MP11SE

danno858

ok - can anyone who has actually played on an MP11SE tell us about it? I've never been near one but is the hype about this slab real?

danno858

Also - if anyone has played on a P515 and the MP11SE I’d really like to hear your thoughts on whether the upgrade would be worth it? Going from the P515 to an MP11SE

Pete14

If I may,

I have played the CA-95; which I believe uses the same action in the MP11SE…

In a nutshell, the P-515 is the winner in terms of overall value despite the ‘negativity’ associated with its ‘folded’ action.

I, too, thought that a folded action would never be as realistic as a ‘long stick’ anchored by a pivot, and coming from owning an MP10 (a while back), which used an action very much like the GF (only slightly shorter), I felt no folded action could match it (RM3) till I bought the P-515!

Now, let’s be clear, we put a lot of emphasis on the action mechanism in isolation, but I genuinely feel that it is the pairing between the action (mechanism) and the sound engine that truly makes all the difference, and Yamaha’s NWX + CFX is truly a match made in heaven. If you ask me, only the N1X surpasses this; however, that instrument costs much more.

Now, to your question, ‘is it worth it, going from P-515 to MP11SE’? No! (in my humble opinion)

danno858

Pete14 So you are basically saying that the N1X would be a much better upgrade coming from a P515? As far as playability comparison?

HZPiano

Hello,

Difficult to say. I have played both (in piano stores) on several occasions -- sometimes literally next to eachother. They both have their strengths and weaknesses, likes and dislikes.

If I had to pick one of these two, it would be the MP11SE. However, in real life, I'm not buying either of them.

If you consider it, please do try (extensively) before making any purchase.

Cheers and happy tryouts,

CyberGene

P515 and MP11SE represent the two major approaches of digital piano actions. The Yamaha has realistic dynamic weight, i.e. inertia which contributes to more linear dynamic response and somehow wider range of forces that you can apply but it comes at the price of higher pushback against your fingers when playing softly and it can be tiring, especially if you are concerned about injuries, tendinitis, etc. The Kawai, on the other hand, has lighter hammer weights which makes it a less tiring action to play, with less pushback against your fingers, more nimble and easier to play softly, however it has unrealistically low inertia that contributes to a compressed/narrower velocity range^* that (when mapped to samples obtained from a large grand, as is the case) leads to unnaturally jumpy velocity-timbre change that makes it more difficult to precisely control the dynamics. For these reasons alone I would choose the P515 but it really depends on your priorities and the repertoire you favor.

^*By compressed narrower velocity range I mean the forces needed to produce MIDI values of 1-127 is within a narrower region and thus it's easier to produce a high velocity strike. And this isn't fixable by changing the touch response because when you have lighter hammers, they can be easily accelerated to high velocities with less force (besides you have less time to correct your force midway) compared to a heavy hammer that requires comparatively more force to get the same terminal velocity and because it will resist the sudden acceleration will apply higher counterforce against your finger (since it has higher inertia) and thus will make it easier for you to push the correct force, also allowing for better precision through micro-corrections mid-strike.

Pete14

CyberGene

You nailed it, CG!

It seems like Kawai wanted to ‘remedy’ this push-back you talk about, but took it a bit too far.

And, going back to my initial point, Kawai’s approach led to a mismatch between the action and the ‘concert grand’ sound engine.

I remember liking the RM3/sound engine a lot, but hating the GF (light, fluffy, bouncy).

I’m hoping they get rid of the GF altogether, and release a newly redesigned action that takes all these things into consideration; perhaps then, they will nail it, too!

josh_sounds

If i read it correctly,

2 proponents for P515 - better action
1 proponent for MP11SE - because of better sound engine? but why neither IRL?

HZPiano

josh_sounds 1 proponent for MP11SE - because of better sound engine? but why neither IRL?

This proponent, if you mean me, is also because of action, primarily. If I had to choose between the two, that is.

But I don't have to, so therefore neither.

Cheers and happy comparisons,

CyberGene

I wouldn't call any of the two actions "better". It's a matter of preference, for me the high inertia of the P515 is "better", however other people would find it overly heavy or sluggish and would thus prefer MP11SE and call its action "better".

josh_sounds

HZPiano

ah hahaha,… i see so it general, this is more of a case preferred action as pointed out earlier… thanks. 😃

Pete14

Yes!