Yamaha P-S500 review, demonstration & buyers guide 

Thanks so much for your supportive comment, BeauR!

⁠@@ePianoscouk Please could you kindly tell me what the “Made in…” sticker was on this model? I wish to import it in as it’s not readily available where I am, and am hearing some conflicting info on where it’s manufactured (this effects my ability to import it) so would really appreciate your help thanks! 🙏🏼

Thank you, chopinlvr.

Thanks, Andreas. We're working on more videos featuring the P-S500 right now. Keep up to date on what we're producing on our Newsroom page here: www.epianos.co.uk/newsroom

Thanks for this info! How's it going otherwise with P-S500? Are you happy with it, any issues/cons?

@@magikat7 Apart from the issues I mentioned, everything is fine and I'm quite happy with it. I do sometimes wonder if I wouldn't have been happier with a proper synthesizer, especially because it allows you to compose songs more easily, but that's an issue for my purpose. What I do love is the many, many instruments it simulates, including entire sections like a string section. The wide range of instruments it simulates makes it superior to most, if not all, digital pianos. I am also more than happy with the action, even though it is relatively simple and actually prefer it to my acoustic upright piano, which I have played for years. The problem with the acoustic upright is that it's hard to play trills quickly, while the PS500 plays very lightly. I am actually planning to sell the upright, since I don't need it anymore. Maybe a grand piano would be nicer, but then you're talking about a completely different price category and one I cannot afford.

Thank you for your support! We're working on more videos featuring the P-S500 (plus more dance moves 🕺). Keep up to date on what we're producing on our Newsroom page here: www.epianos.co.uk/newsroom, you can also sign up to our newsletter for further tips, tricks, special offers and educational material www.epianos.co.uk/newsletter/

I have the DGX-670 and I have owned arrangers from Yamaha, Korg, Casio, and Roland. Since we are talking about arrangers, some aspects of the P-S500 may be better than the DGX-670 and vice-versa. For example, the DGX-670 has paper cone tweeters powered by the same amplifier that powers the woofers, whereas the P-S500 has silk dome tweeters powered by separate amplifiers. The result is more quality in the instruments reproduced, particularly drums. The DGX-670 has fewer styles, but it has 3 intros and 3 endings per style. The P-S500 has about 100 more styles, but they only come with 1 intro and 1 ending. From experience, I can tell you that neither one (more styles or more intros and endings) is really a deal breaker in real life. You can always amplify both with a pair of high quality speakers (studio monitors or a pair of premium PA speakers). The DGX-670 comes with a built-in color screen, which means less things to connect. The P-S500 is a sort of CSP-150 "lite". The guide lights might be the most important aspect that separates both. For me (I don't need the guide lights), the DGX-670 is likely to be the better option: cheaper, basically same arranger features (both have 4 variations, which is very important).

@@Instrumental-Covers I also own the DGX-670. The P-S500 only has 100 instrument sounds without using a tablet, which means that Yamaha has dumped the cost of the additional functionality on the user. It also means that in the future, full control of the piano may be lost due to a new version of the tablet OS causing the software to no longer function unless Yamaha supports it with an updated app. Then there is the price differential, which is substantial and the loss of the console buttons on the keyboard. The DGX is a way better deal. The issue, if any, regarding the sound quality from the speakers can easily be addressed by connecting an external amp and speakers. IMHO, the guide lights are a marketing ploy. One should not learn to play a keyboard by looking at little lights. People need to learn to read sheet music without looking at their hands.

@@MikeHammer1 I agree the DGX-670 is a better deal, at least for most people. But apparently, the CSP150/170 have been very successful. I heard a Yamaha presenter mentioning that... if that's true, then the P-S500 should be equally successful, at least for the audience interested in it. I am not interested in the guide lights or controlling the instrument via a tablet, but again, if there is a market for it... One thing I would say about the speaker system for the piano tones: it isn't easy to find a good speaker system that produces an authentic piano tone. You can find a louder, more powerful, more bass-oriented speaker system... but not necessarily a speaker system that makes piano justice. Case in point: I have a pair of professional studio monitors, and the DGX-670 built-in speakers sound better for piano patches. In fact, much better. Yamaha calibrates those speakers for piano. To be a little more detailed: in my informal tests, I have found that the built-in tweeters do not contribute much to the harmonics in the piano patches, leaving the full-range 12 cm drivers playing most of the content. This means there is no coloration in the sound since the crossover point seems to be very high. But most speaker systems have a relatively low crossover point with a woofer that is not allowed to play full range. This has the potential to introduce coloration at the crossover point, phase issues... If the P-S500 has the speaker system and the samples of the P515, then it should sound more realistic than the DGX-670. What I remember when testing the DGX-670 and the P515 side by side, is that the P515 has the edge in terms of piano sound authenticity.

@@Instrumental-Covers That's very interesting as the samples used in the DGX are also from Yamaha's flagship piano, the CFX Grand. I think that the P-S500, like the P515, may also have the Bosendorfer samples, which could be very nice. But the reliance on a tablet and the lack of the buttons on the keyboard, for an arranger, to me is a non-starter. Especially as at the higher price point there are probably better choices. As to getting a good piano tone from external speakers, the same problem exists if you want to perform on the keyboard in anything other than a small, intimate space. A good parametric equalizer could help. And I am not surprised that the tweeters have little effect, they are tuned too high in the frequency spectrum and probably only add a bit of ambiance, but then calling the 12 cm drivers "full range" is a bit of a stretch. The church organ will sound much better with a subwoofer and a proper crossover as will many of the other samples and the lower register on the piano.

@@MikeHammer1 Unlike Kawai, Yamaha doesn't seem to stress the differences between their tone generators and call "CFX" their main tone in many newer instruments. But that doesn't mean they are the same samples or identical processing of the samples. It is very obvious that the AvantGrand N3X samples are different from the latest Clavinova CLP-700 series. The N3X simply has more realistic CFX samples. Kawai does alert the user of different tone generators for the same "SK-EX" sound. Even though Yamaha doesn't make it clear on paper, a headphone comparison does reveal the differences. Yamaha has said the new CLP 700 series has new samples of the CFX, yet they don't call it in any different manner from, let's say, the DGX-670. That can create confusion and make people believe both instruments have identical samples. I agree that lack of buttons on the keyboard is a big compromise for an arranger. I have tried parametric equalizers... they help to an extent, but they cannot replace good calibrated speakers. Equalizers introduce coloration and phase issues. Consumer-grade speakers are very bad choices for digital pianos. I remember when I contacted Martin Logan if they had any speaker good for digital pianos, and they said, "No. But for your home stereo and home theater needs, please don't hesitate to contact us". I have tried many speakers over the years for authentic piano tones, and unless they have been specifically calibrated for piano, they are likely to sound worse than the built-in speakers on the DGX-670. The denomination "full range" for a 12 cm is definitely a stretch in the literal sense, as no speaker is ever "full range". But the phrase is more loosely applied to speakers that cover most of the frequency range. Pianos don't have much content below 60 Hz, despite having the famous 27.5 Hz fundamental... this can be easily shown with a spectrum analysis. The concept "Missing Fundamental Effect" helps understand why we have the impression of getting a lot of bass from pianos. Even a concert grand piano doesn't sound like a subwoofer at all. When playing the CFIII concert grand, I would informally assess the lowest bass to be around 60 Hz, which is something very much in the reach of a 12 cm driver in a ported enclosure. Actually, the DGX-670 can easily produce more bass than a baby grand piano.

I just bought a P515 a couple days ago and love it. The acoustic grand piano sounds are great and the Rhodes and Wurli sounds are very usable. I don't play the organ sounds to much as I keep a Hammond XK1 on the same stand. I don't want to be dependent on having my Ipad plugged in to my keyboard so the P515 works out well for me.

@@davidcudlip6587 I own a P515 which I will probably keep until the day I die :) The natural wooden keys combined with that sublime Bosendorfer Imperial grand sampling for me are tough to beat. I don't get why this new PS500 has only plastic keys rather than the far superior NWX, but it more expensive than the P515?

It's basically a csp with portability, at cost of action. Fair enough. Fits learning scenarios, can put it aside in small spaces. App control seems fiddly for stage piano work.

Yamaha will gradually upgrade till old lpeople's money is gone, new peoples money will come

Thanks, Cerise RB! - I'm working on a Yamaha DGX670 vs P-S500 video right now - so stay tuned. The DGX670 isn't compatible with the Smart Pianist app right now. It might be that Yamaha make it so in the future, but, as the DGX already has a pretty good screen interface, it might not be required. We've got more videos on both of these models on ePianosTV here: www.epianos.co.uk/tv/

Hi, Ali. That's the video I'm working on next. More videos like this are available on ePianosTV here: www.epianos.co.uk/tv/

Don't. Tyros 5 still sound better in all areas except for the piano sound. You may just buy P515. And use it together with your Tyros.

@@amusic9825 Thank you for your advice. I'll forgo the P-S500.

I believe the P-S500 is the only P-Series instrument the app enables the mighty „Audio-to-Score“ functionality. This even creates MANY DIFFERENT VERSIONS of sheet music, from beginner to advanced levels.

You're welcome, Jenny. You'll need either an Apple (iOS) or Android phone or tablet to download and use the Smart Pianist app. We have a full explanation of compatibility and what's required here: www.epianos.co.uk/is-the-yamaha-smart-pianist-app-compatible-with-my-piano-or-keyboard/

I own a P515 - I think this PS500 as well as the streaming lights thing has 660 voices or so. The P515 has only 40 on the main piano and you can get to the 480 XG voices through the menu system. But the P515 has really wooden keys / NWX, so for me the plastic keys of this PS500 model is something of a step backwards.

@@WayneJoyce1973 Ditto! Yo

This is the cheapest model that contains streamlights, the only others are Clavinovas, the CLP-170 and CLP-150 at twice/three times the price.

Does your P-515 only show the chords in the Smart Pianist app or does it also have the „Audio-to-Score“ functionality? „Audio-to-Score“ turns basically any audio song into sheet music in many (!) different versions from beginner to advanced level. This goes way beyond the chord progression of a song which the app even creates without any instrument connected to it.

Audio to score feature, better speakers, backing band is awesome and intuitive, harmonies on vocal recording. NWX action is a bit heavy for older beginners or people with various bone health issues, this has a slightly lighter action while still being GHS. Wish it had 3 note sampling though, that would have been a satisfying upgrade for the hefty price.

I was wondering that too. P515 has wooden keys and doesn't need an app. For me the P515 (which happens to be slightly cheaper) is the instrument to buy unless you absolutely have to have streamlights.

@@londislagerhound Agree. For my needs the P515 works well. I don't want to depend on an Ipad to get the most out of my keyboard, yet I can go on the Yamaha ap and get more out of an already great keyboard if I choose on the P515.

Yes, if you have your device connected by a cable. There's no Bluetooth connectivity.

@@ePianoscouk Thanks.

Yes. The Yamaha Smart Pianist app is completely free.

Totally agree. Same action that is used on 6 times cheeper p45, no synthetic ivory coating, no tripple sensor, no escapement, I'm not even talking about wood. Unacceptable for this price.

@@zerotopilot8016 I had a p125 with the same action ,it s an ok" ish "action but kinda light for my taste but the sound are good (Yamaha should work more on there action hammer technology.....)For the reason mentioned I hate Yamaha but I like there sounds... It's an love -hate relationship 😅😅😅... P515 action it's really good and cheeper than this new piano .....

@@Marian_M.P Yeah, so I'm a bit disapointed they didn't make two versions with plastic and wooden keys, like on CSPs. Cause they have the proper action for the high-end portable piano already, but they decided not to use it.

Yep! If they had given you the CSP-170 action to match the P515, this would have been a fantastic beast for the price. The 515 with the sub attachment would smoke this thing in every way, except for the useless lights feature.

Why do you say the guide lights are not paced? I have a DGX 670 but I really would like to have the guide lights...

@@compositor82 Because they don’t actually match the pacing as you play them in most song, they immediately jump to the next note. Even more, you have no idea how loud no you should be playing each note for based on the lights, so you’re forced to look at the sheet music anyway and that defeats the purpose. As for the transcription of your music… Fantastic if you have a good midi file, but only provides chord arrangements if you try to use your iTunes library (most of which are useless as the copyright protection prevents you from even using them. Oh yeah, I bought it to this carbon copy sales pitch like this clown was giving, but the reality was nowhere near as Rosey!

@@compositor82 Oh and the model you want is the P515, now that has a fantastic action and the option of boosting the bass with an optional sub woofer.

Do tell what functionality the BT MIDI causes it to lose? Would be very helpful thanks. Also, what app could you recommend that converts sheet music to midi and produces the score on an iPad?

i guess. but hey, it has an app!

Action is super personal, everyone likes something different. I've owned a Roland FP-30 (PHA4 triple sensor), as well as a Casio PX-S1100 & PX-S3000 (Smart scaled dual sensor), a Yamaha P-125 (GHS) and now a DGX-670 (GHS) and my favorite action hands down is the GHS. It's a bit lighter and fast and comfortable to play but feels extremely solid, sturdy and reliable, super good for fast runs, 50's rock piano etc. The Casio action is lighter still and not bad but doesn't feel as sturdy or high quality. My least favorite was the Roland PHA4 which I found heavy; it was nice on the downstroke but very sluggish and "spongy" on the way back up. But like I said, totally personal, lots of people LOVE the PHA4 so that's cool too. Best thing is always to test out actions as much as possible before buying to zero in on what you like!

I have a similar comment as Island Tony: I had a Roland FP50 and a Roland RP401R, as well as two Yamaha YDP console pianos, a Yamaha P85, a DGX-660, a Casio CDP-S350, and now a DGX-670 (plus some other instruments from Kawai, Korg, Roland, and Yamaha). I never liked the PHA-4 action much, it was OK. The GHS is deemed better by a number of people over the PHA-4, despite the lack of triple sensor and escapement. It is not so much about having more features, but as the mechanics of it. In addition, the P-S500 is an arranger, and I know from playing arrangers that you don't need a more sophisticated action than the GHS to play expressively.

@@islandtony5009 Para el precio que este piano tiene, esa acción es un insulto

Es cierto, lo mismo pienso de las teclas iluminadas.

Some people just want to know how to play, not read music. Imagine not being able to talk before you know how to read. I think this is more gimmicky than practical though. Unlikely to be helpful beyond basic songs. Imagine getting bombarded with lights on complex songs. I’m in favor of anything that gets people playing the piano. They can learn to read when they find it is important for their development.