As someone who'll have to buy a piano soon, I'm at the old question of acoustic vs digital. I've done a fair deal of research on the internet, as well as heard the opinion of a piano teacher, and everyone says - "digital is never as good as the acoustic, it's just not possible, yadda yadda yadda".

Yet, I'm skeptical. There's no proof of this anywhere, it's just stated as the truth that everyone knows. And also, drawing on the experience of audiophiles and other digital audio experiments, it seems that today's audio technology is pretty advanced already, and humans tend to greatly overestimate their own hearing abilities.

Which leads me to wonder - just how much difference is there between a decent contemporary digital piano (something on the order of $1000 or more) and an acoustic piano? If put to the test, would the experts be able to tell the difference? Or perhaps it's time we revised this "old truth"?

Does anybody have any hard evidence on this? Any double-blind AB tests or something?

  • 1
    'would the experts be able to tell the difference' - do you mean when playing, when listening in the same room, or when listening to a recording? Also - there being a difference is not the same thing as one being better. – topo morto Jun 13 '16 at 19:32
  • 2
    To put the cat amongst the pigeons - ever seen a concert pianist playing a digital piano? As a player of both, there is a large chasm between the two, both in feel, sound and price. The feel is not the same, the sound is not exactly the same, but a digital is certainly easier to transport to gigs, etc. I can buy a very good acoustic piano for a fraction of the price of a good digital - i know, I've just sold 3 acoustics for a song. but to buy a very good digital, i pay a fortune. – Tim Jun 13 '16 at 19:49
  • 3
    Is there a reason why you haven't gone to a store that sells both and compared for yourself? – Todd Wilcox Jun 13 '16 at 19:55
  • 5
    Ah, if you are not the pianist in question, and your daughter is about to start learning, then I think in your situation there are many advantages in a digital piano: 1) It won't hold a beginner back. 2) It has a volume control/headphone jack, and most of all 3) It won't require tuning and periodic maintenance that an acoustic piano requires to keep functioning correctly. A decent digital will just keep humming along for years sounding exactly as it did the day you bought it. If your daughter becomes advanced over the years, investing in a baby grand acoustic may make sense later on. – Todd Wilcox Jun 13 '16 at 20:24
  • 2
    I would question pretty much everything in the link "experience of audiophiles". There are so many holes in the logic it would take a book-length article to reply properly. Re the other link, the fact that the general public, who aren't used to listening to high quality acoustic instruments, prefer the low quality sounds they are familiar with through low quality recordings, was demonstrated half a century before the mp3 experiments in the other link - but how is that fact relevant to the question? It says nothing about the experience of playing the instruments. – user19146 Jun 14 '16 at 2:26

14 Answers 14

I'm only a guitarist, but I play once a week on a real piano at my teacher's studio, and I have a Yamaha P-115 digital piano at home (weighted keys, $600 retail most places -- I got lucky and paid $400 at a salvage store). The feel is a bit different between the two, but it's in the ballpark (for a tyro like me). No trouble adjusting. I originally started with an unweighted "synth action" MIDI controller keyboard, and that was different enough to be a problem. It only has 47 keys or something too. Just not a good idea all around.

I asked my teacher for recommendations in my price range. He gave me a short list of instruments with weighted keys, with some pros and cons for each one. I would recommend that you talk to your teacher (or some other experienced person, if you don't have a teacher yet) and ask for advice. Be prepared with your best current understanding of your needs and desires, even though you'll learn more about your needs and desires after the decision is irrevocable. I've found that knowledgeable people in a lot of fields are amazingly generous with thoughtful advice for newbies. Mind you, this doesn't include the salesman at the music store or the motorcycle dealership; they have a conflict of interest.

Aside from keyboard feel, there are pros and cons to the P115: The P115 is in better tune than my teacher's beater piano, works with headphones, plays its metronome through the headphones, takes up relatively little room, can be stuffed in a closet, speaks MIDI to GarageBand, and has other sounds besides piano, which I sometimes use. Of course, tuning is easy to fix if you own the instrument, and the other points may be totally irrelevant to you. I started piano lessons to learn to play keyboards, not to be a pianist.

There's one big downside to the P115: Play a note, and hold it down until it decays to nothing. Do it again with the same note. It's the same. It's not just the same pitch, it's the same exact recording. On a physical piano, they will never be precisely the same twice (especially on notes with more than one string, which will produce audible interference patterns). But if you play the same sample twice in a row, it will be precisely the same, every... single... time. For me, there is noticeably artificial and distracting at the end of long sustained notes -- and that's my guess at what it might be. But I don't spend all that much of my practice time listening to the very ends of long sustained notes.

Smart engineers can fix that. If they haven't yet, they will. On a $1000+ instrument, they may have done it already. I can't say, I haven't played any $1000+ digital pianos. If you're in the market for one, I urge you to try letting a note die away to nothing, while listening with headphones, and then repeat a few times. See if it sounds fake to your ears. Then decide whether that's a deal-breaker anyhow. It isn't one for me.

Through headphones, the total absence of any extraneous sounds out of the instrument is also weird and creepy, and the built-in speakers are... OK, if you don't expect miracles. They sound better if you turn it up a bit. Again, a $600 instrument isn't a $1000+ instrument, and any given $1000+ instrument isn't any other $1000+ instrument.

But the only way to choose an instrument for you is for you to sit down in front of it (or pick it up, or sit in it, behind it, or under it) and play it. Weighted keys are a must. The rest is a matter of what meets your own unique needs. There is no general answer to the question of which instrument to buy. That's why there are so many different instruments out there. Is a saxophone better than a Hammond? Well, I dunno: Are you trying to sound like Benny Goodman, or Jeff Porcaro?

All things considered, I'm satisfied with my own choice, given my needs, desires, the high cost of my other hobbies, and the finite size of my living room.

  • I'm pretty sure it's not exactly the same sample being played with each keypress. I have a P-80, which is of course a precursor to the P-115, and even that old thing is multisampled even for the same velocity layer. That said, I agree that you really can hear how it is sampled - I'm just not sure exactly how to describe why it's obvious. And feel is pretty much a non-starter to discerning fingers, but at least weighted keys are maybe half the battle. – Todd Wilcox Jun 13 '16 at 19:58
  • @Tim Did you mean to indicate you were upvoting this answer? If so, I think you might have forgotten to actually click the up button. – Todd Wilcox Jun 13 '16 at 20:00
  • @ToddWilcox Admittedly, my fingers aren't very discerning yet on a keyboard. I'm interested by what you say about the sampling; there's something jarringly fake to my ears at the end of those notes. I may be misidentifying it. – Ed Plunkett Jun 13 '16 at 20:01
  • 2
    I think you downplayed "the speaker problem." To my mind, the quality of the speaker output is the main problem to overcome. – Yorik Jun 14 '16 at 16:30
  • 1
    How can they be the exact same sample every time? That would require immense laziness on the developer's part. Every sample library in the world today for musical composers has at least 3-5 velocities for any single note, and often 3-5 round robin samples per velocity layer leading to something like 15 or more samples per note. In fact I would expect performance instruments to be even better. Like the OP I would like to see them challenge the assumption acoustic is better. We should be comparing the acoustics to the top of the line not some random lower-end digital piano. – pete Oct 4 '17 at 5:42

I own, and have performed on both kinds. I use them for different reasons, in different scenarios. If you can have only one, you should choose according to your needs. What kind of music will you mostly play? Does your digital need to be portable?

ACOUSTIC: A good many classical composers have written piano music that deliberately creates an interesting interaction of harmonics from the open, vibrating strings. Debussy and Ravel, with their impressionist writing come to mind. If I play their works on a digital, I don't hear any of the ethereal harmonic effects they wrote. Many pianists also enjoy the touch-responsiveness of the acoustic piano. They adjust their playing based on the sensory feedback they get through the key bed. You don't get this on a digital. Acoustic is good for developing and maintaining your dynamic range. I find even the most dynamic digitals with the deepest and most bouncy keys do not have an adequate dynamic range or responsiveness on virtuosic pieces. I miss it on a good piece of solo classical writing.

DIGITAL: I like the versatility of a digital piano, though. I really like the range of sounds and re-tunings I can get from it, without all the bother of mucking up with wires and whatnot in a prepared piano. I can use midi, I can use headphones, I can drive it to a theatre, I can easily mix and amplify when playing with an ensemble of other electro instruments; just a clean signal - no mucking around with mics. I can trigger samples. I can't do this on an acoustic piano. And for some genres of writing, a really wide expressive range doesn't matter much, when an OK one will do.

  • The point about harmonics is in my opinion the most important point made in all the answers to this question. A digital piano cannot reproduce this as there's nothing inside to vibrate!. – L3B Apr 3 '17 at 15:34
  • Most digital pianos these days do attempt some sort of emulation of sympathetic string resonance, though my impression is there's a wide range in how much they emulate. – Bruce Fields Jun 30 '17 at 2:22

The whole point of a digital piano is attempt to re-create an acoustic one. Maybe better isn't the right way to think.

There is an instrument called the piano. It's big and feels and sounds a certain way. There are many digital imitations of the real things called pianos. The primary reasons why digital pianos exist in the first place are cost and size. They can be very similar in sound to an acoustic piano at a much lower cost and in a portable format. They are not the same. The digital options approximate the acoustic ones. There are nuances that one can feel and hear on an acoustic piano that are not present or are a bit wierd on digital ones.

You might prefer a digital piano to an acoustic one, but that's a rare opinion. If you want to be able to explore and enjoy all the subtleties of an acoustic piano, you have to get an acoustic piano. If you want to get pretty close and spend less money and possibly have it be portable, then a digital piano might be better for your situation.

Which leads me to wonder - just how much difference is there between a decent contemporary digital piano (something on the order of $1000 or more) and an acoustic piano? If put to the test, would the experts be able to tell the difference?

People who have never played a piano or keyboard instrument before could instantly tell the difference, even if blindfolded. They might not know which is which, but the feel and sound will be clearly different. Anyone who has played an acoustic piano for a few weeks could almost certainly tell which is which in a blindfolded comparison between acoustic and digital.

  • 3
    While I tend to believe you, your last paragraph seems like conjecture. – Dave Jun 13 '16 at 19:09
  • +1 for Dave, I'd like to see some references too. But aside from that - well, there's going to be a noticeable difference between different acoustic pianos too. But they're still all acoustic pianos. Perhaps I should rephrase the question - are there any serious enough differences that would make the imitations objectively unsuitable for some purposes (notably learning)? Assuming that the imitation is a good quality ($1000+ from a reputable brand with good professional reviews), not a cheap toy. Emphasis on objectively. – Vilx- Jun 13 '16 at 19:26
  • @Vilx- I think it depends on what you mean by "learning". Beginners won't benefit much from learning precise touch. Advanced players will suffer some just by going from an acoustic grand to an acoustic upright, and digital just feels so different it's like not even practicing the same instrument. – Todd Wilcox Jun 13 '16 at 19:55
  • Well, that then sounds like another argument for the digital piano. If even the acoustic ones differ so much from each other, then there's no harm in using the digital. It's just another variation. – Vilx- Jun 13 '16 at 20:06
  • 1
    Advanced players and discerning listeners pretty much universally prefer acoustic pianos for feel and sound. Digital ones disappoint on both fronts. Beginners might as well start on digital because they are much more affordable, flexible, and easy to maintain. There is no one answer for which is "better" - it depends on the situation. Personally I would much rather have an acoustic, but I can't afford one (if you include delivery, moving, tuning, and other costs). – Todd Wilcox Jun 13 '16 at 20:27

Which leads me to wonder - just how much difference is there between a decent contemporary digital piano (something on the order of $1000 or more) and an acoustic piano? If put to the test, would the experts be able to tell the difference? Or perhaps it's time we revised this "old truth"?

Does anybody have any hard evidence on this? Any double-blind AB tests or something?

After a few hours of searching I haven't been able to find a single decent piece of written evidence on this. (A negative answer isn't much good, I know.)

The most interesting thing I found was a forum post - Taste Test Digital vs Acoustic. It rapidly went off the topic though pulled up a few interesting references on players' perceptions of touch. Interesting psychology but even this is not on the subject though...

  • Sadly the negative answer is still the most intellectually honest one here. – pete Oct 4 '17 at 5:48

It can become quite confusing when you are looking at different kinds of the piano as to which is the best. Ultimately this comes down to your personal needs and preferences, but digital pianos are a popular choice.

There are several features that make up a digital piano. One of the main features of digital pianos is that they are usually very portable so you can easily transport it to gigs and concerts with you. They are quite lightweight so all you need to do is use a folding stand and stool and you will be able to put the whole instrument into a carrying case.

Unlike acoustic pianos, digital pianos require very little maintenance. You won’t need to tune the piano and as long as you keep it dust-free, you will not experience any deterioration in sound or performance.

Digital pianos have adjustable sound levels with volume controls. There is also a headphone input so that you can play the digital piano without disturbing those around you.

Learners often use digital pianos, as they come with features to assist effective learning. As the digital piano has a real feel and sound to it, learners can get used to the feel of an acoustic piano, but they can also take advantages of the additional features. Play along backing tracks often come with digital pianos as well as sets of basic drum patterns. Whilst those who learn on an acoustic piano have to rely on a metronome to keep in time, digital piano users can use drum patterns to keep time with different styles of music. This adds an element of fun to learning.

If you would like to, you can connect a digital piano to a computer with ease. This will allow you to record the tracks that you play directly to sound recording software.

Playing a digital piano feels a lot like playing an acoustic piano. Hammer detection and weighted keys mean that you have to use a little more pressure for lower pitched notes in comparison to the higher pitched notes. Realistic feel pedals also add to the feel of playing a traditional piano.

  • There's an awful lot of digital pianos out there (and a lot of awful ones..) You're talking of top end here, which are very expensive - if you need feel to be right. – Tim Jun 30 '17 at 5:34
  • That's all well and nice, but it kinda misses the question. I was asking for an objective, scientific comparison. But it seems it doesn't exist. – Vilx- Jun 30 '17 at 7:57

I tried multiple acoustic and top-of-the-line digital pianos in stores recently. The gap between acoustic and digital piano has been GREATLY reduced. They are doing their due diligence of including a ton of samples per note so the sound will be varied rather than fake. The speakers are very good -- still not good enough to sound like a real piano, but pretty close. There are also some subtleties like that if you play a note with the damper pedal held down it will sound different on a real piano, and digital pianos may not be able to replicate this effect yet. Normal people might not notice the difference.

A lot of people are complaining about the feel of the piano, but in 2017, high-end digital pianos replicate the feel of a real one with real hammers. There are also "optionally silent pianos" which are fully functioning acoustic pianos with the option to flip a switch that blocks all the hammers from touching the string and plays sound through headphones instead. So in this case obviously the feel is pretty much identical to a real piano.

In 2017, by far the biggest weakness of the digital piano, is in the RELEASE of the key. In a real piano, when you release a key, felt covers the string. In a fake piano, when you release a key, they turn down the volume rapidly. Similar, but not same. Although they've greatly improved the samples of notes in general, they have not addressed the release aspect. So the difference between real and fake is very noticeable when you play staccato. I really wish the developers would catch onto this, because all they have to do is replace the naive fade-out with a quick cross-fade to a recorded release sample in a real piano. You don't even need to make extra parts; it is a software-side fix. Once they start doing this, I think a lot more people would be buying digital pianos.

Yes, the issue of sound is important, and I've heard some really convincing digital pianos over the last few years. But for me, it's another issue entirely: the touch of a digital keyboard compared to a piano. (As such, it may seem like I'm not answering your final two questions, but I am trying to answer the general inquiry from a different perspective.)

Some digital keyboards are so flimsy (that is, overly easy to play) that a player who has learned on one may be rendered absolutely mute the moment s/he sits in front of a Steinway. In my experience, this is not something that's easily fixed in a week or two; a student that learns how to play on an improper keyboard will create bad technical habits and will not build the proper finger dexterity that would result from beginning on a proper keyboard. As such, the student will really need to re-learn and overwrite the bad habits that s/he built at the start of his/her learning. Speaking from personal experience, this is incredibly frustrating: a student that can "play" something on a digital keyboard is not going to have a fun time when they realize that their hard work has seemingly been for nothing when they're sitting in front of the real thing.

I'm not an expert on digital pianos; perhaps there are keyboards out there that mimic the touch of a true piano really, really well. But if you're dropping >$1000 on a digital piano, I say you at least spend some time checking out some want ads for some good used pianos.

Edit: Thanks for those two links, I'll have to check them out; they look interesting!

  • Well, digital pianos on the tune of $1000+ usually (always?) have "weighted keys" that try to mimic a real piano as close as possible. Also, they improve these designs every few years when a new model comes out, so I expect that by now they should be fairly good too, no? – Vilx- Jun 13 '16 at 18:54
  • @Vilx- I went to a store recently a took a tour of fully weighted keyboards, trying to find one as good or better than the Yamaha P80 I have from 2003 or so. I was very disappointed and went back home to my P80. There are some innovations, especially attached to the more expensive instruments, but I'm not sure if anyone besides Kawai have done anything very surprising on the subject of keyboard feel. – Todd Wilcox Jun 13 '16 at 19:52
  • @ToddWilcox - Incidentally, it's actually the Kawai ES100 that I'm eyeing the most right now. – Vilx- Jun 13 '16 at 20:03
  • @ToddWilcox bear in mind that a long time ago, Yamaha had the then revolutionary idea of applying advanced automatic manufacturing techniques and materials to building acoustic pianos, which produced much more consistent results and more reliable instruments than most other makers at the "cheap" end of the market. (Whether their pianos also "sound better" is a subjective question of course). So it's not too surprising they also make digital keyboards that feel pretty close to "the real thing". – user19146 Jun 14 '16 at 0:20
  • @Vilx- I was thinking about the Kawai VPC1 which apparently has a reduced size piano action built into it. As far as I know, they are first and only company doing that - at least in the portable space. – Todd Wilcox Jun 14 '16 at 17:16

Digital and acoustic piano's are 2 different beasts and it completely depends on what you are using them for wether the analog or the digital is the best.

It is not the same as comparing an electric and acoustic guitar. Both are guitars with strings the only difference is how the sound of the strings is amplified. A digital piano on the other hand contains no strings but switches of sensors (depending on the price range). If your digital piano is of the decent kind, it will have a sensor the calculates what the sound would be from the speed and the force applied to the keys. While it might come close to the acoustic piano sound, it will never be the same. But most digital piano players are not looking for acoustic piano sound and you have the added bonusses of the extra sounds, no need for tuning, midi, easy to amplify, etc...

My major concern with digital pianos is that the feel of the keyboard itself is totally different. you need to play on the with a different technique. Even a good weighted keyboard will not feel as mechanical as an acoustic piano. But again it's a matter of preference.

However, after said all this: if you want to study acoustic piano and if you want to do that on a decent level, I would recomend you to buy an acoustic piano. You won't play soccer with a basket ball either altho they are both balls. The transition from acoustic to digital piano is easier than the other way round.

If you’re looking at it from a scientific point a view there is not much difference. It is true that 99.99% (maybe, not this number, but you get the idea) of people would not tell the difference between the best synthesizers and acoustic pianos. But first of all, this is this is the best digital equipment that simulates ideally the sound of a traditional instrument, not your average keyboard and your standard speaker. Second, acoustic pianos have other qualities to them that people appreciate. It’s like digital watches, everyone though that they would bring an end to the era of Rolex. But what we see today is that people still buying an analogue version for purely aesthetic reasons. Just look at the example of some luxury lucid pianos. It is not just an instrument, but rather a work of art and people take pride and joy in simply possessing it. I certainly do. And although it is not very practical, it is not mobile, after a certain time it would also have an antique quality. Electronics are getting replaced each year, it’s a constant race. While acoustic would have a timeless quality.

I won't try to get to a single conclusion of which is "better", as digital and acoustic are after all two different species.

A good keyboard player, if he or she has accumulated a certain experience of playing on both, will know how to adjust their touch and fingerings to make the best of both, depending on the pieces they're playing.

But one could never undermine the versatility of a "decent" digital piano, and the technologies of being capable of synthesizing so so so close the acoustic qualities of an acoustic piano!

Price is another big decisive factor. A new entry level acoustic can likely get you a fairly sophisticated digital, both in sounds and keyboard touch. It opens up more opportunities to families with kids who can't afford an investment on an acoustic (and maintenance).

My two cents.

Well here's my two cents.

There are obvious advantages to a bit of electronic kit that weighs next to nothing and stays - more or less - in tune after being moved around. But that is not what is being asked about. If I have understood correctly the OP is asking about the sound quality.

So lets do a thought experiment: would you ever consider using electronic sound production in place of mechanical sound production for a clarinet or an oboe or a trumpet? By this I mean that you still blow the thing and use your fingers on the keys/valves, but the sound is produced by sensors detecting what you are keying and making the sound as appropriate. Whilst that might work there is no input that you can have as a player to affect the quality of the sound. Whoever is playing it, the sound quality will be the same. With a real instrument some clarinettists sound better than others because they create a better sound from the instrument and that is down to their skill when blowing (breath control etc.).

And guess what - its the same with a piano. A good pianist can get a better sound from a real piano because the way they press the keys affects the way that the hammers strike the strings. There appears to be no way, with current technology anyway, to duplicate this with a digital piano. And even if there was a way I doubt that anyone would use it. Why would they? - it makes the instrument harder to play and people would avoid it because they struggle to make a decent sound.

So for me the point about being a skilled pianist is the ability to make the instrument sound nice, just like a skilled clarinettist makes the clarinet sound nice.

But the bottom line here is this: digital and acoustic pianos are different instruments. Yes there is lots of overlap but the differences will start to matter if you are serious about your playing. For almost everything written for the keyboard from the mid 1700s to the mid 1970s the composer had an acoustic piano in mind. After that I don't know but certainly many composers in the pop/rock etc. genres are thinking keyboard rather than piano when they write.

If you can't learn both then identify which way you will want to go in the future and buy what suits you.

A digital piano is built to mimic an acoustic one, not the other way round. It is a way to produce good recordings with piano samples in a way that a piano player is right at home with. In that respect, it's better for the listener than for the player. For the player, it's a piano avatar. This has the advantage that you can switch personalities while staying at the same console.

This is conceptually different from something like an electric piano (Fender Rhodes, for example) which have an identity of their own and are not a means to a different end.

You compare digital pianos to acoustic pianos, and you compare acoustic pianos to other acoustic pianos. That's the metric.

Good digital pianos may be more expensive than cheap acoustic ones but quite more affordable than those acoustic ones they are supposed to mimic.

Is the deal right? It depends on your personal standards and availability of space and money. And whether you want to placate the listener or the player.

I know this has been answered by so many, but allow me to add in my opinion here.

First of all, there are concert pianists that play digital pianos and many are labeled as Casio or Yamaha Musicians for marketing purposes.

Now as far as the quality...

With digital you get a freshly tuned piano that was tuned for concert quality and then each key is sampled multiple times for speed, strength, string resonance, key off, key on, and damper resonance. Where the quality is affected is when you have to compress the tones to match the keyboards memory limitations.

Consider this, there are 50 Gig samples you can use with a midi controller that would be near Impossible to distinguish from a concert grand if you have good speakers. Most of the better digital pianos can use these samples if you want but they add several hundred to the cost of the instrument.

With an acoustic there's a range that the strings are considered in tune and that slight fluctuation adds body to the music in unpredictable ways. Some higher end digital have attempted to emulate this with varying success (Roland HP605 is one), but that's the biggest difference in the depth of sound.

With acoustics they're often a pain to deal with when something goes wrong and maintenance can be pricey. Also, the cost is often 10x the price of say a PX-870 and yet the sound isn't always 10x better as these tend to be upright pianos.

Overall, Acoustics are nice but I believe the quality is nearing the point where most places will opt for digital as opposed to acousting pianos. If you go to most schools now, they're using digital in most cases.

Anyway, that's my 2 cents.

  • Thanks! :) In the end we got a Yamaha Clavinova CLP-635 at the recommendation of the salesman. :D However since the salesman was also an acquaintance, we listened to his advice. :) After getting the piano (which is great, btw, as far as I can tell) I started wondering how we really define "good" in this case. For example, I noticed that along with the actual piano sound, they have also recorded (and are reproducing) things like the sound of the pedals being pressed or the keys themselves, wood hitting on wood. [contd.] – Vilx- Apr 5 at 15:42
  • It certainly makes the "simulation of an acoustic piano" more accurate, but I keep wondering - is that an effect or defect? Are these sounds part of the music, or an unavoidable side-effect of the instrument (mostly so unnoticeable that nobody cares)? Is it "better" that they are reproduced, or worse? This is getting philosophical. :) Well, whatever the case, I have my piano and I'm happy with it. Now just to find the time to practice myself... :D – Vilx- Apr 5 at 15:45
  • Pardon, correction, Clavinova CLP-535. – Vilx- Apr 5 at 15:51

Hybrid pianos feel exactly like acoustics. You have the advantage of having a grand piano action in an upright cabinet. The Avant Grand series of Yamaha is a very convincing facsimile of the acoustic piano.

protected by Dom Apr 5 at 14:22

Thank you for your interest in this question. Because it has attracted low-quality or spam answers that had to be removed, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site (the association bonus does not count).

Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.