taushi ... read my original post thoroughly ... and my other lectures on this subject. Adequate ... note 'adequate' soft loud control of independent notes - including absolute maximum loudness. Now there may be different sorts of clavs. If adequate soft loud control - then we have a piano.

I'll be happy to have clavs in the piano family ... piano class. The clav is welcome with open arms into the piano family.

Once again, it was taught to you that we call our digital pianos and acoustic pianos .... pianos ... because we/you know full well they are pianos. Real pianos ... because it is all about piano forte ... adequate soft loud control of independent individual notes, shortened to piano, plus the fact that the word 'piano' is indeed in the word digital piano and acoustic piano.

Basically, the obvious has been there in front of your/our eyes all along.

I don't think it matters whether a digital piano is a real piano. To me, the digital is an imitation of the real thing. That's what I use it for. Other people have different uses for it. It doesn't matter.

    johnstaf Well said! I had an acoustic for the first 30 years of my life. Now, I have a digital which serves my needs perfectly, and I probably will never own another acoustic. Even so, if someone were to ask me if I have a piano at home, I would automatically answer, "Yes, but just a digital, these days" Old habits, die hard.

    johnstaf don't think it matters whether a digital piano is a real piano.

    I know that it doesn't matter. But it's 'interesting' to know that they are pianos from a regular information and educational perspective. And since they (digital pianos) are pianos, as the word really is in their name, then it's clear that they're really ..... pianos. And automatically ... they're obviously all real pianos.

    These days, the performance of digital pianos are so excellent and amazing ... that the reverse is certainly true too ... as in acoustic pianos are approximations of digital pianos ... and importantly ... vice-versa. They're all amazing and fantastic ... digital and acoustic pianos.

      johnstaf I don't think it matters whether a digital piano is a real piano. To me, the digital is an imitation of the real thing. That's what I use it for. Other people have different uses for it. It doesn't matter.

      I think this is the best take. Digital pianos are not “real” pianos, but it really shouldn’t matter. I don’t really understand why anyone would need it to be anything beyond what it is. As long as it serves its purpose, who cares?

      I have a Casio GP-310. It’s not a real piano. But it serves my purposes excellently, and provides more for me than a real piano would given my current budget and living arrangement. I actually prefer what I have to now to the entry-level/old/used acoustic I’d be able to afford for the same cost and the drama that would come with it due to its volume in my shared apartment.

      I’m not desperate for it to be considered “real”. I don’t find any validation or place any worth in that. As long as it allows me to play how I want to, keep my technique up, and, with the help of a VST, matches closely enough to a real piano that I can switch between the two with ease, and not have to adapt dramatically in terms of technique and playing expectation, then I have everything I need.

      I think that if we’re putting a sense of validation into these instruments, and experiencing emotionality that is not connected to the art but rather a sense of personal worth,, then we’ve wildly missed the point of what it should be all about.

        Taushi I think this is the best take.

        It's the wrong take. As was mentioned already ... the word piano is in acoustic piano and digital piano. It's a piano. And since it is a physically playable/working piano, then of course it is automatically real.

        SouthPark And since they (digital pianos) are pianos, as the word really is in their name, then it's clear that they're really ..... pianos. And automatically ... they're obviously all real pianos.

        That line of reasoning doesn't make sense. Is an earwig a real wig? Is a honeymoon a real moon? Is a fake Rolex a real Rolex?

          johnstaf That line of reasoning doesn't make sense. Is an earwig a real wig? Is a honeymoon a real moon?

          Let me educate you too. Those words that you brought up - earwig and honeymoon - don't have space in-between them. And Rolex is a brand (a noun), even though some people use it as a different noun ... object ... but if you're talking about watches ... then sure, they are both watches.

            SouthPark Let me educate you too. Those words that you brought up earwig and honeymoon don't have space in-between them. And the Rolex is a brand ... but if you're talking about watches ... then sure, they are both watches.

            Is a curate's egg a real egg? Is an Easter egg a real egg?

              I think we’re getting pretty deep in a rabbit hole of semantics, which can lead to talking in circles 🙂

              I once asked “what does love mean to you” in a non-piano forum before, and it went berserk.

              Ultimately I don’t see anyone here changing their opinions here per se.

                johnstaf Is a curate's egg a real egg? Is an Easter egg a real egg?

                Let's put it this way ... you don't qualify to ask any more 'dumb' questions. You get the hint.

                HeartKeys Ultimately I don’t see anyone here changing their opinions here per se.

                It's fine HK ... I won't be responding to him on here or at PC. So it will be ok now.

                  SouthPark Let's put it this way ... you don't qualify to ask any more 'dumb' questions. You get the hint.

                  You don't get to decide what I post. Your hints don't interest me. My questions are no more "dumb" than your reasoning.

                  It is an interesting discussion. It kinda reminds me of that old TV commercial, "Is it live or is it Memorex?"

                  Pallas

                  I’ve never said a digital piano is not a piano, and certainly never referred to it as a “piano shaped object that isn’t a piano”. And that’s the problem with how the OP has framed this thread. Perhaps it’s because I’ve seen the OP have this very same discussion on two different sites countless times over the past two years, but I’m very clear on their view, and the point of contention between them and others is never just the word “piano”, but the word “real”. Their contention always arises when people point out the differences between acoustic pianos and digital pianos because they wish to believe that digital pianos are 100% equivalent to acoustic pianos in every way, contrary to the prevailing view.

                  The OP is couching one point behind another. The OP asked “is a digital piano a piano” and gave their opinion yes. Then, threw in “it’s a real piano”, as if the affirmative of the first statement also somehow affirms the second statement they threw in. Here’s the problem with that. That’s two different points (is a digital piano a piano VS is a digital piano a real piano), yet the OP affirms the latter with the former. You can’t do that. Different points require different qualifiers.

                  Is a digital piano a piano? To me? Yes. The word “piano” has migrated and evolved, and it now is generally used loosely to describe acoustics and digital approximations of the acoustic. I myself loosely use the term “piano” to define my digital piano.

                  Is a digital piano a REAL piano, which is what the OP’s point of contention really is? No.

                  Adding the qualifier “real” pulls us away from the general/loose/colloquial use of “piano” and causes us to go back to the facts to make the decision of what qualifies as “real”. How do you measure what “real” is. Logically, we look at the history, abilities, and purpose of all these instruments. And the fact of the matter is, digital pianos were built as an approximation of acoustic pianos, which for 200 years have been the definition of piano. Digital pianos contain extremely limited snapshots of the sound acoustic pianos make. Digital pianos are even advertised that way: approximations of acoustic pianos. In dictionaries, encyclopedias, in theory among professional and advanced musicians, and even to digital piano makers like Roland and Kawai and Yamaha and Casio…a “real piano” is the acoustic instrument, and a “digital piano” is a digital approximation of the real instrument.

                  Loosely, you can all them whatever you want to call them. I certainly just say piano all the time. But, in threads where we’re talking about these instruments in great detail, and breaking down their capabilities and features with a level of specification, there will be instances where we delineate the digital piano from the “real” acoustic piano, especially when we’re talking about how the digital emulates an acoustic.


                  The reason we’ve gotten to taxonomy and strict adherence to fact is because the OP’s is asking for that, but wanting it to be based on their ideas about the history of the instruments, which were inaccurate, and seemingly skewed toward their perception.


                  I think comparing children to pianos is a bit of a false equivalency.

                  A piano is an object. It has no feelings, emotions, consciousness, or intelligence. No matter what anyone calls your piano, it won’t have ears to hear it, or a mind to be hurt by it. It has no need to be classified a certain way to feel value, valid, or loved. And I don’t understand why a person would be hurt by proper classification of instruments either.

                  I own a digital piano as my main home instrument, and I don’t understand why recognizing the reality that a digital piano is loosely/generally a piano, but not a “real” piano, would offend anyone’s feelings. I don’t understand the personal sense of value or worth or validation anyone would put into that. I don’t understand how it would make one love their instrument less, feel they are less apart of a community, feel they are less of a pianist, or feel any personal lack.

                  And I think people who are doing that should sit with why they are doing that, because I’m not entire sure that it’s about the definitions of these instruments.


                  For the record, although I’m clear on what I believe, I don’t pressure anyone else to feel the same. The thread purported to be asking for opinions. I gave my opinion: that the historical data being presented and being cited to support the view was factually inaccurate. I also said that people can feel however they want to feel, though, and that my point of contention was with the inaccuracy of the facts. The same has not been the case from everyone.

                  Frankly, I don’t truly have a great interest in what anybody calls their piano. I don’t understand the vitriol.

                    Taushi they wish to believe that digital pianos are 100% equivalent to acoustic pianos in every way, contrary to the prevailing view.

                    That's untrue taushi. I don't wish to believe that digital pianos are 100% equivalent to acoustic pianos. I'm just saying that digital pianos and acoustic pianos are pianos. They're both real pianos, which is obvious. It's obvious because it's true that both digital pianos and acoustic pianos are indeed pianos. And if you can play them in real-time with your fingers etc, and there's adequate soft-loud control, then it's a piano --- which is then automatically a real piano.

                    The contentious thing about your posts - which you do - and there is a pattern of it, where people can see, is that you throw in essay size posts (where post size is fine in itself) where you lace them with your flame-baiting superiority complex ingredients --- the 'digitals are never as good as the real thing' or 'digitals will never sound as good as the real thing' and all that purposeful flame-baiting nonsense.

                    And it is after-all a digital forum, where all people - piano players and any other people - are welcome obviously. Although, because you purposely lace your posts and embed within it flame-bait high-horse superiority/inferiority-complex material to stir up digital piano fans, will just have to call you out on it. If you want me to link all the posts where you do that - then I can do it. It's all there at PW in the archives - preserved for all to see. And you have already started doing it here as well. All you have to do is to go ahead and make my day.

                    In relation to this thread topic - there was a time when I thought about it -- as in for example Wikipedia etc - where they have a 'definition' of piano, where wiki etc provide a 'definition' as such, involving hammers and strings - and that is it - that is where it ends. And then they start getting into 'types' of pianos - in which digital pianos, electric pianos, acoustic pianos are always shown under 'types'. And then - I was questioning --- then why? - if they only define piano with strings and hammer etc, then how do they then magically proceed/jump to the next type/category stage, where digital pianos etc are mentioned under 'types of pianos'. So there obviously was a disconnect between definition and the 'next' set of information.

                    And then I thought about it. And the answer is - digital pianos are indeed pianos, just as acoustic pianos are pianos. That is why us people call them all pianos. Because they actually are all -- pianos. Real pianos.

                    So basically - the teachings from this are for enlightening us all - myself included of course. The answer had been sitting in front of us all this time. And it is obvious, after thinking about it.

                    Taushi Is a digital piano a REAL piano, which is what the OP’s point of contention really is? No.

                    That's where you are totally wrong. Digital pianos are pianos, which automatically makes them real. Same for acoustic pianos, which are also pianos, and they are also real.

                      SouthPark

                      I have you on Ignore, but I will take a moment to briefly address you, as kindly and openly as I can. And I won’t address you any further after this.

                      Nothing I say is “flame-baiting” or with the goal of stirring up anybody. I own a digital piano and have owned everything from a Yamaha P125, to a Yamaha P515, to a Yamaha Clavinova CLP-785, to a Yamaha N1X, to a Casio GP-310. It would make no sense whatsoever for me to be attempting to “stir up digital fans”…when I am a digital fan.

                      That said, although I am a digital fan and user, they are not the holy grail to me that they seem to be to you. I am a classically trained pianist who performs advanced works and composes. My needs are specific and may be different from others who may play other genres/styles, be at different levels in their journey (higher or lower), or have different needs. I do not think there is a digital out there that is as good as an acoustic. Period.

                      The true question, though, is why does this offend you so? Why are you so upset that I don’t like what you like? That my needs are different from yours, and that what you consider excellent doesn’t meet my needs. Why does this matter to you? What impact does my opinion have on you? Do you look at your P525 differently because some random person on the internet doesn’t like it? I think you need to sit with why that is. Your emotional response to my opinion comes from within, and you need to sit with why your sense of validity, value, worth, enjoyment is impacted by someone’s different opinion. Your response is to attack people or aggressive equalizely everyone and everything with yourself and what you like, but that is not helpful.

                      In this thread alone, you’ve called johnstaf’s questions “dumb”, declared his take was wrong, quoted me numerous times even as I intentionally ignore you, accused me of having ulterior motives, declared that you had some great revelation after reading a Wikipedia article that differs from even what digital piano makers believe, and announced that you can “enlighten” everyone here, including people who have played longer, studied wider, and reached more advanced levels than you. Does that seem conducive to healthy interactions to you?


                      You were banned from Pianoworld multiple times, before being permanently banned. You were nearly banned from Pianoclack for the same reasons. You should step back and do the work to realize that the problem is not everybody else, and that the plethora of negative intentions and ulterior motives you assign to people are not true.

                      You have a remarkable opportunity to not have the same issues here that you had on other piano forums. And you’re already becoming the central source of contention. Please take a step back.

                      I have you on Ignore, and will be placing you back on it. I strongly, strongly encourage you to do the same. That way you won’t see my posts which offend you so.

                      PianoTell is very much like PianoClack and PianoWorld. I saw many posts when I came here about being inclusive. I hoped it would be different. It's not. Unfortunately, this forum, like the others I mentioned, has too many elitists.

                      According to many on this forum, there is classical music and non-classical music. That is not at all how the rest of the world separates music into genres. It's insulting to folks who primarily listen to and play other genres. All genres should have equal standing if we are inclusive.

                      Piano hierarchy: This is the feeling I get from reading the posts in this and the other forums I mentioned.

                      1. Acoustic Grand pianos --- The ONLY worthy piano. What you must aspire to own and play.
                      2. Acoustic upright piano --- OK, but just not good enough
                      3. Hybrid digital piano --- OK ONLY for practicing for when you will play a real piano. An acoustic grand.
                      4. High end digital with grand action --- sort of OK, but ONLY for practicing for when you will play a real piano. An acoustic grand
                      5. Pianoteq --- Completely OK to bash whenever someone post about it.

                      Do folks here not see the prejudice in threads like "Can even the top end hybrids really satisfy a grand player?" or the popular "will practicing on a digital ruin me?"

                      I used to have photography as a serious hobby. The film vs digital was the same thing there. "REAL photographers use film". "I can tell photographs taken with digital cameras. They're awful." "Digital will never equal film."

                      I'm going to be true to my name "Quitter". I don't think this forum has much to offer me.

                      P.S. I really enjoyed the "Alfredos" and like threads on PW. Great people, and enjoyable interactions. Not much of that here though.

                      Studiologic Numa X 73, Pianoteq, Mac, Motu M2, Kali LP6 Monitors and WS 6.2 sub

                        Quitter Unfortunately, this forum, like the others I mentioned, has too many elitists.

                        I see no elitists here.
                        I only see people who have studied long and hard, and often made sacrifices to attain the highest level they can achieve, and as a very lazy, mediocre player myself, I have great respect for them.

                        I also respect those who are just beginning on their piano journey, and admire their enthusiasm and willingness to learn about all things piano.
                        If some people are not comfortable in their own skin, regarding their personal level, quality of instrument, etc., then that is very sad, as whatever our 'level' it is still possible to have a lifetime of enjoyment playing music for ourselves, or for sharing with others. Nothing more, nothing less.
                        I see this forum as a breath of fresh air, a new start if you like, and a place to let go of the past, and I hope it stays that way.