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.

          I find postings like this inherently provocative. We seen this over and over, and I'm always amazed at how many take the bait. If a firestarter set someone's doormat alight and the homeowner came out and doused it with a glass of water, the perpetrator would move on to another neighborhood, or back to where they set the last fire. But, if the fire department is called, with all those lights and sirens, and neighbors coming out to see what all the excitement is, well, you can bet more matches will be struck or fuel added to what should have been doused with a glass of water.

          Some choose to stoke a synthetic controversy, like sample vs. modeling, or acoustic vs. digital, or whatever, hoping to generate activity or just to create a disturbance. Sometimes, when this kind of thing happens in conversation, people just nod and wait for the subject to change to something more interesting. This was not one of those times.

          I also don't get the concept of moving or splitting threads. It's like four guys sitting around a pub table talking about playing in bands. And two start talking about the old vans they had to carry all that equipment. Suddenly, the bartender comes over and tells them to move to another table. Isn't a thread a conversation? Don't conversations drift? For the continuity of the content, the continuity of the conversation is altered?

            SouthPark The second part ... yes ... from an educational perspective. If you or anyone didn't know it before ... then you do know it now.

            Yes, I believe we do.

              PianoMonk So are you trying to say that there's no 'problem' with the disconnect between wikipedia's definition of piano (hammers and strings) and then having digital pianos then magically appear under their 'types of pianos'?

              Also ... it's ok. We will be working on that. I'm confident that the mismatch will eventually be sorted.

                  SouthPark I really don't care what wikipedia's definition about piano, pianos, digital or otherwise,or anything really, is. Wikipedia is constantly changing due to the number of people involved in editing and updating, tweaking and re-tweaking, which, to me anyway, makes it a rather less than carved-in-stone reference resource.

                  Turn away, go practice the piano, or a piano, or piano-like thingy, or instrument with keys, or whatever. Close the laptop, go outside, look up and admire the clouds, listen to the birds.

                    Here’s my personal approach to this thread.

                    As I do with most threads on PT, I put this thread on “ignore” so that I visit it only when I feel like it by going to the thread directly, instead of new post notifications showing on my main feed.

                    I’m fine with this topic going on for an eternity. And have option to not look at it, and then the option to look at it.

                    This way I can learn others’ perspectives and philosophy, and semantics, etc while also doing it in a balanced way (between completely disconnecting vs engaging super deeply).

                    My two cents is: while our control within a forum is limited, we have the agency to control what we pay attention to. If we find ourselves overly invested on a topic we find heated, then going out and doing offline things is a great idea. And then if we are bored while cooking something, and wanna read these sorts of threads for community; enlightenment; entertainment; etc. then we have the agency to do so 🙂

                    BartK locked the discussion .
                    rsl12 unlocked the discussion .

                    Hello, after discussion with the Mod Team, I'm unlocking this thread. If you find this topic interesting, by all means continue discussing it civilly. If you find the topic not to your taste, you can ignore the thread. Look at the right side of this page (if you are on mobile, then look at the top of this page), press the down arrow next to the "Follow" button, and then choose "Ignore".

                    Thanks to everyone for helping make Pianotell a friendly place!

                    I've been an occasional visitor/reader on this site, and this conversation interested me enough to join in and add a couple of points. I know there's been some contention and I don't mean to stir any of that up, but a couple things are coming to mind that I don't think have been mentioned yet.

                    I think it's certainly not clear that a digital piano is a piano.

                    Point 1, consider the distinction between "electronic keyboard" and "digital piano." When I started playing in the early 2000's, it was clear that "digital piano" was marketing phrase. But even so, there were definitely some steps taken towards the electronic keyboard evolving into something more piano-like. But at what point does it stop being an electronic keyboard and become a piano? If it has a wooden cabinet, if it has weighted keys, realistic sound, etc? And if an electronic keyboard is something distinct from a real piano, then you'd have to ask: is a digital piano also a kind of electronic keyboard? I would say yes. And then, if an electronic keyboard is not a piano, neither is a digital piano.

                    Point 2: Five or six years ago I got a low-end Roland digital piano (FP10 I think). I was talking to someone and I told them that I had gotten a piano. Then I regretted saying that because I felt like it was a lie or an exaggeration. Now I'm an owner of a Kawai hybrid and I no longer feel like it would be a lie to tell someone that I have a piano. Maybe stretching the truth slightly, but not enough to waste any words in clarifying my meaning.

                    I think you can't deliberately change language, nor is what Merriam-Webster says anything more than a crude (and not necessarily accurate) summary of the language at a certain point in time. My intuition is that a digital piano is a kind of keyboard instrument.

                      mciti19 I would put electric pianos into a separate group. They are similar to electric guitars. Both has physical vibrating elements (strings, tines) to generate their tone and pick ups to capture that vibration. Digital pianos however converts key presses into digital signal (eg: a midi number and velocity) very early then a software/firmware generates the tone. That's why actual body of electric guitar/piano affects timbre. And they feel as distinct instruments. Digital pianos does not have that character but they are much more flexible because sound is generated by software. And software is easy to change.

                      For the record, I do think all of them are cool. Acoustic pianos are just majestic. Electric pianos have their own character and sound, a different instrument really. And digital pianos are convenient. I do have an entry level digital piano it's FP-10. It is great. It allows me to choose my sound depending on my mood; a concert grand, a tines electric piano or a guitar etc. Amazing time to be alive.

                        mciti19 sorry after re-reading, I've realised you were talking about "electric keyboards" not electric piano. If you mean synth action keyboards then yes they're similar to digital pianos. But they do not try to imitate acoustic piano action and they're aimed to play different instruments. So they have additional methods of expression like pitch bend, after touch.

                        Again I also think synth keyboards are cool 🙂 There's a whole musical world out there. I wish they had more resources on how to play though. Lots of resources on how to make a sound but not actual playing.

                          mciti19 think you can't deliberately change language, nor is what Merriam-Webster says anything more than a crude (and not necessarily accurate) summary of the language at a certain point in time.

                          The Oxford English dictionary is consistently adding new words and refining definitions of old words as language evolves. It currently defines a piano having stings and hammers etc but look under organs and it includes electronic organs under that definition. It is only a matter of time before the OED is updated to reflect the contemporary definition of piano in normal everyday use which of course includes both acoustic and digital pianos.

                            mciti19 I've been an occasional visitor/reader on this site, and this conversation interested me enough to join in and add a couple of points. I know there's been some contention and I don't mean to stir any of that up, but a couple things are coming to mind that I don't think have been mentioned yet.

                            Welcome to the piano thread. That is ok. Just need to go back in time ... to think about what the people were trying to do. They just wanted a method ... any method to control adequately and independently (or thereabouts) the soft and loud level of note (at their assigned pitches) of a polyphonic music instrument having 'workable' sound, workable attack/sustain etc for musical applications. Any which way ... as long as it is effective etc was what they wanted, by pushing keys (levers) or whatever.

                            At that time, there was only the fully mechanical method. So going back to those early times, or just reading through the original post a few times, and other notes in the thread will allow everybody to understand what a piano actually is. There clearly are different types. And all of them are real if you get the adequate piano forte when using them. But ...adequate ... the word ... is subjective. So some people could even consider even inadequate piano forte if they want, and we can welcome that into the piano family (umbrella) too.

                              Rubens Thought experiment. If you play a digital piano with the harpsichord sound, is it a harpsichord?

                              Yes! It is a harpsi if they disable the velocity control etc. And with velocity control ... it becomes a piano and super harpsi.

                              The people back then would have been stoked to have in their hands the super harpsi, which indeed is in the piano class.

                                Rubens Thought experiment. If you play a digital piano with the harpsichord sound, is it a harpsichord?

                                You and I are thinking largely along the same lines, Rubens! And @mciti19 made a really fine point.

                                Taking the example further, there are workstations/synths are are functionally near-identical to digital pianos. They have a sound engine with piano tone, weighted keys, pedals, etc. Are they also "real" pianos if they are named "synthesizer" and not "digital piano"? If the default tone isn't a piano, are they then not real pianos? If you switch to a different tone or use it for an arranger, are you then not playing a "real piano?"

                                I think it goes back to what you, @shawarma_bees, @MandM, @PianoMonk and others have said--ultimately it's a bit meaningless. Not because one designation is valued more than the other, but it kind of goes back to Obi Wan. When you deal in absolutely, all you really do is set yourself up for death by a thousand cuts from a thousand valid exceptions and edge cases. And in the end, what does it matter? Make music, find joy in life. None of that should be diminished by what label others ascribe to the instrument.

                                    Wait...so does this mean that Pinocchio was a real boy all along?!

                                    I've had an N3 since 2013 and various other Yamahas for decades prior.

                                    I notice that I never tell anybody I have a piano. I always tell people I have an "electric keyboard" or an "electric piano" on which I practice. Not the result of any deep meditation or soul-searching, just the description that pops out.
                                    But I do say "I play piano" even though I've only played an acoustic maybe 5 hours in the past 15 years 🤔

                                    Make a joyful noise...
                                    Jane - expert on nothing with opinions on everything.