Kronos LS black key spacing

[DeltaJockey]

I don't own an LS, but have played it a couple of times in the past when they were first released. I find the semi weighted keys to be ok for playing, but am I the only one who finds the wider spacing between C# and D# a deal breaker? I just can't accept the design of this, and as a pianist it would bother me to be confronted with this day in and day out. Unless someone has some enlightening words, I just can't fathom why the keybed has to be this way. No other keybed I've experienced has ever been like this. I'm only focusing on this issue now, as they appear to be releasing further instruments soon using this keybed that I would have been interested in if it weren't for this.

[KK]

Never tried one, but now that you mention it, after seeing LS pics it looks strange indeed.

[Cpilot]

My K61 also has wider spacing between C# and D# as does my old PSR740, but not my grand piano. Interesting.

[voip]

The same here, across a variety of keybeds. Wider spacing between C# and D# seems to be the norm. Not all keyboards seem identical, though. The difference between C# and D# separation and the other # keys seems smaller on the Nord Stage. Even the Bosendorfer Imperial grand piano appears to have a wider spacing between C# and D# than the other # keys!! The ratio of the spacing difference is about 1.25 for the Kronos LS, and about 1.08 for the Bosendorfer.

There is some interesting discussion here:

http://quadibloc.com/other/cnv05.htm#:~ ... its%20wide.

and here:

https://www.pianostreet.com/smf/index.php?topic=51490.0

.

[KK]

After checking closer, it looks like that keyboard design might have meant to be as inexpensive as possible. Instead of using different white keys for the C/D/E sections, they simply use F and B keys as C and E keys (respectively) to save costs as less different plastic things to produce. Hence the very wide space between the C# and D#. In other words, on the LS it looks like one could swap any F for a C and any B for a E and vice versa - something that won't work on the vast majority of keyboard designs.

Sure, on all pianos there is a tiny space difference for the sharps/flat keys between C/D/E and F/G/A/B sections, but I think it goes a bit overboard for the LS­.

[DeltaJockey]

thanks guys for your replies.
I understand the technical differences that occur in the keys, I have keyboards which when taken to a ruler are wider on those keys, however in my eyes it needs to be measured as it is barely noticeable. What I'm talking about with the LS is strikingly obvious. It was the first thing I saw when initially laying eyes on the LS. It is not very noticeable in photos unless you focus on looking at it with this in mind. But to stand in front of it and lay your hands on it, it's way more exaggerated than any other keybeds I've played. Perhaps if you haven't actually played one, it may not be so evident from the literature.

I guess it answers my question though, not something anyone else is bothered about

[DeltaJockey]

After checking closer, it looks like that keyboard design might have meant to be as inexpensive as possible. Instead of using different white keys for the C/D/E sections, they simply use F and B keys as C and E keys (respectively) to save costs as less different plastic things to produce. Hence the very wide space between the C# and D#. In other words, on the LS it looks like one could swap any F for a C and any B for a E and vice versa - something that won't work on the vast majority of keyboard designs.

Sure, on all pianos there is a tiny space difference for the sharps/flat keys between C/D/E and F/G/A/B sections, but I think it goes a bit overboard for the LS­.

you could be right KK, reducing cost may be it, but still a bit odd to save money in that way. Not seen any other cheap keyboard do that.