Jump to content

Talk:Keyboard instrument

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Virginal vs Harpsichord

[edit]

I thought a virginal was actually a separate instrument from the harpsichord, maybe closer to the clavichord?

Also, I can see how a piano might be called a percussion instrument, because of the hammers, but it seems like it should get classified as a string instrument too. -- Merphant 03:44, 6 Nov 2003 (UTC)

A virginal is just a harpsichord with one keyboard and the strings running paralell to the keyboard (as on a clavichord) as far as I know - I don't think there's anything more to it than that. Whether that means we should list it separately to the harpsichord, I don't know, but it's certainly not very wrong to list them together.
As for classification - the way we had it divided into "strings", "winds" and "percussion" didn't really make any sense, because in the first two you're classifying according to what is vibrating, while in the last you're classifying according to how it is being caused to vibrate. I've fiddled around with it a bit, therefore. --Camembert
Listing the virginal separate from the harpsichord would, I'd say, not be very different from separating grand piano from upright piano. I'd say leave it this way. --EldKatt

An unnecessary article?

[edit]

Does anyone think that this should be merged with the article Musical Keyboard; or perhaps just delete the Musical Keyboard article? Surely one of these articles is expendable.

I'm reluctant. This article is about a particular class of instruments which use a keyboard, whereas musical keyboard is about said keyboard in particular (and not the stuff surrounding it) and its layout. (OK, that didn't adequately explain my thoughts, but I'm half asleep at the moment.) I think these topics should stay separate. There's certainly enough to say about both, even though both articles can be improved quite a bit. EldKatt 22:58, 15 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

But to quote the Musical Keyboard article, "Many musical instruments which have a key for each note lay them out in the standard way shown in the graphic: the piano, harpsichord, clavichord, organ, synthesizer, celesta, melodica, glasschord, and carillon are keyboards. Also, instruments such as the xylophone which have a separate sounding part for each note lay them out in this pattern." It talks about many different keyboard instruments which I believe are all mentioned in the Keyboard instrument article. I also just realized that the 'instrument' in this article's title ought to be capitalized.

After a little consideration, I would merge the "Musical Keyboard" into this one. All the instuments on this page generally share the same keyboard as on the other page, and it seems unneccessary to separate them.--B. Phillips 23:56, 15 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
All the keyboard instruments it talks about are indeed mentioned here, as they should be. But it also talks about the way the separate sounding parts in a xylophone, a marimba, a vibraphone, orchestral bells, tubular bells and crotales (to name those I can think of now) are arranged, and these instruments are patently not keyboard instruments. So musical keyboard isn't really about the keyboard itself (which indeed is something rather inseparable from keyboard instruments) but about its layout. On the other hand, the musical keyboard article is of pretty low quality and something should be done to improve it. Personally, though, I don't think the remedy at this point is to merge. EldKatt 13:30, 16 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I second merging "Musical Keyboard" into "Keyboard Instruments". "Keyboard instrument" is a technical term, while "musical keyboard" is kinda slangy. The keyboard instrument page is basically a stub. Also, 'musical keyboard' could be confused with 'electronic keyboard' or maybe even a player piano(might be a stretch). Both pages would benefit from a merger, especially since both touch on similar topics and share almost exact information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:569:F8B5:3000:6C57:9DD9:1CCE:B087 (talk) 06:55, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keyboards redirects here

[edit]

The article Keyboards is a redirect to this page. The term Keyboards and sometimes Keyboard alone means an electronic keyboard and not the class of keyboard instruments (Longman dictionay and MSN Encarta Dictionary confirm this). I will change that redirect to the page electronic keyboard.

I disagree. "Keyboards" refers to all keyboard instruments. When a player on a popular recording is credited with keyboards, it usually means that the person in question performed various keyboard instruments, both electronic and acoustic. --Trweiss 14:38, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I completely agree with Trweiss. And it was in fact I who made the questioned redirect and subsequent dab notice on this article. Please see Special:Whatlinkshere/Keyboards and note that nearly all of the 150+ links are referring to Keyboard instrument and not the plural of Keyboard. Although convention would have Keyboards redirect to Keyboard, this seems like a good instance where we should concern ourselves with de facto rather than de jure. -- Krash (Talk) 19:34, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Another point is that the picture of this page rather suits the electronic keyboard page than keyboard instruments class. The picture is talking about a specific brand (Yamaha) and doesn't include the word electronic. I will change it. -Neshatian 16:34, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Simply changed to #redirect to keyboard. Period. --Teika kazura (talk) 04:00, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

MIDI on this page?

[edit]

I think the MIDI section is rather related to electronic instruments. It can be described in electronic instruments (covering how MIDI is incorporated in different instruments, samplers and ...), in electronic_keyboard (covering MIDI controlers, MIDI keyboards, etc) and in MIDI itself for basic concepts. Neshatian 08:20, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but I disagree. It is important to mention that keyboards may simply be keyboards and not musical instruments at all. Such is the case with MIDI controllers in general and keytars specifically.
The electronic keyboard article is chiefly about a class of electronic instruments made for the home market, not about electronic keyboard instruments in general. There are plenty such instruments which are not equipped with MIDI.
I think the discussion of MIDI and how it relates to the history of keyboard instruments is better discussed in this more general article. --Trweiss 14:50, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for you comments Trweiss. But really I'm not yet convinced. If there are "some keyboards that are not musical instruments", what are they doing in this page which is about Keyboard Instruments. Though this is a separate discussion, I think that even MIDI keyboards (controllers) are a kind of Electronic instruments. But let's stick to the main subject of this discussion: Why should MIDI heading stay on this page?

First of all, this page is about a family of instruments called: Keyboard Instruments. So what we write here should be related to most members of this family and not just a minority of them. Let’s look at the list of keyboard instruments on the bottom of the page. What is the proportion of MIDI-enabled instruments to the whole list? It is not large enough.

Let’s look at the MIDI first (and its only) paragraph. It begins with “Many electronic keyboard instruments are outfitted with … “. It is affirming that this is related to electronic keyboards. I tink electronic keybaords doesn’t mean just those home playing ones, necessarily. I know that electronic keyboard page is very poor. But we should complete it and maybe again not as an instrument but a class of electronic instruments ranging from toys ro those professionals. Unfortunately, this paragraph is not comprehensive at all and with some minor mistakes. For example: The purpose of MIDI is not just controlling; the sound module has nothing to do on this page. Keytar is not just a MIDI controleer, it’s an electronic keyboard instruments and most of the models produce sounds themselve without any external MIDI tone generator and …

Finally, The MIDI article is fairly good and I would suggest to merege this to that page to avoid redundancy. If we think that MIDI Keyboard is a separate class from electronic keyboard we would creat a new page. However as I mentioned we can extend electronic keyboard]] to not just including those home market ones but a wider range of electronic keyboard instruments. Regards --Neshatian 09:35, 7 February 2006 (UTC) the keyboad is a piano without the pedals and electronic —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.208.224.132 (talk) 15:56, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Merging discussion

[edit]
  • I wish we had come to a conclusion before merging . I think there two main reasons that these pages (Keyboard Instrument and Electronic keyboard) can not be mereged: (1) Your example is true. However when we talk about can opener we are not talking about a category (or class) of openers but a an individual object. This is not true for this article which is about a big family of instruments. This article should concern a general definition, History, Evolution, Categoies and a directory of instruments recognized as keyboard instrument.(2) There many things about electronic keyboard that can not be fit into this page or other pages. A synthesizer is not equiped with a keyboard necessarily so is sampler; so they can not hold all the related subjects. Besides, what about many things related to electronic keyboards specifically? Can we put Pithc bend, Modulation wheel, Auto accompaniment, Short-cuts for chords, Styles and Custom (user defined) styles, Built-in sequneceres, Drum pads, List of manufacturers, Different models, and so many related topics, here on this page? I kindly ask you to wait for a conclusion before making changes. --Neshatian 07:49, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • I too would have liked to see some sort of consensus before a merge. One for, one against, and one embarrassingly undecided (that's me) doesn't really suggest that the issue is dealt with. EldKatt (Talk) 11:44, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Neshatian, I'm sorry but I fail to see any point that you are trying to make. Nothing is stopping you or anyone else from including those "related things" on this page, though I'm not sure what relevance they would have here. Rather than beating some moot point, why not expand the "electronic keyboard" section to reflect your vision for it. This might then (perhaps) better support your argument that it could stand alone as its own article. As it is edited right now, I feel, it's much better than having a stub and a really short incomplete article that are about two of the same thing. Please see WP:POVFORK. -- Krash (Talk) 14:33, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ok, I took a look at the old Electronic Keyboard article, and I'd have to say that it works fine as a heading under this article. If Neshatian wants to expand the section, I'll try to help if I have time. When the section gets too big it can be forked.--fataltourist 17:20, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I’ve added some headings under electronic keyboard section. Now it's obvious that it can't remain here in this page. If everybody agrees, we will move it to its own page. --Neshatian 12:47, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • I don't see anything as "obvious" and wish that such condescending language in discussions be avoided. I don't understand why the user feels so strongly the need to move part of this article and wish that he could cite sources for the information that he is adding. -- Krash (Talk) 01:49, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • I never knew that "obvious" is a condescending word! By “obvious” I mean, now that ‘’electronic-keyboard’’ body is being added to this article and shows its potential to have a detailed content, it doesn’t make sense to have an instance instrument article inside a family of instruments. I don’t like my opinion to be considered ‘’’condescending’’’ when I put it in a discussion page (which is for this purpose I think). I think of discussion as a constructive debate. --Neshatian 06:50, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Popularity

[edit]

What popularized the keyboard instrument more? The organ or the stringed keyboards? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.87.110.175 (talk • contribs).

first instrument using keyboard principle

[edit]

just a little suggestion that might be researched further, but i have heard that the organ was not the first instrument to use keys, but a hurdy gurdy a stringed instrument using a rosin wheel to produce sound, was actually one of the first in an instrument called an organistrum, although i am probobly wrong.

Keyboard shaped like a Guitar

[edit]

What is the name of the keyboard shaped like a guitar? Zachorious (talk) 11:08, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've wondered that for a long time. WAVY 10 Fan (talk) 18:46, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Just googled it. It's called a "keytar". WAVY 10 Fan (talk) 18:47, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

I removed the section containing the only link for not being a reliable source. The author also does not have the notability needed and does not make Wikipedia:Verifiability guidelines. Can we do better than to include a biker's website? *The general keyboard in the age of MIDI.

After reading the article that the external link takes you to, I decided to put that link back as a useful reference. However, I do see problems with WP:V and WP:RS. Jrod2 (talk) 15:31, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Synthesizers

[edit]

Why synths aren't mentioned on the list? --ProgressiveAeternus (talk) 17:10, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Would it be possible to add http://www.classicalmusichomepage.com/reference/keyboard-reference to the external links list? This page lists all the best online reference material for keyboards. Thanks. Ndifrancesco (talk) 13:18, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Carillon

[edit]

I added the picture with the keyboard of a carillon to show the difference to most of the other keyboards. --ThT (talk) 03:54, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pianet

[edit]

Isn't the Pianet wrongly classified? It appears to be an idiophone, not an electrophone. J. Martin Velez Linares 17:35, 14 September 2015 (CDT)

Other devices using "piano" keyboard

[edit]

Where to list other (non musical) devices, using the keyboard, e.g. Clavier à lumières (Color organ), which produces only light? Žiga (talk) 06:41, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think we have this covered already. See Keyboard. Opus33 (talk) 16:17, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Electronic Keyboards

[edit]

Read the body of this article and you would think that the only modern keyboards were electronic pianos! The electro-mechanical piano needs to be mentioned (e.g. Fender Rhodes), as do electro-mechanical organs (Hammond) and other esoteric variations like early tape-based samplers (Mellotron). Space needs to be given to synthesisers and other electronic keyboards that are not primarily piano emulators, controllers that can be used with different music sources (covering things like evolutions like pitch bend and vibrato wheels etc.), other types of keyboard instrument such as bass pedal boards and accordions. Stub Mandrel (talk) 10:40, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Would a list be unencyclopedic?

[edit]

Greetings. On this article (which is TAFI horray!), there was, in my opinion, an overexausted list right on the main article. When juxaposed with the rest of the article, it doesn't mix well. I would either create a separate list on a separate page (click to start), or via a navbox. What do you think? Also: Wasn't there a rule about this, like maybe Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Embedded lists?

Thanks, Zanygenius(talk to me!)(email me!) 15:39, 25 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Should I go ahead with splitting then? Zanygenius(talk to me!)(email me!) 02:17, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keyboards listed at Redirects for discussion

[edit]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Keyboards. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 14:49, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Modern keyboards" section

[edit]

In general, the section reads like a collection of random factoids, half of them wrong, the other half of unclear importance. Some of the many problems:

  • Ignoring every other kind of keyboard instrument referred to in the article, this section acts like the only two kinds of keyboard instruments in existence are traditional acoustic pianos and electronic devices trying to simulate acoustic pianos. It often uses the word “keyboard” as a synonym for the second type. E.g., “A simple keyboard has light plastic keys”.
  • The section makes factual claims that sort of make sense in the specific context of a debate over which kind of piano is better, acoustic or electronic? But the claims are ridiculous in the context of keyboard instruments in general. E.g., “Each acoustic keyboard contains 88 keys”. Really? Accordions have 88 keys? Carillons have 88 keys?
  • The section borders on non-NPOV on the only issue it seems to care about. “The electric piano and electronic piano were early efforts that, while useful instruments in their own right, did not convincingly reproduce the timbre of the piano.” It probably wouldn't be hard to convince me of this claim (assuming the extremely narrow definition of “electronic piano” that the Electronic piano article pendantically insists on), but ...
  • The only three citations in the section are to blog posts of unclear neutrality. (At least some editor corrected the howler I noticed in earlier revisions of the page, which listed one of the blog authors as “Post, Guest”.)
  • Whoever wrote the section misunderstood at least one of the references they're citing. The section says “smaller arrangements have a minimum of 61 keys”. The closest that the reference (a blog post with consumer buying advice) comes to saying this is: “Commonly, these smaller instruments will have either 76 or 61 keys.” If you squint, you might be able to imagine the blog is recommending that a beginning student shouldn't buy a keyboard with fewer than 61 keys — a far cry from its supposed claim that smaller keyboards don't even exist.

I don't care enough about the debate over acoustic vs. electronic pianos to try to fix this into anything remotely coherent. I don't know enough about keyboard instruments in general to have a sense of how important the topic of this section is to the article. I suspect deletion is the easiest surgery, but one of the article's regular editors might care enough about it to fix it. As it is, it's just embarrassing. 2604:3D09:A97D:E200:E11D:5896:15A4:B66 (talk) 03:34, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah fair enough ... I don't know enough about the subject of the article to salvage that section either, so I've just removed it. Many of the problems were caused by edits made during the "Articles for improvement" project in early 2019 (see the above collapsed note), but some of the text is much older. I only have this article on my watchlist due to vandalism that stuck around for a while, ironically in the section under discussion. Graham87 05:02, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Keyboard_instrument&oldid=1194071899"