Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Digital Pianos - Electronic Pianos - Synths & Keyboards Yamaha DGX-670 vs Kawai MP7se

This is both intended for Kawai and Yamaha (what to improve for DGX670 and MP7se):

The DGX670 is just great and I believe perfect for professional use as well as for the home based singer song writer or just music enthusiast. That is how good the sounds and effects are. Also in Yamahas favour I will say that the GHS keys are actually as good as the Kawai MP7se ones. THe touch is great and the keys turn to their resting position swiftly, have a good cushion feeling at the bottom/base and one doesn't tire though playing intensively for a long time.

THe MP7se got me tired quite quickly (and I believe Pavel said that this owes to there being some resistance all the way down, whereas the Yamaha only gives it at the start but then willingly and easily follows the fingers movement). ALso I believe that though GHS has 2 sensors, still the controle and nuances of one's playing is heard very well. Especially if having several layers of sound I believe not many will be able to hear the difference (even with just the piano).

I believe that most of the reason to the MP7se's fame owes to the combination of the keybed and the very meticulously sampled piano sounds. It is hard to hear what owes to the sampling and what to the keybed. I played them both side by side, including without sound, a lot recently and honestly I find the DGX670 keybed at least on par with that of the Kawai Rh3. I even started to prefer the GHS after a few days. But I guess one needs to get adjusted to the feel. ALso the DGX670 feels lighter just as you return from having played the MP7se, but quickly this impression leaves one. Also my precision actually seemed to be as good or better when playing the Yamaha. So the hype about Yamaha's GHS being 20 years old is nonsense if it works well.

CHopin had long not thick fingers and had his Keybed made specially so that he could play extremely fast as compared to other pianos. If one has got heavy hands it might fit one better with a heavier keybed.

SO I return the Kawai one which does not even have an audio interface, thus no mic inlet. This implies a lot of cabling in order to simply hear the play back of software VSTs, when mixing one’s music or when doing casual listening from the web. The DGX670 has a very easy Bluetooth connectivity which works. From where I listen it is just not practical with all those cables plus an audio interface means more tech stuff and adjustments, as opposed to focusing on playing. If you don’t have a band and a need for a mixer or several instrumental inlets then it is bothersome and costly to have to get a sound interface.

ALso the DGX sounds are just great out of the box plus it has all the arranger functionality.

I played Chopin and Beethoven plus improvised on them both in order to compare. Also the distance from the upper position of the keys to when they strike the felt at the bottom is around 0.5-1 mm longer for the Yamaha than for the Kawai so basically the same: 10 mm although the thickness of the felt I have not measured. THe returning of the key is fast as well. I ship back the Kawai one due to the complete picture from comparing them. That being said I loved the Yamaha keybeds of the p120, Cp5, p155 and p300 and would suggest Yamaha to consider a DGX670X or DGX680 with such a keybed.

Perhaps the ability to switch to a lighter touch in an instant, such as what the Kawai MP7se provides (well it is very easy to change the sensitivity on the DGX670 actually and not deep inside some menu: Two ways to change and in the piano room mode it is two button presses + with the direct access around the same I guess). THen one can instantaneously change the keybed feel from one, optimised for the piano focused pianist, to a keybed for the more synth/organ focused player. I might be contradicting myself and perhaps the keybed is not the issue but the sampling which might be of higher quality for those before mentioned DPs.

So to Kawai regarding the MP7se and a possible MP7se Plus:

pros:
1) Keybed: RH3 with 3 sensors.
2) The 4 layer function and easy volume controle (but the Dgx 670 has this easily accessible on the screen as well and the good thing is one can have the memory scenes (Bank) with the volumes for each different song plus 4 different versions (memory). TO have those layers and easily choose external VSTs as well is really good.
3) Great piano samplings with good nuances. It is a matter of taste though. The Yamaha sound is great I think.
4) Good looking beauty.

Cons: 1) No audio interface, thus no Microphone inlet. An audio interface introduces yet other technical challenges which a built in interface would save one from. This also means that each time you want to record your singing you need to turn on the pc. That might prevent many from spontaneous singing if they find this cumbersome. Too much tech stuff is a killer of spontaneity.
2) No Bluetooth. Really convenient when you need to mix or simply hear some playback or do casual listening.
3) Get tired in the fingers.
4) Not so many different sounds that are great right off the bat (the guitars I did not find that interesting or impressive and I went through them all and tried the various variations). One needs to do adjustings to get them right. But perhaps this is intentional since here we have 4 layers available. Regarding Yamaha, being an arranger keyboard there are a lot of sounds already in the orchestral backing sounds. I can not say much about the MP7se and how easy it is to create good sounds including the synth layers. It would take some time but I already decided that the DGX670 is easier to quickly create good sounding music.

Remember Chopin: Did he have to do all those settings? Well perhaps he would have liked the option but I think he had enough in his hands to focus on. I think he would prefer some great default sounds and be freed in his mind to focus on playing and composing rather than to remember which buttons to turn or menus to dig into.

5) No built in monitors which is another advantage of the DGX since you get the sound directly into your ears and don’t have to turn it up that much: Which the neighbours love. Also with monitors you can use them as feedback while also plugging in bigger external loudspeakers for a bigger audience (yes that is possible). Yet again having a combination of great monitors turned upwards plus some built in more powerful ones for an audience (which can be turned on or off) is another possible scenario, but that would of course mean an increase in weight. I would prioritise some great keybed, which doesn’t fatigue one’s fingers.

Completely disagree. Also what’s the rambling about Chopin’s piano doing in the discussion? If the RHIII is making you tired, there’s something wrong with your technique.

Did you personally compare them? Your insulting language is rambling to me. It is very relevant to talk about Chopin in that he actually disliked a heavy feel, my highly esteemed friend.

You are free to compare the two, but both don't belong to the same category of pianos. One is clearly a built-from-scratch to be a stage piano. The other serves the needs of people looking for compact options mostly to be used in a home learning or light entertainment setting.

I don't give much for the so called categories plus people have various needs. FOr me it makes sense to compare them in that they are both user friendly and good for realtime adjustments. I compare them since they were the top choices for me and my needs and I know many have the same needs. THus I don't care which categories the manufacturers have chosen to place them in. It is irrelevant what is relevant is what you need to do.
I guess there is money in upselling and calling the DGX670 a beginners piano but I don't agree. If it works it works and the sounds are amazing. THat should be the core thing.

I have played dozens of GHS action Yamahas and dozens of RHIII action Kawais, both in console and slab form factors. I have also observed a good number of my students in trying both and have seen their reaction, without trying to influence their opinion. These actions really aren’t in the same classes (in terms of weight, product positioning, cost, and performance) and it’s sort of unfair to compare them in the first place...

How many period/historic instruments have you tried? Most pianists dislike a “heavy feel” for their performance instruments.

I wouldn’t have said anything at all but you chose to cross post your review in a completely unrelated thread, apparently to try and generate views.

Yes exactly what I said: The heavy feel is best for people who really love say a heavy Steinway, and perhaps due to the constitution of their fingers/hands/arms etc. A grand piano has often got rather light keys. I read that someone speculated that this debate about having to have a heavy touch much owed to someone spreading this wrong biased argument, which then the market followed, for which reason the differential marketing parameter came to be that.

So therefore it is wrong to exclude the GHS feel from the discussion since some people or a lot actually will prefer it due to the arguments mentioned. ALso in a household it is a good idea since children will have problems adjusting to a heavy touch.

I used the example of Chopin to paint the picture and show how some marketing philosophy might NOT reflect the reality.

In fact often a need in the market did not exist to begin with but was created artificially which the consumers then adapted to and started to believe they really had to have. But so is the commercial world. We don't need to sit and wait for such more or less unsubstantiated claims to dictate what we need.

No you are wrong: THis debate was taking place in that thread, but since the scope was on a tangent I found it better to initiate a new thread.

- Again, you're free to not care.
- Different manufacturer categories exist, because there are fundamental differences.
- "Beginner's piano" is not a category that manufacturers came up with. They don't care if a beginner uses a piano from the "Hybrids" category.

Exactly, they did not. That is something people believe in, although people are free to define the pianos as they wish. But probably a lot who pay a lot for a piano like to refer to the cheaper ones as beginners pianos or the retailers might use that argument hoping to sell one of their more expensive models. But luckily we are free from such terminology. It is a commercial world.

Of course there are differences regarding the hammer technique and the 3 sensors are undobtedly more precise than 2 sensors. HOwever if the difference is that pronounced is the question. THerefore I concluded that the overall gains of the DGX670 (owning it) overshine the difference regarding the keybed, and as said that keybed might actually be preferable.

I totally agree with you. DGX series is a masterpeice. Great that you made this discovery and shared it with us. Thank you!

Can you compare other models like RD2000, CP88, and potentially the P-515 with DGX-670? We need expert opinions like yours here more than ever during pandemic times.

Thanks again bud!

BTW the resistance you're saying is called the "escapement". I think Pavel forgot to mention it. Also, Pavel where are you man?

Current-production Steinway grands are not heavy pianos to play...almost too much so on some of the recent concert grands I've tried. Though we'll see what changes with Renner in their umbrella of wholly-owned subsidiaries does to the NY production. Actions became heavier historically as fortepiano and piano design evolved. Sturdier frame construction allowed for higher tension designs and dynamic potential, along with larger hammers to drive these pianos. This brought about action changes. And it also brought about changes in piano technique from what came generations before.

Which is why I asked about your personal experience with historic pianos-- the first thing I noticed about the action when giving a concert on an 1855 Broadwood (granted, not what Chopin had, but certainly closer than a modern piano) was the shallowness of the key dip, not the touch weight. This made a lot of the repeated note figures in a Schubert sonata substantially easier to play. Of course, there were also drawbacks-- worse tuning stability, limited dynamic range, and pedal trap work made mostly of wood that felt rather fragile.

Pardon my ignorance, and I've only been here for a short time, but who is Pavel? I know there's a guy on YouTube whose middle name is that, but I'm not sure it's the same person being referred.

I prefer rhc2 over ghs, but they're pretty close, I wouldn't complain on either.

I do believe Price vs Performance, DGX670 is unrivaled.

I was ignorant too until Djengis enlightened me with his post. It moved me like reading a verse from our holy book.

I have no idea who Pavel is! but I suggest we exegesis Djengis' post. Pavel can be an angle delivering divine messages.

I will say it's kinda sneaky they removed the included stand which came with the dgx660 though.

THank you for the supporting words :-)

Expert ...hmmm, I just do my research quite profoundly.

ANyway here are my 5 cents about those pianos you mentioned.

RD2000: Highly wanted to purchase this the moment it was released, but found it lacked a microphone and I prefer the sounds of the Yamahas, though it might be an acquired taste, the supernatural sound engine on the Roland: Didn't really impress me although I would have to do better comparisons to really tell (good loudspeakers, no noise in the room, good headphones etc.).
I prefer samplings still. I found the concept with a lot of controllable layers inviting. But perhaps there is some learning curve. I never bought it. I decided for the DGX660 instead which however I replaced with the MOXF8 after 1 year. THe moXF8 was too complicated to inspire to creating music, by the way, though it's GHS keybed was good.

CP88: Never tried it but from the reviews (and listening to it through headphones) I found that it is best for purely stage use due to the sounds being quite sharp and useful for penetrating some bands sound: I prefer the Korg grandstage, MP7se or Nord Grand although I would have to test them myself against each other to know for sure. Again the keybed is good according to some and undoubtedly it provides 3 sensors and good samplings and therefore it can be controlled well, plus the User interface allows for really quick easy real time handling, perfect for the gigging musician. I was very curious about this digital piano, yet to a musician like myself I like to have more sounds available. I think it is a shame that one would have to purchase some heavy furniture to get it all: That is until the latest DGX models where the sounds are really great and generally improved from the DGX660. I always buy transportable DPs or Stage pianos.

P515: I have played this and actually beside the DGX660. THe ivory keybed feel is great (although to some the Yamahas might be a tad to heavy: But I think this impression is highly adjustable with the sensitivity settings), but I really did not like the loudspeakers and the reason probably being one or more of the following reasons:

a) Big piano room and carpets (though the DGX660 was just beside it and the sound being good).
b) Loudspeakers turned downwards.
c) Loudspeakers being powerful but probably not sounding that good before turning up the volume quite much.
d) The loudspeakers not being that well constructed as those of the latest two DGX. THe DGX loudspeakers consist of two bass cones for the deeper frequencies plus 2 tweeters for the high frequencies, plus they are fairly loud and provide a clear and clean sound. I just could not get the same feeling from the p515 which is a shame. I heard another who had the same opinion.

Also as said I prefer a DP with more available sounds. THat is the reason the DGX appeals to me. I like playing various instrumental sounds such as spanish or electric guitars, flutes, synth sounds etc. FOr many years it was just the piano sound but I got the hang of the variety of sounds.

This were just some of my quick impressions with the mentioned pianos.

I created this thread because I wish to shed light on the needs mentioned: Many sounds, arranger functionality, ease of use in combination with a good keybed. But as said I believe that often distinguishing between the quality of the samplings and the keybed feel is rather hard. A good sampling can give the impression of a good keybed and vice versa. Since the keybeds might be rather similar in terms of quality, the most important choice is probably often that of which sounds appeal to one and inspire one to create music.

The competition is quite hard so even small costs might alter peoples decision I guess. But I prefer a self chosen stand although it is a shame that the triple pedal only works with that NON portable stand.

Hahaha ;-) no he is an actual person who likes reviewing pianos: james pavel shawcross. This answers your question too mmathew.

Who are you? What did you do with the true Abdol? Please give him back! Preferably in one piece!