The CP73/88 page specifically state "Expandability" with pianos, keyboards AND MORE.

All I read was 2 pianos were added with V1.4. I'm using this as a pattern for prediction of what YC holds in store since I'm thinking they WILL NOT upset CP customers by greatly expanding the YC even though they are different products.

It's a Yamaha gimmick to make big promises but deliver little results and over long periods of time to boot.

Let's face it but Yamaha sucks when it comes to expansion. Always have and always will. It's their MO "Never Touchscreen" business model.

Their new precedent sounds more like an internal Yamaha design department bet offering 1980s sized screens and less content at modern day pricing and thinking no one will notice.

I like my YC73 but just need a lot more of it and now, not 6 months from now.

they all should have the full compliant of 400+ voices...digital display only with 2 digits. 99 and that's all or perhaps add an asterisk and start over...The pop up display list can run endlessly I suppose.

You'd really want hundreds of voices to choose from through an endlessly scrolling list?

I like my YC73 but just need a lot more of it and now, not 6 months from now.

Then I'm afraid you bought the wrong board. I'd say you should always buy a board for what it does today, not for what you hope it will do tomorrow; and if a board does not do what you need today, then you should buy a board that does. That said, if you happen to own an iPhone/iPad, you can cheaply/easily add many more sounds to your YC73 using its MIDI zone functions.

My point was their other stage boards had many more voices. Why less now? Since when is less an improvement? Still makes no logical sense.

However it's a possibility that those 400 voices mostly sucked compared to 160 better voices.

The quality and sample size/layers could be a valid comparison.

Less is an improvement if one sound has lots of flexibility (one is not really one static sound).

Less is an improvement if the sounds that are there are killer without "throwaways".

Less is an improvement if there are other features that are better giving an overall competitive experience with less. Things like navigational ease, control surface, keybed quality, reliability, weight, etc.

I don't know where the competition or Yamaha's current stage models fall - but those are just some general answers to the question of when less is or can be an improvement. This is all fairly subjective as we all have our own personal rating systems. I respect the individuality of perception.

I don't have the 300/400 voice CP models to compare my YC against but perhaps someone else knows how the quality compares.

I do own the CP1 and because of this the CP1 always destroyed my Genos, Montage, Fantom, YC etc.

I ordered a CP4 once because on paper Yamaha said it was the greatest stage board ever. I returned it after one day because my CP1 still destroyed it.

I can't recall, it's been any years but I'm sure the sound were falling short of the mark. Don't ever buy the CP1 because not knowing is best for stage people.

Classify these CP/YC as stage boards if you want but CP1 is the only real stage board that can do pianos and keys accurately like an actual piano or EP.

The others are really just attempting to replicate without the true velocity and character. When I strike the DX on CP1 you can feel it in your bones.

A YC1 would be a very interesting project combining the all CP1 tech and YC line into a stage monster. Or own both like me.

Since the CP1 only does 17 voices/2 layers (still it's like owning 17 of the real instruments all very organic) I placed a rack on top of it and added the Behringer Deepmind 12 module via Midi.

This catapults the CP1 into another dimension for very little additional money. Those layers are beyond insane with analog in the mix.

I agree with Jason. A board that does less can be preferable if it is simply better suited to the task at hand.

People may counter such a thought with, "they can just provide more options... people who don't need them don't have to use them." But the mere *presence* of other capabilities can make a board more difficult to use. It's harder to find the menu item you need in a list of 25 options than in a list of 5, for example.

Another common complaint about boards which you allude to is that adding something would be "cheap." But it's still a cost. The economics of the keyboard market is such that adding $20 to the cost of building something can still add $100 to the retail price. So if they don't want to raise the price, then the question becomes, what existing capability do you remove in order to make room for the new one?

The point is, each decision has ramifications. I don't know whether they've made the right or wrong decisions with the CP, I guess they'll find that out from the sales figures. But surprisingly, you focus on disappointment over the relatively small number of sounds of the CP73, while praising the CP1 that has far fewer.

In the end, if it does what you need better than anything else you can find for its price, it's a good value for you. If it doesn't, then you should buy a different board. Which will no doubt have its own trade-offs vis-a-vis the CP.