Talk:Keyboard expression

This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Music theory This article is within the scope of WikiProject Music theory, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of music theory, theory terminology, music theorists, and musical analysis on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Music theoryWikipedia:WikiProject Music theoryTemplate:WikiProject Music theoryMusic theory ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

I'm aware that I'm close to the line of NPOV with the last paragraph, about manufacturers of inferior instruments inaccurately claiming them to be pressure sensitive, but I think it's exactly what is happening.

And I think inferior is the word, regardless of the quality in other respects. It's best to implement the full MIDI standard, and an instrument which does so is in this sense at least superior.

The problem with the confusion is that it's very believable. Pressure sensitive seems a far more natural way to describe the touch of a piano than velocity sensitive, but it's not technically the correct way. (Linguistically of course anything can be correct, let's not go there.)

In fairness to these manufacturers, it's probably not their designers or even their executives who have made at least some of these decisions, it may be translators, and they may even be doing it in good faith. There's a lot going on. Andrewa 22:42, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Can someone give some examples of pressure sensitive (PS) and velocity sensitive (VS) keyboards? How about the Yamaha MO series?

And if I'm in a music shop, how can I find out if a keyboard is PS or VS? Is there a little test you could describe?

THANKS -- Michael Janich (talk) 03:41, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Since keyboards with polyphonic pressure sensitivity are afaik not built anymore, it would be nice to have a list of models, because it is really hard to find those models, that have this feature. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.70.180.244 (talk) 21:23, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think release velocity deserves a mention in this article. Maybe a list of instruments sporting this feature as well. I also agree with the previous poster, a list of instruments with true polyphonic aftertouch would be very helpful, as well as an explaination of the difference between channel and polyphonic aftertouch. 80.213.252.238 (talk) 15:43, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The displacement section is sort of ambiguous for organs. Theatre Organs have 2nd touch which plays more stops for the notes pressed to the 2nd set of contacts, while SOME tracker organs open the pallets in proportion to how much the key is pressed. A lot now have pneumatic assist or are adjusted to only play when the pallet is far enough open to make the pipes speak, so the tone is not necessarily affected by the amount of key displacement — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.204.110.209 (talk) 00:24, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A little known feature of theatre organs is second touch, the ability to depress a key past its first travel. There is a second spring for each key, so engaging second touch for a note requires pushing through the second (stronger) spring. I don't think it's the same as polyphonic aftertouch, as polyphonic aftertouch is controlled by pressure, whereas on a theatre organ keyboard it is controlled by distance — it is depressed further. Would that be something applicable to this article? Smj-edison (talk) 18:02, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Stub" comes closest to describing what this article's actual state: Bad. There are no citations until halfway through the body. The citations are amateurish. The whole thing looks like original research in its current form.Trumpetrep (talk) 20:23, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]