off-topic (it is about the Piano)

[Pashkuli Keyboard]

Hello forum members,

Most likely you have no idea that besides my endeavour to bring back radical concepts into Music notation (please refer to the ancient Alypian music notation), I also design piano keyboards.

Recently (in the past month or so) I made a couple of videos on the subject of piano keyboard design. They are on my YouTube channel. If you are interested in the subject (yes, I plan on making videos regarding music notation as well), the link is here:

Piano keyboard Design – YouTube channel

Enjoy!

— Evael

[Douglas Keislar]

Hi Evael,

Thank you for the highly entertaining and educational videos about the principles behind your keyboard design! They are well worth the time required for watching. I enjoyed seeing all the clips of historical designs; many people are unaware of how the standard keyboard evolved (which is also related to how notation evolved). Congratulations!

Your design cleverly solves a number of problems of the traditional keyboard. It doesn't attempt to address the problem of the traditional keyboard's lack of isomorphism: different shapes and therefore different fingerings for the same pattern when transposed to all degrees of the chromatic scale. Some might wonder whether the effort required to adapt to your new keyboard might be just as well put toward adapting to an isomorphic keyboard in order to gain its additional benefits of being able to play anything in any key without extra effort.

I have the impression that all the problems your design solves are also solved by well-designed isomorphic keyboards, except for the ability to play a chromatic glissando. (Of course, a chromatic glissando can be played on a single-level keyboard design that is isomorphic, but a completely flat keyboard is much less ergonomic than even the standard keyboard. A multi-level isomorphic keyboard could have a flat area added where a chromatic glissando could be played, perhaps at the back, as in your design. It could also have an area for playing a diatonic glissando -- but on the traditional piano keyboard and even yours, the diatonic glissando is only possible in one key, C major, unless the instrument produces sound electronically and a means is provided for electronically transposing the sound.) 

On the other hand, an isomorphic keyboard requires much more time to learn than your design would -- for anyone who already knows the traditional keyboard, but not for a novice.

Doug

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the forum of the Music Notation Project (hosted by Google Groups).
To post to this group, send email to musicn...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to musicnotatio...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/musicnotation?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Music Notation Project | Forum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to musicnotatio...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/musicnotation/3cb7f821-97ab-4986-9a96-bf7619e03146n%40googlegroups.com.

[John F]

Hi Evael,

Your curvy keyboard in Part Two is intriguing. As some said in the comments, it's difficult to imagine what one would be like to play without hands-on experience. The big difference between the black and white keys on the standard piano keyboard does create a few difficulties, and yours potentially solves a few issues, as you describe, and it's quite a significant addition to be able to play a chromatic glissando rather than just a white-keys or black-keys one.

One criticism I'd raise is that when you illustrated some of the problems you (and/or Chopin) identify, your hand posture is entirely wrong, which I feel undermines your arguments. Perhaps you were doing that deliberately to emphasize the problems, but it would backfire with almost any competent pianist. Your elbow is ridiculously low, and this causes your hand to be too low, your wrist alarmingly curved, and your fingers also too curled. The elbow should be a little higher than the hand, so there's a gradual slope down the forearm to the fingertips. In this more correct position, a lot of the issues you mention are minimized. The thumb doesn't, in fact, "pass under" the other fingers, but swings next to them, and the hand is rotated (along the axis of the forearm) in this and many other motions. You wouldn't make a video about redesigning car controls and sit on a cushion on the floor complaining that the steering-wheel is hard to turn and the pedals can't be pressed easily. You also seem to give the impression you think keys are pressed by bending the fingers, which is not really what happens.

I see two potential downsides of the keyboard, as well, I'm afraid, although, as I say, it's hard to tell if they're real or not without experiencing yours, indeed probably without getting familiar with it over some length of time. The flat keys have these advantages: 1) in navigating the keyboard, the fingers often slide forward or back on the keys. It's hard to know how much this is in order to accommodate the other problems you cite, and how much it's just a fact of having two "levels", or front and back keys. Doing this on flat keys, it's relatively easy to unconsciously keep track of pressure on the key (although, of course, they require more at the back than the front to keep them pressed). Doing this on curvy keys would, I think, probably remove this ability altogether, but would at least make it quite problematic to do. 2) The flat keys also provide a long surface as a target for the fingers. Judging the height of the surface is hardly a problem - there are two different ones, black and white - so one doesn't have to be accurate in that dimension front to back (although, again, there's the stiffer action to the back to consider). The height of the key surface is important, because it governs when the key will activate. So my concern is that the curvy keys will introduce a need to be more accurate in that dimension.

That said, this is an admirable and creative experiment. It's good people try different things, and it's a hell of a long time the standard keyboard has been pretty much the same (while the mechanics behind the levers has evolved enormously). I look forward with interest to seeing various keyboardists try it and report on it.

One other thought - have you considered what it would be like to bring all the keys to the front (the width of the tails), and what conclusion did you come to? I'm thinking if one is trying to remove the problems of the two levels, that would be a fuller and more radical solution. I guess it would make it isomorphic (but still with the black keys to aid navigation), and would probably also remove any need for curves, since every key would be a "pivot point" like every other.

[Pashkuli Keyboard]

Hi, John F

"…your hand posture is entirely wrong, which I feel undermines your arguments. Perhaps you were doing that deliberately to emphasize the problems, but it would backfire with almost any competent pianist. Your elbow is ridiculously low, and this causes your hand to be too low, your wrist alarmingly curved, and your fingers also too curled. The elbow should be a little higher than the hand, so there's a gradual slope down the forearm to the fingertips. In this more correct position, a lot of the issues you mention are minimized. The thumb doesn't, in fact, "pass under" the other fingers, but swings next to them, and the hand is rotated… You also seem to give the impression you think keys are pressed by bending the fingers, which is not really what happens."

I do not have a piano at home so those were shot at in the local store, where I had to hold the phone with my left hand looking at the screen (to frame\focus) and demonstrate with my right hand.

Definitely not the right way to demonstrate piano finger movements! Yes, it is only to illustrate a problem. After all, piano composer such as Chopin (and all pupils) would adapt at an early age and learn the best practical techniques. All I am trying to say is "what is possible and necessary" from my own perspective on trying to learn the Piano (and never managed to pass beyond basics) as I could not comprehend its design – especially the keys. 

[Pashkuli Keyboard]

Hi, John F, (I sent the response too early)

"The flat keys have these advantages:

1) in navigating the keyboard, the fingers often slide forward or back on the keys. …Doing this on curvy keys would, I think, probably remove this ability altogether, but would at least make it quite problematic to do. 

2) The flat keys also provide a long surface as a target for the fingers. …The height of the key surface is important, because it governs when the key will activate. So my concern is that the curvy keys will introduce a need to be more accurate in that dimension.

Yes, pianists get used to feel the "meat of the black keys" (not my words, rather I quote a 50+ old pianist who tried my design). This was to be expected. Yet, I think it is not crucial given the fact that it will free the movement of fingers for transposition. Yes, it will require more precision from the player but hardly anything that will need special accommodation or training.

 

One other thought - have you considered what it would be like to bring all the keys to the front (the width of the tails), and what conclusion did you come to? I guess it would make it isomorphic (but still with the black keys to aid navigation), and would probably also remove any need for curves, since every key would be a "pivot point" like every other."

You might be talking about the Dodeka keyboard (https://www.dodekamusic.com/products/dodeka-keyboard/)

Regarding "pivot points" – they require different level (bump) in such a way that when pressed, the pivot finger to be fairly in the same level as a non pressed key. Flat design can not achieve that.

The main issue here, which led me to develop this curvy design, was the understanding how the "standard" (flat) piano keyboard design came to be. And that it had nothing to do with the fingers. It was just easy to cut and construct from wood. Then, the "accidental" keys were intruduced. Again, not much thought given to their shape and position (at least not until the 1500s maybe even the 1600s actually with the Halberstadt rearrangement around Bach's time). That is all. And no one seemed to be bothered. Players would adapt to it as "practice makes perfect" as they say.

[Pashkuli Keyboard]

Hi, Douglas Keislar,

thank you for taking the time to watch the videos (although every few minutes of it could deserve their own extended video presentation on each matter mentioned)

Your design cleverly solves a number of problems of the traditional keyboard. It doesn't attempt to address the problem of the traditional keyboard's lack of isomorphism: different shapes and therefore different fingerings for the same pattern when transposed to all degrees of the chromatic scale. Some might wonder whether the effort required to adapt to your new keyboard might be just as well put toward adapting to an isomorphic keyboard in order to gain its additional benefits of being able to play anything in any key without extra effort.

I have briefly shown my isomorphic design based on the work of August Theophile Dreschke and a small bit to that of Paul von Jankò and of course I used the parts provided by Korg and the isomorphic digital keyboard from Mr. Wataru Ohkawa (Japan) to whom I owe 90% of what I accomplished in this field of design (isomorphic pian keyboards). More about him here (https://muto-method.com/en/history.html). 

I plan to make dedicated playlist for such isomorphic keyboard and the thoughts behind the design of each key (the tops or caps – they are replaceable\interchangeable). 

 

I have the impression that all the problems your design solves are also solved by well-designed isomorphic keyboards, except for the ability to play a chromatic glissando.

The question is what would be a "well-designed isomorphic keyboard"? I found all of them (incl. Ohkawa's own designs) to be not so suitable to my understanding of such keyboards.

 

A multi-level isomorphic keyboard could have a flat area added where a chromatic glissando could be played, perhaps at the back, as in your design. It could also have an area for playing a diatonic glissando – but on the traditional piano keyboard and even yours, the diatonic glissando is only possible in one key, C major, unless the instrument produces sound electronically and a means is provided for electronically transposing the sound.)

Diatonic glissandos in every key is not possible without digital transposition features (as purely mechanical\acoustic that would be crazy cumbersome to implement).

Yes, Ohkawa's digital keyboards with isomorphic layout (as P. Jankò derivatives) have such flat (in terms of level) portion of the keys where the player can perform chrom. glissandos.

On my design it can be done on the line between any two adjacent rows of keys or with diagonal slide moves of the fingers.

 

On the other hand, an isomorphic keyboard requires much more time to learn than your design would – for anyone who already knows the traditional keyboard, but not for a novice."

I think every musical instrument is a challenge for a novice.

In pert 3 of the series I will tackle the problem of "left-handed pianos" and where are they??? Or… who said (would assume) current pianos are geared towards "right-handed" players?

Hint: I think I can prove current pianos are more suitable for "left-handed" individuals! Quite intriguing, don't you think?

It is a really open-ended question as I base my observation from the perspective of a "right-handed" guitar and drums player (myself).

In other words: who said the strings (notes) of the piano should go ascending from left to right? And how this (or reversed direction) comply with the fact pianos are played by symmetrical/mirror position of the hands (the corresponding fingers)?

It is really, really interesting!