My first general impression of Tyros 5's sound was that the highs shriek a bit to much for my liking.

I have mine since mid November and I love the T5.
To be honest this forum is not the place for me (anymore) to put my reviews/experiences in, because the 'mine is better than yours culture' and Yammie slamming posts.
I prefer a forum that is not dominated by 4-5 superposters that keep asking questions all the time, posts URL's and hardly/never show themselves.
Just my opinion and I know a couple of buddies share it.

This remark kind of worries me, especially because is in agreement with something that Ian posted a few days ago (about the Tyros 4 having a "sweeter" sound, compared with the Tyros 5).

From some of the demos I've heard of the T5, I've also noticed the sounds appear thinner of even 'tinny' until you apply some tweaking. Although many people might be ok with doing the tweaking, I prefer the effects already applied to the sounds on my T4 ootb, I don't really want to waste time trying to create new registrations with hundreds of adjustments. I really like how both the T3 and T4 sounded by default. I'm sure that the T5 can be made to sound incredible but this requires the effort first whereas with the T4 it sounds fantastic as it is.

For me, I have a different view on what constitutes "live" sound and it has not as much to do with the actual (overall) sound of the arranger, as it does with how the arranger is being played.

There are players who play with every note exactly on the beat, use no passing or even slightly complex chords, use very few fills (or too many), who play guitar, sax, organ, strings etc. voices, in the same manner they play a piano...and, the overall sound produced (and performance) falls far short of what could have been achieved. In other words, the amount of "liveness" is created by the performer or player.

Maybe "realism" is a closer word than "liveness"?

I have heard recordings of people playing the Audya (which I consider to have the most realistic sounding rhythm section) sound much less like a live band than someone playing an entry level arranger, because the player's approach and performance on the former was wooden and bland.

I also concede that some arranger brand's drum kits have more "punch" than others, although more equality can be achieved with proper EQ'ing and kit choices.

To clear up the "sweetness" thing, I was referring to the "richness" and "warmth" I hear in the instrument's overall sound (played through the same speakers with the EQ set to flat). The Tyros2 and Tyros4 had a very similar overall tone, and the Tyros and Tyros3 had a strong sonic resemblance. This, of course, is my personal opinion. I have played all these instruments extensively during my work with Yamaha, and got to know each of them at a very deep level, and I spent many hours a day playing and listening through the same speaker system, and also through high quality headphones.

The Tyros3 (and Tyros) were less detailed; e.g. the separate instruments in the style blended together and were less distinct. I keep thinking of the word "blunt" but it's not quite that extreme. The Tyros2 and Tyros4 had more detail and crispness, and, overall were less fatiguing to my ears when used with headphones.

Getting the Tyros3 to nearly the same level of detail as the Tyros4 required a fair bit of work, whereas the latter sounded excellent right out of the box.

I don't want to form my impression of the Tyros5 solely based upon on-line demos, as that isn't fair in my opinion, but I should know more in a week or so, as I am doing a private clinic for a Tyros5-76 owner, who will be bringing the instrument to my apartment, and we will be using my Yamaha MS-60S for both, so a side to side comparison with my Tyros4 should be fairly accurate. He also had a Tyros3 from new, which was just sold to be replaced by Tyros5.

Ian