Recommendations (choice between Privia Pro PX-5S and XW-P1)

[ampetrosillo]

Hi everyone, I'm new to the forum. I'll get straight to the point. I'm not a keyboardist first and foremost, I'm basically a bass player that plays keyboards now and again. I'm in a new band¹ (our own material) and my synths don't cut it (I have a Yamaha An-1x, a Blofeld and a Polivoks). We're after a more traditional sound and want to avoid anything electronic sounding, apart from the odd Juno-style string/lead patch (authenticity is not a priority). Basically the sounds I need are organs especially (drawbar organs, but also possibly Farfisa/Continental style organs and most of all pipe organs too), electric pianos, acoustic piano and mellotron-style sounds (strings, flutes but with that kind of character), with a few "GM" sounds too (eg. marimba, harpsichord, regular strings etc.). This is for live performances, not recording purposes (we must face it, any computer with decent plugins and sample banks is as good or better even than the expensive stuff) so I don't need total refinement.

 

The Casio XW-P1 has a semi-weighted keyboard (which is ideal for organs and mellotron), it has a dedicated organ section with drawbars and bespoke controls, on the other hand it has the mono-synth section that I'd use really sparely, the hex layer engine which, again, I'd use sparely as a synth engine but could come in handy for organ sounds, and the PCM section which is supposedly passable (the acoustic and electric pianos are competent but lack the refinement of a piano board).

 

The Casio Privia Pro PX-5S is a higher-end product overall, it has a larger and fully weighted keyboard (which is not ideal for organs, but the organ accompaniment is usually really basic, think chord accompaniment, no rock/jazz organ, slides and fast phrasing, so it may be immaterial), it lacks the mono-synth section (which is not a big deal, but... more later on), it carries over the organ section from the XW-P1 but without some of the hands-on features (for example, you only have six drawbars, instead of eight, so I'd have to program the patches beforehand, I suppose), it has higher polyphony (irrelevant), but it has much better pianos, both electric and acoustic (especially the grand piano, but it looks like the electric piano is smoother on the PX-5S, with more dynamic behaviour, as opposed to the XW-P1 where it appears to simply select one of three samples according to velocity with abrupt switching). It also has a sleeker look 😀 The thing with the PX-5S though is that it is impossible to program a layer as a pure mono layer, which makes it harder to play basses cleanly, and I don't know whether the organs are as good on the PX-5S as on the XW-P1. On the other hand, the strings and flutes and stuff seem to be better on the PX-5S (or maybe they're just more programmable). I've heard a very good mellotron flute patch somewhere on this forum for the PX-5S and I don't know if I could replicate that kind of editing on the XW-P1. I also don't know whether either of the keyboards has any decent/decently programmable pipe organs. As for effects and such, the PX-5S appears to have master compression and insert effects (including EQ), while the XW-P1 appears to have only master chorus, reverb and delay and I'm unsure about the rest.

 

So, any recommendations?

 

¹ here's my band's new single, to give an idea of the kind of sounds we're after:

 

 

 

 

[Brad Saucier]

Hello and welcome to the forums!  I like those songs!   I am the one who created the Mellotron flute for the PX-5S.  Before I get into this, let me clear up a couple of features.  The XW-P1 has a virtual tonewheel organ engine but the PX-5S does not.  The PX-5S also has a hex layer synth engine, which is a little different and more powerful than the one in the XW.  The PX has fully programmable sliders but the XW does not. Organ simulations on the PX-5S are possible because of the hex layer synth engine and programmable sliders.  We have one user who created an organ for the PX-5S that is using some of the knobs to make up for the fact there is only 6 sliders.  There are many other organs as well, preset and download-able. So that brings me to this... the hex layer synth is not necessarily all about synth sounds.  It can be used to create nearly anything, from pianos, to strings, flutes and more.  I used the hex layer synth to create the Mellotron flute and Mike Martin created a Mellotron strings sound.   Lots of sounds are done using hex layer.  Mike also created a Farfisa sound for the PX-5S using hex layer.  So, based one everything you said about your end use, I would recommend the PX-5S first.  Harpsichord sounds much better on PX-5S than XW.  It sounds like you wouldn't need the step sequencer in the XW or the solo synth.  The effects are better in the PX-5S and you can use more of them at once. There is one more option, the MZ-X500.  It basically combines everything you need or want from the PX-5S and XW-P1 and more, much more.  It may be overkill itself however.  

[Brad Saucier]

We also have a Facebook group that would respond to your questions moreso than this forum.  

 

https://www.facebook.com/groups/PX5SPX560/

[mike71]

I think the philosophy of the two keyboards is different.

The PX-5S (and the PX-560) are stage pianos and are geared to that thing, so they have an hammer action keyboard. The synthesizer and hex layer part are added to the core digitali piano functionality, so this is why there isn't a mono mode.

But bear in mind that the PX-5S has a great MIDI interface, so you could serach say a Oberheim OB3 expander.

 

 

[ampetrosillo]

9 hours ago, Brad Saucier said:

Hello and welcome to the forums!  I like those songs!   I am the one who created the Mellotron flute for the PX-5S.  Before I get into this, let me clear up a couple of features.  The XW-P1 has a virtual tonewheel organ engine but the PX-5S does not.

 

Thanks for your reply! So the organ engine on the PX-5S is tacked on and basically is a differently laid out hex engine, and not a true organ mode? Soundwise (YouTube doesn't really cut it) are there any material differences? What are the advantages of the drawbar organ emulation on the XW-P1 compared to the PX-5S, apart from dedicated controls?

 

Quote

The PX-5S also has a hex layer synth engine, which is a little different and more powerful than the one in the XW.

 

How is it more different? The manual is quite basic and doesn't really explain how powerful it is. It looks as though the PX-5S is capable of more effects, since the DSP is right "inside" the engine (and the first four layers can run their own insert effects).

 

Quote

The PX has fully programmable sliders but the XW does not. Organ simulations on the PX-5S are possible because of the hex layer synth engine and programmable sliders.  We have one user who created an organ for the PX-5S that is using some of the knobs to make up for the fact there is only 6 sliders.  There are many other organs as well, preset and download-able. So that brings me to this... the hex layer synth is not necessarily all about synth sounds.  It can be used to create nearly anything, from pianos, to strings, flutes and more.

 

It would seem so, but I think you can sort of do that on the XW-P1, I think...? You can use the PCM samples as oscillators, right? And is there anything stopping me from recreating those Mellotron-stype patches on the XW-P1?

 

Quote

I used the hex layer synth to create the Mellotron flute and Mike Martin created a Mellotron strings sound.   Lots of sounds are done using hex layer.  Mike also created a Farfisa sound for the PX-5S using hex layer.  So, based one everything you said about your end use, I would recommend the PX-5S first.  Harpsichord sounds much better on PX-5S than XW.  It sounds like you wouldn't need the step sequencer in the XW or the solo synth.  The effects are better in the PX-5S and you can use more of them at once. There is one more option, the MZ-X500.  It basically combines everything you need or want from the PX-5S and XW-P1 and more, much more.  It may be overkill itself however.  

 

Why is it overkill? It's a cheaper model and is more of a "home keyboard", apparently. What features does it offer that would serve my purposes better? The step sequencer could come in handy, actually, but that's not a big issue because I have a hardware sequencer (a very old Roland MIDI sequencer, runs on floppy disks!) that could be useful.

 

Bear in mind that I need a jack of all trades, but since we make large use of organ sounds, I'd like them to be good. Not necessarily a real Hammond in a box, but good. If the Privia PX-5S is capable of organ sounds as good as those on the XW-P1 without the use of an expander (because it gets fiddly, unless you could route the output of the expander into the keyboard and make use of its master EQ and stuff), then of course it's a better choice for me, as the pianos are better too.

 

[mike71]

In the PX-5S you can route the output of the expander into the keyboard compressor and master EQ on the PX-5S. The quirk is that there's a noise gate alsto and can't be excluded, but for organ sound it's less of a problem.

Real big quirk of the PX-5S, if you like organ sounds, is the missing expression pedal (if you are going to use an Oberheim OB3 expander it has an expression pedal input).

But I think that the MZ-X 500 could be an interesting option, if you are interested more on organ sounds than piano sounds, and has a more synth approach,  so has a sampler and a mono mode, and last but not least a nice colour LCD display. If you don't need an hammer action keyboard it could be an interesting thing.

 

Anyway I have a PX-5S, and I like it, even if it has some quirks, don't have an MZ-X500 but I think that is an interesting arranger keyboard.

[Jokeyman123]

Consider the build quality also. I have no opinion on either, but if you are lugging it around alot, the less controls to break off, the better. I love my XW-P1 and my PX Privias, with proper care and handling, would use either on a gig. If you are not a piano player, you may find the piano action a little hard on your hands if you play many parts during each set. tough call. I have the 350 and 560 also, definitely positive on all counts. I'd gig with XW on top, PX on bottom.

[ampetrosillo]

I used to be a piano player as a child, and I still have an upright piano at home I play once in a while. The piano action isn't a problem, although certain things are a bit harder to do of course (but since we're not doing fast leads and that kind of stuff...). The kind of stuff I do, people usually either get some vintage dodgy stuff (old, heavy, cheap "home organs" and keyboards) or they splash out on the real stuff (heavy, fragile, delicate Rhodes pianos and Farfisa organs). Since we're in 2018, I'd like to get something which is more dependable.

 

The more I look at it, the more I like the MZ-X300/500 actually. I don't need the internal speakers, and the colour touchscreen scares me a bit (how long will it last?). But it seems to have everything I need sound-wise (the pianos seem to be the stuff you find on the Privia line, with better organs though). The thing is that it's got all those "arranger" features (the rhythm accompaniment section for instance). I basically need something along the lines of a Nord Stage, but I don't want to spend so much for something I don't even use *that* much (and I find Nord stuff to be steeply priced anyway, for what they do).

[Brad Saucier]

I would recommend the MZ-X500.  The touch screen is reliable.  I wouldn't worry about that.  Casio has been making their own touch screens for years.  They use them in dictionaries and business equipment.  The keyboards use the same screens.   

 

As far as the speakers and arranger features, if we ignore those things, the remaining features are competitive with dedicated workstation keyboards and performance synths.  

 

If you do end up considering the MZ-X series, I would further say go for the 500 rather than the 300.  The 300 does not have the hex layer synth engine, and by extension a mono synth mode. 

[mike71]

Roland Atelier church and combo organs have arranger functions. They're quite expensive (the combo organ is 3500€ and the church organs are "please come in the shop" price, I suppose because they're 200 kg beasts and aimed at a small market.

[sslyutov]

XW-P1. Since you are not a piano guy. You want more organ keys action, plus bars. Glissando on PX5 would feel not as comfortable for a hand as on XW.

However, it more looks like Hammond would the best chose (some SK)