Yamaha with unresolved problems. I will be the first, that I know if I detect it, I will send mails with complaints to Yamaha.

IMO I have the feeling that the instrument is being pushed to the limit with tests that I don't know if with a regular practice occur. It doesn't happen to me. I would like to know in which works the problem is apparent so I can try to reproduce it by playing normally. It has also been commented that the solution to the "load note" problem was a patch to get out of the trouble when, as far as I know, no one has obtained real information about how Yamaha solved the problem.

On the other hand I can't find any information about other series with the exact same laser system and the same vertical action (or similar but always vertical) in which the same problems have appeared (silent SG2 and SH2 series, transacoustic TA2, old hybrids DUP-8, DUP-22b, etc). If it was a problem of this sensor in combination with a vertical action it should have appeared beyond NU1 since it has been mounted for more than 20 years. In my opinion it is exclusively a software problem of the NU1 that the NU1X "inherited" and that in my experience no longer appears with the V2.1 correction.

In upright pianos there is no need for the hammer sensor because the key and hammer movement is synchronous. There is no double escapement or repetition lever. In the case of the NU1X not even the "hammer" has to produce a sound (as it happens with the silent and transacoustic); it would have the same behavior as the counterweight lever of the GH action or any other simulated one. With the sensor that these pianos have, they should collect all the information of the key movement (down and up) and transfer it correctly to the corresponding velocity values. In the grand piano action it is mandatory to have double sensor, it would be impossible to detect what is happening in the repetitions when the double escapement mechanism is acting with only the key sensor.

ediegus In the grand piano action it is mandatory to have double sensor, it would be impossible to detect what is happening in the repetitions when the double escapement mechanism is acting with only the key sensor.

I don't think this statement is entirely correct. Hammer sensors are beneficial in both grands or uprights, not because of the double escapement, but because the systems calculate key velocity based on timing between 2 points regardless of acceleration. So, using only the timing you can run into situations in which the same timing leads in reality to a ppp note or a silent strike (sudden acceleration in the last portion of key travel is enough to ppp). Of course you can measure acceleration continuously for all 88 keys, but that requires complex realtime computation far beyond what is implemmented in DPs. One additional simple hammer sensor solves this and guarantees correct detection of silent notes.
PnoScan and many other systems (including from yamaha) only use key sensors in grand pianos. And sometimes run into problems...

Hey ediegus, thank you for your participation! Sorry for not answering yet in the pianoworld thread.

First of all, as I wrote before, I noticed this problem more and more in regular playing and practicing - only after that I tested it systematically with Pianoteq to be certain about the nature of the problem. I am not a trained concert pianist who can play a bombastic ffff on a concert grand, but even me as a late beginner/early intermediate player can reach very high velocities - as it is supposed, thats why they are 128 MIDI velocity steps. Everyone playing classical music will get to literature that demands playing ff+. I really wouldn't say that I push the instruments artificially to its limits.

The settings for the NU1X and Pianoteq: default. Medium touch curve on the NU1X, perfectly straight line as the velocity curve in Pianoteq. But as I wrote before it also happens with the internal voice of the NU1(X).

As vagfilm wrote here and @RIP explained in the pianoworld forum, I do think there is an advantage using a hammer sensor instead/additionally to the key sensor. Kawai wouldn't add the hammer sensor just for fun to increase production costs in their upright silent and hybrid pianos.