Disklavier

On Thu, 2012-08-23 at 02:25 +0000, Dave wrote:


> I recently  bought a DC2A, thinking it would provide the same fidelity
> in recording and playback as other Disklavier grands. But I've now
> learned from my technician that the C1 and C2 Disklaviers lack the
> hammer sensors that are found on the C3 and up models, which have both
> the hammer sensors and continuous key sensors.
> 
> As a result, the DC2A may not provide the same accuracy in playback as
> the more expensive models, according to the tech. I'm wondering if
> anyone can confirm this. And, if so, how much of an improvement do the
> hammer sensors provide?

>
> 
> I was hoping someone more knowledgeable would respond, but your
> technician is correct that the Disklavier lacking hammer sensors is less
> accurate.  I would expect the accuracy of recording to suffer more than
> the accuracy of playback, but I don't think anyone has quantified the
> differences between lower and higher-end Disklavier models (which,
> depending on the music and listener, might not even be perceptible, so
> don't feel bad about your purchase).
> 
> A while back, some studies were done measuring the ability of the
> Disklavier to reproduce notes at various velocity levels consistently,
> and as I recall, there was a moderate level of variation even on
> Disklavier systems equipped with hammer velocity sensors.
> 
> But these sensors are especially important to the recording process, as
> the impact time and measured hammer velocity just before the hammer hits
> the strings are the critically important values to capture (and to
> reproduce accurately during playback).   Eliminating these two very
> accurate measurements from the recording process (and instead estimating
> them based on key motion) means recordings made with such a piano will
> never be quite as good as they could have been.  That's why I said a
> lack of these sensors will affect recording more than playback.   If you
> at least have an accurate recording, you can benefit from upgrading the
> playback system at some future date.  But if the recording itself is
> less accurate, there's no way to improve it later.
> 
> What generation of Disklavier is your DC2A (Mark II, Mark III, Mark IV
> or E3)?
> 
> Mark Fontana
> 
> 
> On Thu, 2012-08-23 at 02:25 +0000, Dave wrote:
> 
> 
> > I recently  bought a DC2A, thinking it would provide the same fidelity
> > in recording and playback as other Disklavier grands. But I've now
> > learned from my technician that the C1 and C2 Disklaviers lack the
> > hammer sensors that are found on the C3 and up models, which have both
> > the hammer sensors and continuous key sensors.
> > 
> > As a result, the DC2A may not provide the same accuracy in playback as
> > the more expensive models, according to the tech. I'm wondering if
> > anyone can confirm this. And, if so, how much of an improvement do the
> > hammer sensors provide?
>

>
> 
> I was hoping someone more knowledgeable would respond, but your
> technician is correct that the Disklavier lacking hammer sensors is less
> accurate.  I would expect the accuracy of recording to suffer more than
> the accuracy of playback, but I don't think anyone has quantified the
> differences between lower and higher-end Disklavier models (which,
> depending on the music and listener, might not even be perceptible, so
> don't feel bad about your purchase).
> 
> A while back, some studies were done measuring the ability of the
> Disklavier to reproduce notes at various velocity levels consistently,
> and as I recall, there was a moderate level of variation even on
> Disklavier systems equipped with hammer velocity sensors.
> 
> But these sensors are especially important to the recording process, as
> the impact time and measured hammer velocity just before the hammer hits
> the strings are the critically important values to capture (and to
> reproduce accurately during playback).   Eliminating these two very
> accurate measurements from the recording process (and instead estimating
> them based on key motion) means recordings made with such a piano will
> never be quite as good as they could have been.  That's why I said a
> lack of these sensors will affect recording more than playback.   If you
> at least have an accurate recording, you can benefit from upgrading the
> playback system at some future date.  But if the recording itself is
> less accurate, there's no way to improve it later.
> 
> What generation of Disklavier is your DC2A (Mark II, Mark III, Mark IV
> or E3)?
> 
> Mark Fontana
> 
> 
> On Thu, 2012-08-23 at 02:25 +0000, Dave wrote:
> 
> 
> > I recently  bought a DC2A, thinking it would provide the same fidelity
> > in recording and playback as other Disklavier grands. But I've now
> > learned from my technician that the C1 and C2 Disklaviers lack the
> > hammer sensors that are found on the C3 and up models, which have both
> > the hammer sensors and continuous key sensors.
> > 
> > As a result, the DC2A may not provide the same accuracy in playback as
> > the more expensive models, according to the tech. I'm wondering if
> > anyone can confirm this. And, if so, how much of an improvement do the
> > hammer sensors provide?
>

On Mon, 2012-08-27 at 14:00 +0000, kenruda wrote:

> Mark, 
> 
> 
> When you said, "you can benefit from upgrading the playback system at
> some future date" -- does that mean a the playback system could be
> upgraded with hammer sensors  to a piano that doesn't currently have
> them now?  
> 
> 
> Thanks!
> 
>  -Ken