Shall I swap digital for accoustic??

[archivist]

Hi, I'm new on this board! I'm a begginer on the piano, started learning in April (I'm 38). Playing the piano has been my life-long dream. I played the classical guitar for several years as a teenager, got to equivalent of grade 4/5 (it was abroad), and been singing in choirs as adult, so I had a fair grounding in music, but no experience of a keyborad (except computers at work!) whatsoever.
To start the piano, I bought a digital Roland HP101, which was what the music shop reccommended to me, they said I'll get better value with it than with an accoustic, even second hand, at same price (money was an issue).
I enjoy my playing to no end, and my Roland has good touch and sound. However, I'm a bit annoyed with the 'electrical' aspect to it - the bright red light on front, it looking not 100% like a piano, just the knowledge that it has no strings and hammers inside - all probably frivolous reasons, I know ... What do people here think about the comparison? Should I try and sell my Roland to get a second hand upright? Is that a realistic option, to get a decent second hand with the money I could get from the digital? Are there people who actually prefer a digital and would consider a swap? What should I look for if I do that?
All advice / opinion appreciated.
Many thanks!

[Gill the Piano]

When your fifteen hundred quid Roland stops working, and you discover that it needs a sub-woofer circuit board switch doobrey thingy, and you ring Roland to ask them to send you one, you'll get 'O we don't make that model any more; it's obsolete.' Outlay up the swannee. When a note on your acoustic stops working, and you discover that it's not a current model...it won't matter, because if we can't get one, we can mAke one. Outlay safe...and that's partly why an acoustic is always better value, because it'll last 30 years before any serious money is required, other than tuning.
The touch on an acoustic is better, because it IS an acoustic, it's not an electro-Japanese approximation of one, ditto the sound. You'll learn how a tiny muscle movement can affect tone, and you'll start to learn real muscle control.
Cost? As much as you can afford. Size? As big as you can accommodate without having to live in/on it. Ring local tuners (NOT during Coronation Street if it's me) and ask if they have any customers selling; they will know some of the history behind the instrument, and whether it's worth the price.
Welcome to the world of real piano playing!

[WinstonChurchill]

Shall I swap digital for accoustic??

Yes.

[Stuart]

There are all sorts of reasons for preferring acoustic to digital but I think that the main one is that an acoustic piano gives you feedback - it is responsive in an incredibly sensitive manner to how you play it . This means that there is no limit to your musical progress if you learn how to listen to yourself. I remember a piano salesman referring to hearing a very good pianist play a range of acoustic and then digital pianos: his playing on the acoustic pianos was stunning, on the digital pianos he sounded merely ordinary.

I've been along this path. Acoustic is far more satisfying.

Stuart

[jcb25]

I had a Clavinova for several years and never made much progress on it, because I made the mistake of trying to teach myself. In February of this year I finally embarked on proper lessons, and quickly improved to the point where the Clavinova no longer satisfied me - I needed to feel the hammers at work, and to sense the resistance of the keys. So I recently invested in a proper piano, and my advice to you would be: don't hesitate. You'll find yourself playing with greater enthusiasm than ever before, and playing better.

[PianoGuy]

No contest.

Buy a real piano.

[archivist]

Thanks everyone for your input, much appreciated. I still wonder about the question of swaps, and about the question of cost (I know that to get a good upright I should probably invest not less than 5000 pounds). Another interesting thing I just discovered is that the CD attached to the scores in the "Pianist" magazine is mostly played on a digital Roland. Do you know why they choose that, if as you say that an accoustic piano is much superior?

[PianoGuy]

I just discovered is that the CD attached to the scores in the "Pianist" magazine is mostly played on a digital Roland. Do you know why they choose that, if as you say that an accoustic piano is much superior?

Probably paid handsomely for the use and endorsement.

[Gill the Piano]

You can get a perfectly reasonable new upright for £2500, or a decent second-hand 'grey' market Yamaha U3, you don't have to spend five grand just because it's there! Shop around...

[Openwood]

There's no contest - if you want to improve your skills and you have the cash, buy an acoustic piano. The day I see the top names releasing their solo CDs on a Roland will be the day I trade in my acoustic piano.

I always wondered why details of the instruments used were missing from the Pianist magazine CDs - it's a pretty glaring omission for a magazine solely dedicated to pianos - but if they've struck a deal with Roland all is explained. If it was something the magazine was proud of you can be sure that the Roland brand would be plastered all over those CDs.

I've played a wide range of Clavinovas et al (and I reckon the Roland sound beats the Clavinova). They're a reasonable solution when an acoustic piano isn't an option but there is simply no comparison between them and an acoustic piano in terms of sound and touch (and what else is there?).

Plus, as Gill points out, you get built-in obsolescence with any electric piano once the technology moves on.

Buy a real one, do it now