RD700NX.....Just starting it folks, let's go!!!!

No, I'm sorry but it's difficult to explain for me.
With the PHA-III keyboard each key has 3 contact points.
With the PHA-II (GX) there are 2 contact points with each key.

Therefor it is possible to play much smoother velocity with the PHA-III.
It can sense much more exact the velocity.

With the G8 If there would be a ARX-piano, It would play wonderfull but the velocity would'nt be as sensitive as The PHA-III.
There would also be several different sample with each key. (Like The NX and K-RD700)GX1.

Hey Artemiy It's definitely cool.....no hard feelings of course : )

After hearing what insilentio said I am actually very curious to test drive this NX and compare notes. Like I said, I'm very interested in seeing what kind of improvements they made to the SN EP's.

I guess I'll have to wait until November

KPro81, peace man

Very cool man : )

After seeing Roland's web and reading about the "new" NX, it seems to me that it's mostly pure marketing from Roland. In sum, this is a GX with the supernatural piano card, the PHA III keyboard and WITHOUT expansion slots. I haven't had the opportunity of playing the PHA III keyboard, and I don't doubt it's great, but is that enough reason to launch a "new" piano and get rid of all its expansion capabilities?

Honestly, a really new RD should have also other improvements such as (for instance) ARX slots, a bigger LCD screen (in colour, please), additional digital outs, twice the ROM memory, 256-voice poly, etc. And yes, 256-voice should be a priority. As piano samples are stereo, real polyphony is actually 64, and under intensive use of the damper pedal, you can get some notes cut (it happens to me in some passages of Beethoven's Moonlight sonata).

I've got a GX with the K-RD700GX1 and it's great, and given what the NX offers, I think I'll be waiting at least until the next generation appears. I've always been a Roland fan, but I feel that in recent times it is losing the north a bit. I purchased a SD-50 module some months ago, and although it has good sounds, it's spoiled by a severely and stupidly limited effects section (only reverb and chorus/delay... come on Roland, we're in 2010, not in 1990!!)

~As piano samples are stereo, real polyphony is actually 64, and under intensive use of the damper pedal, you can get some notes cut (it happens to me in some passages of Beethoven's Moonlight sonata).

That's strange that you are experiencing that, but I have to back up Roland on this one. With their current boards, if they say they are 128 polyphony, then it is a TRUE 128. Unlike many other manufactures like Korg and Yamaha, Roland didn't skimp out in this department by using the double voice rule. (128 really equals 64 in stereo mode)

And yes if you have a GX/F, then what the NX offers is probably not going to be enough to validate buying it. However, I still am interested in seeing if they truly improved the SN Eps.

Definitly....i'll keep my Gx !!!

After Yamaha had launched the CP-series Roland just had to do something.

My son has Yamaha's CP-5, I have the RD-700GXF.

The CP-5 sounds clearly more authentic, open, wide, plentous, rich, superb, whatever you wuld call it in English.

It's dynamic response is just perfect, e-pianos are gorgeous, rhythm patterns are powerful etc. etc.

Haven't heard the NX yet, but if bringing out a new generation is supposed to make any sense it must be above te GX/F even if GX-users are not amused

They've got to compete eventually.

I was researching the FP-7 when I came across the FP-7F which was announced a few days back.

The PHAIII-S vs PHAIII seems to be like the PHA2 alpha (stage version) vs PHA2 key action. Anyone know the difference between the two?

How are the speakers on the FP-7 (to have an idea of the ones on the FP-7F). Are they bass reflex. The FP-4 speaker sound is too thin.

Is the Session Partner feature similar to auto accompaniment / styles in a Yamaha? Are the Rhythm Patterns similar to Auto accompaniment?

Is the PHAIII better than GH3 of Yamaha or RM3 of Kawai?

Whats the diff between RD-700NX and FP-7F from the context of a Piano student beginner?

The only thing positive that I have read about the new rd700nx, is that the pulse PHA III is wonderful, but it really sounds much better?.

But personally was expecting a 76-key version of the family rd, roland do not understand how you do not see that yamaha and korg are selling very well their models and korg s70xs sv-76.
Or maybe I'm asking too much, but if I would have liked more polyphony, and more memory, plus they have to improve a bit the sound of brass and strings.

So forgive me for my terrible English

"That's strange that you are experiencing that, but I have to back up Roland on this one. With their current boards, if they say they are 128 polyphony, then it is a TRUE 128. Unlike many other manufactures like Korg and Yamaha, Roland didn't skimp out in this department by using the double voice rule. (128 really equals 64 in stereo mode) "

I guess you are wrong on here. There is no true 128 voice polyphony. It depends on how many tones create a patch. If it's a layer than the polyphony is half, and the same should apply to stereo voices since in stereo voices there are separate recordings for the left and right channel.
For the sound engine it doesn't really matter if you have a single voice/patch which consists of 4 different tones/multisample or wether you use 4 voices/patches in a live setup, while each voice consists of just one tone/multisample.
What they call as polyphony actually refers to oscillators. There are 128 of them. One mono tone uses one oscilator. You can count the rest. And Korg and Yamaha do the same. In no way are they different.

Ah actually in Roland's case no. I'm right. And yes I am referring to playing a single stereo patch that can contain up to 4 levels. Here is a brief description from the Fantom X that Roland introduced some years back:

" Roland's new sound generator chip. This chip is Roland's most powerful to date, and it not only makes it possible to play expressive 4-tone Patches with 128-voice polyphony, "

I use that info because a form of this chip was also used in the RD700SX which was then upgraded and used in th RD700GX. I remember when the Fantom X came out and the Roland rep that was at the Samash that I was testing out the Fantom X's (at the time), was really trying to make this point shine as compared to other manufacturers. Don't get it twisted, I'm not putting down the other companies especially because I own a Yamaha Motif ES and Motif ES6. I actually don't own any Roland workstaions. Just thought I should mention that.

Sorry pal, but now I would say for sure that you are wrong.
Let's turn back to what Roland said. They are right.
You can play 4 tone Patches with 128 Polyphony but only if the tones are velocity switched and don't sound at the same time. That's the case with any single sample based keyboard out there.
It was confusing a lot of people when it comes to how real polyphony is calculated.
So, Roland reformulated the part about polyphony as you can read in the manual for the Fantom G.
Let me copy that part:

"The Fantom-G can produce up to 128 notes simultaneously. This number of notes will vary depending not only on the number of notes you’re actually playing, but also on the number of tones used by each patch, and the number of waves used by each tone."
(you can read the rest with further description in the manual, pg. 34)

For me it's more than clear:
1. the polyphony depends on the number of tones used by each patch
2. the polyphony further depends on the number of waves used by each tone

Point 2 is related to the use of stereo samples, which means that a tone which uses two waves (left and right) actually uses two notes polyphony.

Now again the math:
If you use all four tones at the same time, for one pressed key you trigger 4 oscillators (of the 128 available).
If you use for all of the four tones stereo samples, one pressed key triggers 8 oscillators/notes. It means that a patch consisting of 4 layered tones with 4 stereo samples has "only" 16 notes polyphony.

I guess we can agree that the Fantom G is not worse than the Fantom X when it comes to polyphony. So, Roland does nothing better than Korg or Yamaha or any other company.
It's actually very simple but people get easily confused. The keyboard has 128 oscillators which can produce a sound. But a patch can be a complex construction, consisting of more than one oscillator (oscillator equals somehow to tone) and stereo samples requires two oscillators because there are two different waves sent to the left and right output respectively.

Ok mojkarma I'll eat that, and admit to being wrong about Roland. All of the explanation that you went into about polyphony and how it's actually applied to the oscillators, I'm well aware of how the basic procedure goes. I was just misinformed by one of the Roland reps during that time.

First and foremost, I am a pianist of of 22 years ( 28 years old, classically trained and a teacher as well) and I play with some notable Jazz groups out here in New York. When I play my GX I have had no polyphony issues what so ever (even when practicing Chopin). I just thought that the information given to me was accurate, because I figured it was coming from the source.

It's all good though, thanks for the info!

Hi KPro81,
yes, it's all good! Neither I had any polyphony issues with my RD700GX (when I had it).
I hope you understand that my intention was not to prove you wrong for the sake of debating, but just to give other users or potential buyers the correct information about how the polyphony works and what they can expect.