A small dumb keyboard used by pianists for exercising the fingers.
I have used digital pianos almost exclusively for the last several years. I fear it might ruin my technique, though no evidence yet suggests that these plastic imitations of “real” pianos have done anything negative to what we pianists sometimes call “the mechanism” (heh).
Like anything digital, the success of a digital piano depends first on its convenience, then its quality. Digital photography overwhelmed film photography in large part for its convenience, this in the same way that digital audio formats will make plastic compact discs obsolete, and this after said CDs made LP records a relic — though I believe this latter shift was less of a response to consumer demand than to the needs of the recording industry.
Digital pianos have seen a far slower rate of progress compared to other digital products. This is because the convenience that they offer has not yet become a footnote to their quality. Quality is still poor, though digitals offer other features that make them useful and fun. Yet, as other observers have said, it is simply astonishing that digital keyboards and piano-like instruments have been around for decades and yet there is not a single such instrument you can point to and say that that defines the standard for non-acoustic keyboard instruments. Digital pianos carry the stigma of compromise. Digital pianos are disposable and must be replaced regularly (the marketing term for this is “upgraded”) to keep pace with rapid obsolescence that is synonymous with gadgetry.
“Real” pianos rarely appeared in the context of an upgrade scenario. Practicing Liszt concerti on a spinet might suggest an upgrade is in order but for the most part a pianist who blamed their problems on the instrument was just making excuses.
