Played a Yamaha P-250 today
I played a Yamaha P-250 at Guitar Center today and wasn\'t very impressed. I had heard that the sample set was the same as that in the PF-500, but this doesn\'t seem to be true. A PF-500 was sitting directly beside the P-250, so I was able to move back and forth between the two keyboards. The PF-500 was much better: a fuller sound. Both keyboards have the same controls available, but the P-250 didn\'t sound as good, to my ears, as the P-200\'s I\'ve played in the past. The PF-500 seems to have longer samples.
I also played a used YPP50 that I wanted to buy, but it was used, and the sustain pedal jack was dead. Very nice samples in the upper registers. A relatively cheap keyboard that sounded better on some notes than the PF-500. Bad middle register, though. Thin, although the upper notes made me want to take it home and and try some eq.
All of this leaves me feeling bad. Enough is known about sampling, now, to create a very good keyboard that plays large piano multisamples that sound good in all the registers. There is no reason for this to be expensive. But none of the big companies is doing this. Yamaha\'s Motif\\S90 line is almost good, unless you try to play a ballad, and then you realize that the samples are looped after 2 seconds and the loop drone makes you shut off the power. I don\'t expect a piano as good as a Giga instrument from an off-the-shelf piano, but I don\'t understand why Roland,Yamaha, Korg, and EMU don\'t understand, four years after Giga was introduced, that a good piano is now a very basic requirement for a keyboard. Hell, with any midi controller and a copy of the $89 Plugsounds keyboards set, I have pianos that are much better than any of the hardware people have put together. What\'s so hard to understand? Put a $100 hard drive in a keyboard, some RAM and good samples. (Sorry for the rant. It just seems so obvious that a good keyboard would be easy to create.)