CT-X3000 & CT-X5000 Unboxing video

[Mike Martin]

Just got this video out this morning

 

 

[invicta alec]

I've only had my CT-X3000 for a couple of weeks but one thing I'm really enjoying is the look and feel of the keys. For me the touch sensitivity levels are nicely balanced.

It was something I noticed (and liked) straight away when trying out the 3000 in the music store.

 

I think Mike Martin should promote this aspect in later CT-X videos. 

 

Alec.

 

 

 

 

[PianoManChuck]

Awesome presentation, Mike!!  Can't wait to try one...

[Mike Martin]

21 minutes ago, PianoManChuck said:

Awesome presentation, Mike!!  Can't wait to try one...

 

They're really stellar. What has amazed me is how much you can customize things. I think I counted 92 speaker/amp combinations in the distortion effects. Unreal. 

[PianoManChuck]

5 minutes ago, Mike Martin said:

 

They're really stellar. What has amazed me is how much you can customize things. I think I counted 92 speaker/amp combinations in the distortion effects. Unreal. 

 

Would that be the 5000 model?  Or do both the 3000 and 5000 have those same speaker/amp combinations?

[Mike Martin]

2 minutes ago, PianoManChuck said:

 

Would that be the 5000 model?  Or do both the 3000 and 5000 have those same speaker/amp combinations?

 

They're identical in this regard. All tones & editing are the same.

[Ken Madell]

Hi Mike, 

Casio couldn't have a better spokesperson. 

I chose Casio for keyboards 20 years ago, just like I chose James Bastien for beginners teaching 30 years ago.  CASIOs are now a BETTER instrument than accoustic pianos for both serious and casual teaching/learning.  As a teacher, composer and performer I can't think of ANYTHING that could be improved in the 3000, or anything of creative musical value Casio hasn't thought of and included.  

 

[mirka]

Very nice presentation !

 

I liked very much to see that Casio offers the possibility to download customized/edited  sounds from their websiite.

Not everybody is good at tweeking sounds with a good result (I am one of those !)

 

Hopefully there will be a forum topic here where the CT-X users will propose/exchange their customized sounds !

 

 

[Ken Madell]

9 hours ago, invicta alec said:

I've only had my CT-X3000 for a couple of weeks but one thing I'm really enjoying is the look and feel of the keys. For me the touch sensitivity levels are nicely balanced.

It was something I noticed (and liked) straight away when trying out the 3000 in the music store.

 

I think Mike Martin should promote this aspect in later CT-X videos. 

 

Alec.

 

 

 

 

Good observation Alec, this new keyboard touch response is truly awesome, and no other keyboards can do it.  In the past it was perhaps the primary reason serious piano teachers avoided keyboards.  This keyboard responds to touch and technique over the entire spectrum smoothly and completely, just like a piano.  It is now a very serious, expressive musical instrument. All credit to Casio.  

[petersohn]

Another novelty in Casio instruments is a new system of effects. Casio has introduced something that its competitors have been using for a long time. For me, this is a very big step forward.

The high-speed digital signal processor is also applied for each sound type, such as melody, backing drum and bass, or organ. Even the standard ensemble for a keyboard delivers distinct sound for each instrument for an expressive performance.

[TheBradge]

Seriously? So it can now have one DSP insert per accomp thingy?

So rotary on the organ, chorus on the piano, phaser on the strings, compressor on the drums?!

[AlenK]

On 6/1/2018 at 9:40 PM, Ken Madell said:

Good observation Alec, this new keyboard touch response is truly awesome, and no other keyboards can do it.  In the past it was perhaps the primary reason serious piano teachers avoided keyboards.  This keyboard responds to touch and technique over the entire spectrum smoothly and completely, just like a piano.

 

The primary reason piano teachers have avoided "keyboards" (by which it seems you mean an entire class of instruments that does not include digital pianos) is that the keys don't physically feel like the action of a real piano's keys. If the keys don't have a similar feel as you hit them (weight, resistance, velocity profile) and a similar return behaviour, then you could develop a "bad" playing technique that won't work as well on a real (i.e., acoustic) piano.

 

The keys on some digital pianos such as Casio's PX-560 and CGP-700, on the other hand, ARE reasonably close to the feel of a real piano and, in fact, some piano teachers DO recommend them for students for which a real piano is just too expensive. And note that the PX-560 uses Casio's AiR technology, which responds to touch smoothly. So that aspect (smooth touch response) is not a new thing for Casio. What is new is getting it for so little money. (Note that it is not clear if Casio is using something similar to AiR or not in the CT-X models.) 

[Ken Madell]

5 hours ago, AlenK said:

 

The primary reason piano teachers have avoided "keyboards" (by which it seems you mean an entire class of instruments that does not include digital pianos) is that the keys don't physically feel like the action of a real piano's keys. If the keys don't have a similar feel as you hit them (weight, resistance, velocity profile) and a similar return behaviour, then you could develop a "bad" playing technique that won't work as well on a real (i.e., acoustic) piano.

 

The keys on some digital pianos such as Casio's PX-560 and CGP-700, on the other hand, ARE reasonably close to the feel of a real piano and, in fact, some piano teachers DO recommend them for students for which a real piano is just too expensive. And note that the PX-560 uses Casio's AiR technology, which responds to touch smoothly. So that aspect (smooth touch response) is not a new thing for Casio. What is new is getting it for so little money. (Note that it is not clear if Casio is using something similar to AiR or not in the CT-X models.) 

Good comments Alen.  If you don't mind I'd like to make this topic a little more open ended, because I think some interesting and unexpected things are happening in keyboardland.  

Before becoming an avid Casio fan, I was just your average classical piano grad student preparing to teach, and taught beginners for many years.  A few got digitals, the rest traditional.  But now, I've reached the point of entertaining the idea that someday keyboards may become a preferred instrument to the piano by many.  

Y'know, for the most part, piano teachers are very traditional, and often quite uncreative.  Sometimes, not well informed.  I think weighted keys is a myth, just like the prevalent idea that you need to start your lessons in childhood.  Fingers have no muscles.  And compared to the responsiveness these new keyboards are having, I've started finding weighted keys (including real pianos) to be cumbersome and slow to respond.  For now that's just me maybe.  

[Casiokid]

I quite agree Ken the classical/traditional music world is being left behind.  It first started with the invention of Midi, classical/traditional musicians these days 'can't afford to bury their heads in the sand' without  embracing today's technology

[tuxfriend]

Just found this on YouTube:

 

 

[Ken Madell]

3 hours ago, tuxfriend said:

Just found this on YouTube:

 

 

WOOWIE, wailin'

[AlenK]

Fingers don't have any muscles? Of course they do. And trust me, they can be strengthened. Weighted keys a myth? We must agree to disagree on that one. 

 

Certainly, unweighted so-called "synth action" keys (Why aren't they called "organ action" since that is where they originated?) are valid for playing music. I like synth actions. They are well suited for playing fast monophonic leads (the kind that are sadly out of fashion today). And you can even learn to play music written for acoustic piano on them. But if a piano student learns exclusively on that and then is asked to play or has the opportunity to play an acoustic piano (or even a good weighted-action digital piano) then they will probably falter. 

[Joe Muscara]

17 hours ago, AlenK said:

Fingers don't have any muscles? Of course they do.

I'm guessing he meant memory. Fingers don't have any memory, as in the expression "muscle memory."

 

I would be insulted if they called non-weighted keys "organ action" unless they were waterfall instead of diving board synth type. Calling them organ action would confuse people and make them expect waterfall keys.

[Casiokid]

Following a piano recital Mozart once said that 'he didn't play the piano with his fingers ! '

[AlenK]

2 hours ago, Joe Muscara said:

I'm guessing he meant memory. Fingers don't have any memory, as in the expression "muscle memory."

 

I would be insulted if they called non-weighted keys "organ action" unless they were waterfall instead of diving board synth type. Calling them organ action would confuse people and make them expect waterfall keys.

 

Well, I'm sure you know that "muscle memory" is a function of the brain directing the muscles, not the muscles themselves. I'm sure piano players would be surprised to hear that their brains are not memorizing what their fingers do as they practice. If that were so there would be no point to practice. I'm sure that you, as a real keyboard player (I am but a noodler), appreciate that when playing the keyboard your fingers are more than just stubs that hit selected keys. The muscles that control our fingers are involved bigtime (or should that be "bigly" ).

 

Re waterfall keys, I appreciate your point. But I will point out that all of Casio's recent non-weighted keyboards use keys that are very close to waterfall. I'm not sure they completely qualify because they do have a slight lip, but they are certainly closed at the front unlike the "diving board" keys usually seen on synths. And not all organs use waterfall keys. Look at most church organs, for example. 

 

However, I was referring to the action, not to the shape. Unweighted actions started with organs. When keyboard mechanicals were first incorporated into synthesizers (in Moog modulars if I'm not mistaken, at least on this side of the Atlantic) they used keyboard mechanicals sourced from organ suppliers. For the most part they still get their keyboard mechanicals from those companies if they don't make their own (like Casio does). 

[Joe Muscara]

Some people say muscle memory like they mean their muscles and not their brain. I find it an odd expression, maybe because they seem to be leaving the brain out of it!

 

I would not say that keys like on the CT-X and XW series are waterfall at all. Check out a Hammond or recent clone, and you will see the fronts of those keys are curved, allowing for palm smears. I would not do a true Hammond-style palm smear on a keyboard that had a lip at all.

 

I knew you were referring to the action. My concern is the terminology might confuse some. I am so hopeful and wanting true waterfall organ keys on anything that if I saw "organ action" I would start to think they meant waterfall. Meanwhile, I know of any "organ company" supplying keys for keyboards or synths nowadays. Casio, Yamaha, and Roland pretty much do their own, and most of the others come from Fatar. When I hear organ company I think Hammond, Wurlitzer, and Lowery. I don't think the latter two make anything anymore, and I believe Hammond has used Fatar for some of the SK series.

[Display Name]

23 minutes ago, Joe Muscara said:

Some people say muscle memory like they mean their muscles and not their brain. I find it an odd expression, maybe because they seem to be leaving the brain out of it!

 

Muscle memory is basically a task that you have done so often and so well,  that you don't think about it --- but of course it's still all in the brain. 

[Brad Saucier]

My muscles definitely have their own memory.  They often tell my brain... "What do you think you are doing? You're not 19 anymore!"   

[AlenK]

Joe, I said organ supplier, not organ manufacturer; an important distinction. Fatar got its start supplying piano actions but then also became a major supplier of organ keyboards. More recently, of course, they have become the predominant supplier of keyboard mechanisms for synthesizers and all manner of keyboard-based instruments, primarily because of cost. But Fatar is still a major supplier of keyboard mechanisms for organs. I said "for the most part they still get their keyboards from those companies" and that is one example of what I meant by that. 

 

Historically speaking, I am sure you know that when keyboard-based synths first came out in the late 60's and early 70's Pratt-Read was the predominant supplier (they apparently only make screwdrivers now). Pratt-Read was also a major supplier of keyboard mechanisms for organs and I have to believe that comprised more of their business back then than synthesizers. 

 

Also, Kimball was apparently* a supplier of keyboard mechanisms for at least one synthesizer (Rhodes Chroma before they switched to Pratt-Read) and possibly others. This (they?) is (are?) the only example(s) I know of an actual organ manufacturer supplying keyboard mechanisms to a manufacturer of other keyboard-based instruments. Very much a special case.

 

(* According to some online sources, at any rate: here,  here and here. But on the other hand Philip Dodds implies it was Gulbransen, which was indeed owned at the time by CBS.)

[Brad Saucier]

My organizing compulsion is off the charts.  I really want to make another thread for the action and memory discussion.