CVP-300 series design question...

[r_d_wilson_47714]

Take a really good look at the very beginning of the CVP-307 movie as Peter Baartmans opens the fallboard of the instrument. What is most striking to me is that Yamaha has moved virtually all the controls plus the large LCD screen to the front, movable part of the key cover/fallboard. This had to be quite a feat of engineering to accomplish.

Questions: Why did Yamaha redesign the construction of the instrument in this way? For CVP-307 owners—is the fallboard any heavier and bulkier than on a CVP-200 series instrument where all the controls are stationary, or do you not even notice the difference? Of course, the CVP-207 roll top key cover opens in a very different way.

This obviously makes the access of the controls much easier in terms of future repairs, if ever necessary. What does this mean in terms of reliability, or is this a non-issue? Does anyone know what types of electrical connections are used between the main unit and the fallboard? Flat ribbon cables such as in a printer? Flexible wires like those used in other applications where they are build for lots of movement? Some newer technology?

I know that all that Yamaha does is for a particular purpose, is highly thought out and is very reliable. The reason I am posting this question is that this is an issue that we’ve not yet discussed in this forum to date.

[wally]

I saw what you're talking about, but I haven't actually touched a 307/309 yet. I think I prefer the older way of putting the control panel behind the keyboard. It just seems that the new approach makes the control panel more vulnerable to damage -- if someone sat on the cover or dropped something on it. The concept of a cover is to "be a cover" to protect what's underneath. A cover should be easily and cheaply replaceable.

[danilo72h501]

I have acquired cvp 307 yesterday. The cover me seems enough solid. To who it comes in mind to be based on a pianoforte? Aesthetically the 307-309 is the much beautifulst one of 208-210