- Edited
shawarma_bees Can you elaborate on what you mean when you say "educational" perspective? Are you disappointed with Wikipedia's definition and want it changed? Or by "educational" do you mean educating us on your opinion of how a piano should be defined?
Noticing something from a 'logical perspective' does not necessarily mean someone gets emotional or disappointed etc. In this case, I feel that they have just 'dropped the ball'. And it's not just wikipedia that dropped the ball.
The second part ... yes ... from an educational perspective. If you or anyone didn't know it before ... then you do know it now. And yes. It is about knowing the essence of piano.
shawarma_bees None of us have the ability or authority to change how a word is defined, and this is a topic with inherent ambiguity.
That's not true though what you wrote. Somebody in the past, at one time did after-all hijack the word 'action' if you know what I mean. But on the other hand, it may well be possible that one day, their hijack meaning might be seen in well-known dictionaries around the world.
shawarma_bees I used a VPC-1 for over half a decade as my primary instrument and would happily tell people that I "play piano". Nobody asked me if I owned a "real piano"
And now you know that you were/are playing a real piano all along. Not that it matters to you ... but the fact is ..... it is true ... the VPC1 when coupled to the rest of the sub-systems - forms a piano. A real piano. You were correct all along. A playable piano is indeed a real piano. As I had mentioned that an acoustic piano is truly not the only kind of piano. And any 'workable' piano ... playable with our hands in real-time ... is not merely a piano ..... it automatically is a real piano.