Talk:Keyboard instrument

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  An unnecessary article? 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)

text: Simply changed to #redirect to keyboard. Period. --Teika kazura (talk) 04:00, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Keyboards redirects here 

message: *I think they are completely different topics. Electronic keyboard is a descendant of Keyboard instrument covering a small proportion of this category. --Neshatian 07:48, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merging discussion 

message: What is the name of the keyboard shaped like a guitar? Zachorious (talk) 11:08, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've wondered that for a long time.  WAVY 10 Fan (talk) 18:46, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Just googled it. It's called a "keytar".  WAVY 10 Fan (talk) 18:47, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Keyboard shaped like a Guitar 

message: 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)
thread_title:  External link removed for [[WP:RS]] not so much for lack of  [[WP:NOTE]] 

message: Why synths aren't mentioned on the list? --ProgressiveAeternus (talk) 17:10, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Synthesizers 

message: 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)
thread_title:  External link 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Carillon 

message: 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)
replies: text: I think we have this covered already.  See Keyboard.  Opus33 (talk) 16:17, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other devices using "piano" keyboard

message: 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)
thread_title: Electronic Keyboards

message: 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)
replies: text: Thanks! Should I go ahead with splitting then? Zanygenius(talk to me!)(email me!) 02:17, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Would a list be unencyclopedic? 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Keyboards listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  "Modern keyboards" section