Talk:Keytar

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Musical Instruments, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Musical Instruments articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
Start This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

Contents

[edit] Williams Keytar V1/V2 - dedicated page?

Despite their name, these instruments are NOT keytars in the generally-understood sense of the term (they are electromechanical keyed zithers rather than electronic instruments or MIDI controllers) and as such should have their own page, "Williams Keytar", along with a disambiguation paragraph here. The public in general understands "keytar" to mean a conventional electronic keyboard worn as a guitar, whereas the Williams instrument is, like the Autoharp and the Clavinet before it, an instrument developed by applying a mechanical keyboard to a set of guitar-like strings. It is a shame that the Williams company chose an existing and potentially misleading name for their fascinating product. User:Butterfingersbeck 15 March 2007

Actually it's just the other way around. Those instruments are the ONLY keytars. Everything else called "keytar" is nothing but a common mistake. 91.64.150.240 11:04, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ilian Beat Magazine

Did/does Iliana Beat Magazine really exist?

Yes, although its now apparently known as Midwest Beat Magazine http://www.midwestbeat.com/ --67.71.1.173 01:37, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Article

I'm so pleased my little Keytar article has matured rather well. I love the keytar, its so classy.

--69.156.3.63 08:46, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Rearrangement

Rearranged the "notable artists" section alphabetically; added the ubiquitous Todd Rundgren based on this photo of one of his keyboardists. R 22:03, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] AX-7 Only Model?

Roland is currently the only company manufacturing new keytars as of 2006, their only model being the AX-7.

What about the Roland AX-1?--Anthony5429 22:22, 24 February 2006 (UTC) It's outdated 91.64.150.240 11:05, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Keytar vs. Keytar(C)

Many professional musicians and music fans dislike the usage of the word "keytar" meaning a portable (master) keyboard, me being one of them. There though is a real Keytar, by Keytar incorporated, which is completely different instrument compared to the "keytar" meaning portable keyboard described here. This adds a lot of confusion, since not all people understand the difference. You don't say a whale is a fish, though you say a portable keyboard is a keytar. This does not make sence.

I'd prefer eliminating this article and replacing it by redirection to the real Keytar(C) AND to the "portable keyboard" as Roland AX-7 described in the article. The reason for this is that a) they're two different instruments, and only amateurs call portable keyboard a "keytar" and b) I personally find Wikipedia a source of _factual_ information, not just rumors or misinformation like "a friend of mine says 'keytar' when he means a portable keyboard which kind of looks a bit like a guitar". The fact is different than the words used in language of some people, and this should count on wikipedia.

The "Keytar Inc." instrument seems to have began production 2005. Since the term Keytar greatly predates this particular instrument, your arguments are for naught. This instrument does infact have a pre-cursor which was the Autoharp. The term keytar has been a term which exists in popular culture as the definition used in Wikipedia.

I full heartedly would promote an article known as "Williams Keytar V-1" which would include a link to it from the Keytar article, but to replace this article with the williams instrument? That seems in appropriate. It's like claiming the Dodge Caravan article should replace the Caravan article or any product that adopts a popular name/nickname as its product name and expecting the world to abandon all use of the word except for that particular product.

I have a growing suspicion that you may be more involved with the Keytar Inc. product than you are letting on, that or you own one. Go and google for "Keytar" especially in the image section. This isn't "misinformation" people understand the term Keytar to mean portable keyboards.

Again, my arguments are that the "Keytar Inc." product was created very recently, I'm seeing September 2005 as the beginning for production, with a public announcement of January 2005. Hell, this article ALONE predates that announcement. And my second argument is that this instrument is based off previous instruments like the Autoharp and the Indian "Bulbul Tarang". This product will never gain the amount of public knowledge than the portable keyboard under the term "keytar" has.

No doubt you're going to argue my points, but people know the keytar as a portable keyboard.

--67.70.15.118 05:24, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

(Abbott messed up this page, I'm fixing it up: --67.71.1.173 01:28, 18 April 2006 (UTC))

[edit] Jeffrey Abbott

I would like to take this time to both clarify and comment in this Talk Area of Keytar

First: I would like to thank the original author of the thread for doing a pretty amazing job of keeping this honest.

Second: you were correct in removing the misquoted claim over the origins of the name "keytar".

What it should have said to be "Anywhere"in the historical ballpark is that "Perhaps one of the earliest printed uses of the name "Keytar" was circa 1980 in an interview by Tom Lounges of me&my band for illianabeat magazine or it already could have changed it's name to "Night Rock News".

Third: What I would like to see you correct in the thread is the perception that "Keytaring"is an antiquated art form. I recently had a dialogue with a well know industry magazine editor and we both agree "Keytaring is about to REALLY come into it's own. The interest in the instrument has never been higher.


Keytar V Keytar: This is just silly. I think the last post to this regard hit the nail on the head. And for the record, the Williams instrument was not the first to attempt to use strings along with keys. I know, I had one of the "Digitars by "Charlie Labs"bestowed to me 7-10 years ago. It still sits in it's original box on a shelf in my studio. In closing, if any further clarification is needed in regards to my history with "Keytaring" please email me directly at aprodig@aol.com

And IMHO (if anyone really cares about that) The "King of the instrument for me is "Jan Hammer" without him, I doubt many of us would be doing with the instrument what we are today. What a GREAT musician he is!

Jeff www.jeffreyabbott.com

Thanks muchly for explaining everything, I've re-added your contribution to the page based upon your rephrased explanation.

--67.71.1.173 01:36, 18 April 2006 (UTC) (initial editor of Keytar)

[edit] The True Origins of The Keytar

In spite of the various theories being suggested here about the origins of the name Keytar, I was deeply involved in the company (called Keynote Musical Instruments) which invented the Keytar in London, England during the spring of 1977.

Keynote Musical Instruments Ltd (KMI) was a small electronic musical instrument design company based in Chiswick, West London from 1975 onwards and was set-up originally to market a portable organ called The Keynote Consort. KMI also introduced a line of "Leslie-type" organ tone cabinets to accompany it, called The Vortex. In 1977 plans were made to introduce a monophonic synthesizer called The Scorpion Stage Synthesizer - the launch of which was projected to be at the next Frankfurt Music Trade Fair in 1978.

Keynote Musical Instruments CEO, Jeremy Symons, was the main designer of KMI’s products, a skill he had developed during the early 1970's, while employed as Product Manager of the keyboard division of the Dallas Arbiter Group of companies (which at that time included VOX). During that time he had also been responsible for launching Moog Synthesizers through the UK’s music retailers, which brought him into close contact with Robert Moog and musicians such as Keith Emerson, Rick Wakeman and Roger Powell.

As many readers here probably already know, Roger Powell became the keyboard player with Todd Rungren in 1977 and invented a shoulder-hung keyboard called 'The Worm' which included a hand-hole in the upper left hand corner to use when holding the keyboard steady.

The Keytar concept came about as a consequence of Jeremy including an extra voltage-control jack-socket on the back panel of the Scorpion Stage Synth to enable a remote keyboard to run the synthesizer from elsewhere on stage. This then led to a vigorous discussion within the KMI team about the potential for making this remote keyboard into a self-contained shoulder-hung live performance accessory. In contrast to Roger Powell's shoulder-hung keyboard, the finalized idea was a compact keyboard housing with a neck containing a pitch-bender which allowed the musician to express him/herself in the same way as a guitarist does when bending and sustaining a notes. The name ‘Keytar’ took only a few days to materialise after the initial idea had been hammered out within Keynote and substantial funding was then devoted to obtaining international trade-mark protection through registration of the Keytar name.

The prototype was then made by fixing a synth keyboard to a piece of floor-board and attaching a stubby guitar-type neck, hollowed-out to take the pitch-bend slider. Andrew Gordon (now CEO of ADG productions www.adgproductions.com <http://www.adgproductions.com/> ) was the first musician to try this crude prototype and Rick Wakeman was the first famous musician to try it. As crude as it was, he was very enthusiastic and agreed to give the Keytar it's official launch at the Frankfurt International Music fair in 1978. Unfortunately lack of vision within the British Banking system meant that Keynote could only raise the funds to finance patent protection and production against firm orders. This meant that no patent was possible prior to exposure. At the Frankfurt Expo, crowds blocking the gangways as Jeremy demonstrated the Keytar included many Japanese gentlemen with small cameras. Orders for hundreds of units a month were obtained from one USA distributor, which scared the UK’s bankers and meant that apparent success turned into immediate embarrassment and frustration.

In 1979, another synthesizer company called the Electronic Dream Plant became involved with the intention of manufacturing and marketing the Keytar, but a combination of a lack of funds and the release of copy-cat products from Roland, Yamaha and Moog more or less consigned the Keytar's true creators to anonymity while the word Keytar had already become a commonly-used generic term to describe this kind of performance keyboard accessory.

Anyone who was working for - or with - Keynote Musical Instruments during the summer of 1977 would know these facts - people such as Rick Wakeman who appeared in Time Out Magazine playing one of the later prototypes in 1979, and the pop group, Landscape, who borrowed a Keynote Keytar to use in the Video of their hit record "Einstein-A-Go-Go" in 1981.

[edit] Gitboard

What is a Gitboard? And what is the difference, or when did it develop from the Keytar written about in the article? By Gitboard, by the way, I mean a normal looking guitar with a section on the... bit where you strum your hand... with a small section of keyboard on it. Sorry for the lousy explaination. I've only ever seen one, Quan Yeomans from Regurgitator used to play it live but seems to have stopped. A friend told me his instrument was called a Gitboard (might be guitboard) and it looks alot different to a Keytar. Gohst 06:13, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Used/Use

I think it would be more appropriate that the "Notable Musicians that Used Keytars be changed to "Use". A growing percentage of the list are newbie’s to the instrument, therefore, current.

[edit] Some cleanup notes

That list of alternate names seemed kinda odd to me. I doubt anyone thinks of a "master keyboard" as automatically being a keytar.

Also vastly reduced the notable artists to a subset of what was there based on, well, my own personal bias. I think the list should be kept short and kept to notable artists, which I define as being either widely popular in general or widely popular for use of a keytar.

I think the list of keytars is a little long, but few of them have articles, so I guess it's cool as is.

--Davetron5000 20:21, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RE: clean-up

Though i think you meant well, i suggest you leave the general maintenance of the thread to its creators. As a contributor to this thread as well as a documented part of it's history i can tell from your "Clean-up" your knowledge of its history is a bit limited. Also, i REALLY appreciate seeing some of the "New" Keytarists" added to the list though a vast majority of them at the moment are 'Indie" acts, they are still out there promoting the instrument.

And yes, i re-added myself to the list as well as "George Duke". I would have added others but i am confident the folks that have been maintaning the thread will revert the list back when they have a moment.

jeff www.jeffreyabbott.com

I think that list needs to be kept at a minimum, and if there is some vital need to itemize out the players of a keytar, feel free to start List of keytar players or something; I honestly don't think this article would be twice as good with twice as many keytar players listed in it. I would be interested to know how you consider Devo, Weird Al, Prince and Oingo Boing to be "New Indie Acts" :)
As to your other comments, aside from deleting this lists you restored, I just rewored the article to flow better and read better. Besides which Wikipedia has no concept of page ownership that you imply, so I don't see why I shouldn't edit things for the better despite not being a hallowed creator of the article. You monitored my changes, put back what you thought was important, and that's how it works. --Davetron5000 13:59, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lists

Both lists took up more space than the entire article and per Wikipedia guidelines and essays, it just seems cleaner and simpler to make each its own list entry.

Furthermore, the list of "notable" players is highly POV (and debatable :), so it seems like List of keytar players should satisfy everyone and remove any POV notion of "notability". People can edit that list as they like including whatever they want and it won't grow and grow the keytar article.

I left the "rare keytars" in here, because the list was small, though I guess it could go in the List of keytars article as well.

Davetron5000 14:49, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] list wars?

Sir, The list of players is and has been part of the thread. Your "generic" displacement makes no sense. Each time you remove it, i shall reinstate it. As you said so eloquently in your last rebuttal, that is my right.

As i said prior, your lack of knowledge on "keytar" history speaks for itself.

What "wikpedia" is if i understand correct is an evolving historical reference. My personal history with the instrument is documented well. An entire under current of youth is now generating more interest in the instrument than at anytime in its history.

Please, do not make random edits because you are not pleased with having your edits questioned.

Thanks, jeff

I didn't make that edit because of some imagined fued on your part. The wikipedia list guidelines state that if a list takes up more content than the article itself, it should be made its own seperate entry. Furthermore, the "notable" in the list title here is TOTALLY POV, which goes against Wikipedia guidelines yet again. I fail to see how making a change in accordance with wikipedia guidelines is a problem.
In the article Wikipedia:Embedded_list It says "As a basic principle, you should avoid list-making in entries. Wikipedia is not a list repository. Lists of links, if warranted, should have their own entry: see Wikipedia:Lists (stand-alone lists) for detail. Instead of giving a list of items, the significant items should be mentioned naturally within the text." As far as I'm concerned, the only non-debtable notable keytar players (the first three owners of the first keytar) are mentioned in the text, and the list of "notable artists" is a list of links. Why are you so incessant in going against wikipedia policy? From the same article: "Having lists instead of article text makes Wikipedia worse, not better. "
You want me to agree you are the hallowed all-knowing Dude of Keytars, fine. Considered it acknowleged. My change has nothing to do with the definition of a Keytar; it has to with improving Wikipedia in the spirit of it's guidelines and proposed style essays.
If you have a problem with my interpretation of Wikipedia Guidelines, please visit Wikipedia:Resolving_disputes and we can have a third party decide what to do. --Davetron5000 12:53, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
I'm not sure how much clearer I can make my case. You, on the other hand, have made absolutely no case for including the exact same list in the article, versus linking it. If you revert my change, you will be close to violating the Three_revert_rule. If you feel strongly about having the list in the article directly, state your reasons, and if we can't agree, can we at least agree to seek out mediation. I've made my case, now make yours. This is not about Keytars, but about Wikipedia and making it the best it can be --Davetron5000 14:29, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
I personally am in favour making new articles for the lists, and having them linked in the main page. --69.158.141.55 05:41, 29 July 2006 (UTC) (initial Keytar article editor) Oh, and Jeff? I appreciate all the effort you've put into helping this article, even though we've had some confusion, I know you're trying to improve this article, And Davetron? as I said, I agree in separating the lists, it doesn't hurt the article because the information is still there.

[edit] Alternate Name: Flying Harpsichord?

In the liner notes from The Aquabats! vs. the Floating Eye of Death!, Prince Adam is listed as playing the flying harpsichord, and I was wondering if this was a reference to our beloved keytar. If so, would it be appropriate to add it to the list of alternate names?

--Whiteskittlz 03:21, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Controller clarification

I see a need to clarify the difference between a "portable" MIDI controller and devices capable of producing sound. I seem to recall that the original keytars were controllers. I don't know whether or not keytar style synthesizers were made. I am no expert on the subject, so I won't try to edit this article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 166.34.148.192 (talk) 19:36, 3 May 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Shamless Plug

Removed the self-promo for "Showbread" Removed other shamless plugs, PLEASE keep this propaganda in the "users" section

[edit] Removed Reference for un-released product

" The G-Kay1500 is expected to hit the shops in September '07, and other manufacturers are expected to follow."

Though i'm confident "Irishguy" meant no malice, it is in violation of wikipedia guidelines. Personally, i hope he's right about the G-Kay 1500. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.247.205.37 (talk • contribs)

I didn't add anything about a "G-Kay1500". Please read the edit history correctly before making accusations. IrishGuy talk 16:37, 17 June 2007 (UTC)


Opps, I did read that wrong. A thousand apoligies.

In case your wondering this is the IP address of the guy who added it 81.169.145.28 I to really hope this is true.However i have found no information on it.Anyone who references it is referencing this article.Hopefully Yamaha will issue an offcial announcment if this gets popular enough.Parralax 14:12, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Removed shamless plug for Williams Keytar

These folks really need to come up with a better marketing plan. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.17.132.18 (talk) 05:42, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Removed shamless plug for zen riffer

Actually i first attemted to link another product and was refused. Seems fair then to remove and even the playing field. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.252.11.52 (talk) 19:32, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

==STOP THIS PLEASE!!!! ==

In regards to "Jeffrey Abbott" I AM Jeffrey Abbott aka KeytarJeff.

All of this crap in regards to me being listed is JUST SILLY. Last time i checked WikiPedia is not propelling my career or putting cash in my pocket. In other words STOP THIS PLEASE.

For the record: The information about who owned the first five Moog's in the KEYTAR article came from me. Also, I am Marcus O' Dare's Source for Tom owning the first Keytar.

And yes there was a story on me&my band featured in the "WorldView" section of Keyboard mag it was in the nineties and to be honest without digging in the attic for a copy i don't have a clue when it was. I know it was prior to internet stuff. I'm confident that if someone were to contact then editor Dominic Milano he would authenticate this. If someone does please send him my best!

I dont have the time at this moment nor is this the place to go into details on the Moog thing however i also owned a white prototype of the liberation. My contact at moog was a guy named Leon Filkowski. i have not had contact with him for over 20 years.

And yes, i STILL play a Keytar did 200 shows last year in Europe, and for enthusiasts of the instrument, get ready there is a new one coming, soon::)

I hope this clears up any confusion. If any of you have questions feel free to contact me through my website www.jeffreyabbott.com or at keytarjeff@comcast.net

I am posting this to the list and the original article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeffrey abbott (talk • contribs) 12:19, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] alternative names for keytar?

I removed this list as half the names seemed made up to either see what the auther could get away with without citation (synthar, belly synth, kaytar) or just to take the mick (electroponce, schmidtkeytar, a-ruckus). I propose that unless these alternate names can be cited, they shouldn't be added. Whilst a lot of this article does seem to be without citations, the list is most at risk of abuse (as already evidenced by adding things like "electroponce". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.155.148.241 (talk) 10:18, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Most of the names should be re-added because keytar is not such a common name for the instrument. Instead, it has been called by many names. This was previously indicated by the list. For my part, I would have never found the article (I was looking for a 'strap-on keyboard') without the list, and having found it, I would have thought the article editors are not well informed. Piechjo (talk) 08:19, 19 May 2008 (UTC)


Whilst I would take issue with your saying Keytar isn't such a common name for it (google it, and then google "strap on keyboard"), I do agree that a couple of alternate names could be re-introduced into the article, though certainly not in the extensive list form (have a look at it and count the number which are clearly vandalism).81.132.148.177 (talk) 15:39, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

I get your point. Anyway, there are a number of hits for 'strap-on keyboard' as well. I wouldn't advice anyone to use Google as a reference in such a case exactly because 'keytar' is the name of the Wikipedia article. Wikipedia is open licence and its articles are copied to a zillion pages. If someone managed to introduce the word 'sgloth' in Wikipedia, it would only take a couple of months to recognized by Google. Piechjo (talk) 11:16, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Reverted Weird Edit

Not sure what the person was thinking by eliminating pertinent information in the article and included a reference for a keytar that pretty much never saw the light of day and then introduced an article that was years old. Again, that info belongs in "list of keytars".


The reference added was referencing the fact that another name for keytars is "strap on keyboard", after having removed the list of alternate names for keytar, this was the only one from the list that appeared to be in any sort of use.

The reference I removed was because, whilst the point states "keytar also refers to the ability to emulate the playing style and sound of an electric or acoustic guitar via a synthesizer...", there is no mention of this usage of the word in the article to which it is referenced. Nor in fact, is there even a mention of the word keytar at all.86.155.148.41 (talk) 09:12, 21 May 2008 (UTC)