Just arrived at local GC.

It crushed the competition as sub $1500 88 key arranger ( 256 poly,arranger functionality, style compatibility,playable keys and also usable sound wise). Korg XE20 ( terrible B1 quality keybed and Ek50 board which is cut down version of PA50 ( Pa 80 from 2000) and Casio 88 keys ( good piano sound and debatable feel but mid 90’s GM sound set 2 variation arranger board) have no chance. Not even close. Xe20 still has some good/ punchy Triton sounds but , arranger backing tracks still suffer from busy / jumpy fills issue that pa80/60/50: micro-arranger had. Add that to lack of user style editing.





Has Live! Drums like mid Tyros 2/3 and up. Live drums were not a part of MOTL PSRs.

(Not sure about PSR - S series).

VRM and Natural! Pianos are there ( better than old school Live! ones). Must have SA 1sounds ( concert gtr/ saxes, etc) are there. Adaptive styles,User style writing / song creation/ mic input with vocal efx that can be recorded as wave file are also there.
The key action ( still GHS) is quiet without being stiff. I believe it’s also capable of Bluetooth. Best of all , 4 variations and ability to load hundreds of well writtenYamaha styles since it’s equipped with Mega voices as well. Yes , 16 track midi recording / SMF playback ( yes GS , XG , GM2 )with no load time from flash drive . 3 pedal input is also there for better expressive pianos. Color screen helps too.


Ability to read 4 variation MOTL arranger style files ( which has mega voice data) is a big game changer since Korg/ Roland/ Casio can not compete with Yamaha’s style pool that is free ( both factory and user styles). The advantage is due to free platform which started in early 2000s ( PSR 2000 era). They are reaping the benefits now. Think about it, your $800 home keyboard can read Tyros styles from 15 years ago which still sound great as backing accomp. Add that to sequencer / edit/ layer additional tracks with SA1 voices and save as Wav file so that you are ready to play anywhere.



Cons?



It’s pretty obvious that Yamaha made it intentional so that it won’t canabilize their upper end gear. They want to beat the competition in home market but they don’t want gigging OMBers to get it by making it-

One phone out ( line out - need stereo cable to split)
Weight- 47 Ibs? Are you kidding me?
No Mod wheel/ cheap pitch wheel
Bulky
No Mp3 record/ playback ( only Wav)
No Midi Din sockets, only USB
Tiny and fragile buttons that are back on dark board
Navigation thru arrow keys ( not sure about their longitivity )can be painful
Built quality is definitely for home market but MOTL features makes you mad


Just added the link.
https://usa.yamaha.com/products/musical_instruments/pianos/p_series/dgx-670/features.html#d1344578

Spec-wise it seems roughly equal to the PSR-SX600, maybe better in some ways. If it does sell for $800, you're getting a LOT of functionality for that price!!
The "Adaptive Style" feature is interesting. I don't recall seeing something like this on a Yamaha before. If you play more notes, or "harder" velocity, the arranger engine picks up tracks from a more advanced variation. So when it's active, you have thirteen fuzzy variations instead of four discrete ones. Pretty slick!
I could probably approximate this on my Roland with an expression pedal, some MIDI Solutions black boxes, and a whole registration bank filled with subtle variations of the same style. But I think Diki would tell me that my setup is too complicated :-) Honestly I'm jealous, it would be a nice feature to have!

BK-9 (and the older G70/E80) has a system where the harder you play, the harder the style track plays, but this can be edited to be an on/off function too. But I’ve never heard of a system that picks up style parts from later variations when you play harder.

This might work really well, but probably only with styles written with the function in mind. Not sure if I’d dig small snippets of later variation popping in and out as I play harder and softer. Is there any control over the strength of the playing necessary to trigger it, or if it persists for a window of time and takes more than just one frisky note to start it?

The Dynamic Arranger from Roland’s is best used subtly, but when you dial it in with the right style, it’s remarkable. Kudos to Yamaha for pushing things along in how the arranger responds to YOU, but it’s curious it’s just this line. I would have thought, if this works well, add it to ALL the SX series and the Genos…

And yes, sure it could be approximated with a boatload of gear, a boatload of effort and a boatload of tinkering, but what can’t? LOL Still can’t figure out any way to trigger it by playing MORE, though. Velocity is easy to quantify, but ‘busy-ness’ is a bit harder to detect and use. I wonder how Yamaha pulled this off? Number of notes down? Number of notes played per quarter note? Speed of notes?

Can’t really think of a black box that could detect that…

But yes, things like this are what I think we need to push arranger realism. The more the style picks up on HOW you are playing not simply the notes, the more it can sound like a real live band. The good ones listen to each other, why not our arrangers?!

I could paste a huge chunk from p. 51 of the Owners Manual, but I encourage anyone interested to download it and read it for yourself. Yes, the feature is limited to certain styles. I'm guessing that these styles have a subtle and logical progression across the four variations. The user can limit how far the arranger wanders from the "base" selected variation.
Remember that first and foremost this is a piano. I'm guessing that the "more notes" feature is optimized for full keyboard or piano-style chord recognition. In two-handed scores there are always some passages which are more dense than others. I would guess the arranger engine looks at how many keys are pressed on a beat, or are being held down or sustained.
The Adaptive Styles seem like a great idea, but so much depends on the execution. I'm sure that we'll see demos on Yamaha's website, or YouTube shortly, and then we'll know more. This, and the Accent/Unison are some of the most significant features to emerge in a long time. Whether the arranger is evolving or dying, it's encouraging to see companies trying to make them more interactive!

I think it’s telling that only pianists get a system like this… Perhaps a subtle dig at how many arranger players don’t seem to put much emphasis on dynamics, and perhaps come from an organ background where the dynamics come from the swell pedal..!

On the other hand, there’s no reason something like this couldn’t be triggered by how far down an expression pedal is pressed.

But yes, I kind of figured this system really only works with styles deliberately written that way for it, with probably much less variation from first to last, as you say.

It’s a great idea, but like so many things remaining to be done, only those with fairly decent playing skills will benefit much as it relies on a foundation of decent piano technique to be able to summon it at will. And, like so much about arrangers, playing well in the first place is the key to getting the arranger to sound better, no matter what you use…

Thanks for the review, sounds like a nice home KB, but too bulky and heavy too carry around. Too bad...

To be fair, it’s not designed to be a portable keyboard.

The thing I’m getting from quite a few of the pro review sites is that its action is a bit sub-par for the price (one site mentions it’s the same action as much less expensive home digital pianos Yamaha make).

Obviously, how much the action matters depends a lot on how used to a real piano you are, but they also mention it might not be great for building finger strength in beginners , and also difficulty with rapid repeated notes and fast trills.

But criticizing the weight when it’s supposed to feel and sound like a piano and the vast majority of keyboards that actually succeed at this mostly weigh the same or more seems a little unfair. It’s like criticizing a tuba for weighing more than a flute! There are lighter and heavier tubas, but they ALL are heavier than the flute!

It’s an odd situation to be in, I’d guess that 99% of all keyboards like this get set up in the living room or dorm room, and that’s it for them ever being moved. Sure they could probably build them lighter, but to remain stiff and solid that’s going to take more expensive materials.

Another minus in my book is that, while it does have the nice bright CFX Yamaha piano sound, it lacks the Bosendorfer samples that some other Yamaha’s have (Yammie bought Bosendorfer), and I rather prefer the warmer, more ‘classical’ sound of the Bosendorfer. Just me, I admit, but if you’ve ever played one with both sets in it, what do YOU think? 🎹

So called review pro’s from websites are clueless of what Yamaha put what type of keys in price range. Most of online website pro reviews will compare the specs and write the review without playing them.P125 (700$) , MX 88 ($1000, now $1100) and all sub $1000 88 keys pianos use GHS action. Not GH and GHE and NWX actions are for more expensive $1500 models. GHE is more playable for rapid repetitive notes and trills than GHS or Rolands sub 1000 FP30x . No sub $1000 pianos has Bösendorfer Samples either. Just CFX. The good thing is VRM and natural! Piano samples with some limited adjustments. Old “warm live!”
Piano samples will sound less bright.

Mx88 is 88 keys ( same key action) and is 30 Ibs.
Xe20 is 88 keys with speakers and is 25 lbs.

Yamaha can definitely do better with making less than 47 Ibs but they want to prevent the OMBers buying this instead of sx600. There is increased demand for arranger with weighed keys. Up to now, most lack one or more features: mega voice style compatibility/ 4 variation/ style writing/ 16 track seq , SA quality right hand voices, etc. in the past , in Korg world, they had Havian ( pa300 with 88 keys)( light weight ) and pa588 ( pa500 in 88 keys but heavy and expensive). Both have great editing and had all features as their related arrangers.
Unfortunately, if xe20 is pa300 ( instead of ek50)with 88 keys with around 35 pounds or less, it will be a direct competitor to Yamaha. Korg missed that boat by going cheap route by using year 2000’s Pa80 gen styles.




https://usa.yamaha.com/products/musical_instruments/pianos/p_series/dgx-670/specs.html

https://usa.yamaha.com/products/musical_instruments/pianos/p_series/dgx-670/features.html#d1344578

I'm curious... have you played Roland FP-50 and Casio PX560? Curious how they compare.
The PSR-SX600 seems to cost $100 more than this DGX on the street. So that's not a huge penalty if you prefer the lighter weight. Also, I'm sure the "Adaptive Style" feature will come to the arranger lineup next year in a PSR-SX650. Incremental feature upgrades is the Yamaha way.

Sx600 is $999 and dgx is $799. Sx has more sounds/ styles but DGX has better piano sounds/ samples and of course weighted keys.



Played Px 560 , liked the slim layout and touch screen, good piano sounds( not EP and the rest of the sounds) , likes triple sensor action , do not like the key noise and relative short keys length of black keys.
FP 50 is 2013/ 2014 model. Haven’t played by I have used fp30 a while I believe they have same key action with escapement.

Arranger functionality and sound/ style quality within arranger play, FP 50 and Casio no comparison to Yamaha.
Both Casio and Roland has 2 variations only. Styles quality is way behind Yamaha due to programming and lack of expressive nuances ( mainly with mega voiced bass and acoustic guitars). DGX has more arranger real-time control and editing as well.

Arranger sound wise,Roland sounds and styles are better than Casio ‘s arranger styles , which are mostly GM quality with a few exceptions. Roland arranger function/ sound wise are acceptable, but still not new DGX/ SX quality which has on fly adjustments and 4 variations.



Roland super natural piano sound is great . strings are also crisp like high resolution clear samples.Casio is piano sound is good but , other sounds are not great , mostly sounds like outdated 90’s samples.



The problem with FP series is keys with escapement system which is good initial feel and resistance but slow key return time. Having played a lot , initial impression is over when you want to play fast licks and trills due to slow return keys. Initial touch is great but return time is slow. Great piano sound and initial feel , individual sensors, ( may be heavy for some). I also prefer key width of Roland to both Casio and Yamaha. Roland is well constructed, high quality feel but again slow key return.


I agree with his assessment at 16:10.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9wRY-Eodzog








The problem with Casio ( some models , not necessarily px560) is the difference key response ( different spring strength) between black and white keys. Black keys return faster so not equal playing experience.

Casio- also agree with his assessment at 14:50.


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=p7xHgXFEJUE


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=mKAfScFK0QU

You may want to check the key feel/ response on your own.