I appreciate the response

I wasn't expecting such a large response to my inquiry. I thank all of you. I do have one more thought in mind regarding what's available for $4500.

This might be taboo to discuss around here, but what about electronic pianos? For example, Yamaha Clavinova? I understand that technology is always revolving and becoming better day by day and I also understand electronic pianos depreciate in value drastically.

But aren't newer electronic pianos better than they were before? I also know they sound phenomenal. Any thoughts why to or not to buy electronic?

'For my money, an informed purchase of an acoustic still beats the best electric hands down. The physicality of 700 lbs working with you to produce music can't be described, only felt. However, playing an electric can...how do you spell 'sterile' Also the depreciation on a used acoustic is minimal. They hold their value for a reason

Rick. ! =

Good questions, and I'll try to help if I can. I play about 50% on electronic instruments of several types. I like them, for some situations. The major disadvantage I find in the best of them is a lack of dynamic range. This translates to expressiveness, I suppose. If I'm working with a small combo whether it be rock, country, or jazz I usually prefer an electronic instrument even disregarding the built in advantages of mobility and ease of amplification. If I'm going to be doing just instrumental music alone, I'll take an acoustic piano every time. Well, nearly every time. The exception is some really poor verticals and any instrument in need of tuning or repair. The very best of the electronics, btw, have an inferior action to the cheapest spinet. Many acoustics have inferior sound to the better electronics, but they have more variety of sound to offer. Your mileage may vary Gerry Exaggeration is a billion times worse than understatement.

Here are the reasons to buy 'Electronic'

1. You need to be able to bring your piano with you. (For example, you play in a band and may not have a reliable piano at each venue, or you are a choir director and you need a keyboard you can move to different pracice locations.)

2. You live in a very small place (dorm room, barracks) and need to be able to practice with headphones on.

3. You need to make recordings of a piano track as part of a pop or jazz ensemble and don't have space or acoustics to mic a quality piano well.

4. You're performing on stage with other loud instruments (drums, electric guitar), and need an instrument you can mic into the sound system without having to worry about feedback.

Other than that, I can't think of any good reasons. I can't stand playing on them.

I had the opportunity to plat Roland's flagship electronic. It was the RD-700. Sounds nice, but their 'progressive, realistic hammer action' felt nothing like the real deal.

Yes, they're weighted and very sensitive, but something is lacking?!

I definitely prefer the Clavinova over the Roland.

Because I live in Roseburg, Oregon, I'm at least 80 miles from the nearest acoustic piano dealer. Everyone here is into electronics.

The problem with them is that the sound is dead. A real piano has a soundboard and it resonates. When you strike a note and hold the key it lingers and does not die out as on an electronic keyboard and their are overtones from the other notes vibrating sympthetically. It sounds alive. Liken it to the difference between real hair and a toupee.

They are getting better, and they sound as good as far more expensive pianos. I've seen few uprights that can compete with a good digital, and plenty of grands that couldn't. Some say they sound sterile, but again some say CDs sound sterile compared to LPs. You have to decide for yourself if you like the sound or not.

Personally I've seen heaps of cheap pianos with horrific sound, sticky keys, squeaky pedals, uneven action, German-sounding names on them, all built God knows where, all cheap and still more expensive than a good digital.

The idea that their piano has real strings and real wood keeps many warm and fuzzy thinking that an instrument can't be junk if it's acoustic and 'real', with 'personality'. I think only the wood would keep me warm. By all means, people, buy them if you think they're better. After all it's all a matter of perception. I have a Clavinova 860 and a KG-2A Kawai and I'm very happy with

Even the >10k$ Grand Touch by YAMAHA, with its grand action inside ?

I guess that the electronic piano can sound a little bit sterile. I have been playing on an acoustic one for 16 years and to be honest that piano sounds awful! (Yes, I have tuned it once a year). It was the cheapest new Yamaha my parents could find back in 1986 and I'm really sick and tired of it. It makea noise rather than music. (No, it's not me lacking piano-skills. It sounds much better when I play on my teachers piano).

So I'm seriously considering to buy an electronic one instead. At least they have sampled the best pianos in the world at a moderate price. But I will keep my old bad piano to get the right 'feeling'...

This is what I do, Susanne. I have a decrepit old upright and an Alesis QS-8. If I can play a piece on the upright, I can play it anywhere. <G> The Alesis, with this expansion card I have in it, emulates stretch tuning, so it's a little better than the factory presets, but not nearly as satisfying as an acoustic piano.

Best Wishes,

I see your point, but I'm not sure that white elephant qualifies as an electronic from a practicality standpoint. I looked at one when it first came on the market and remember at the time that it didn't seem to have any purpose. However, as I remember I wasn't nearly as impressed with it's action as the sales person was. Yamaha had an earlier and similar machine that came apart into two pieces as I recall. It didn't have much pracitcal application either.