Korg microKey micro-review

RIP

A friend gave me the non-wireless 37-keys version and I've been enjoying playing it (with Chateaux Grand in FluidSynth on my phone, since I don't currently have the logistics set to use it with my computer). Here are my first impressions:

The keys look small (not surprising given the name), but the appearance is somewhat incorrect. They are about the same length as my clavichord (a King of Sweeden kit-built). On the Korg, the naturals are 79mm (sorry imperialists, writing all these numbers as 3 + 3/32" is a nightmare I'm not going into) whereas the clavichord has naturals at 86mm. The piano is at 140mm (and my piano is among the shortest ones). I deem both the Korg and the clavichord as too short for being really comfortable, but long enough to be playable.

The octave on the Korg has a 140mm span (about 5.5") whereas it is 160mm on the clavichord and 165 (or 6.5") on the piano. I find the octave span of the Korg fantastic! It's perfect, so comfortable! I can reach a tenth, with a stretch (minor stretch if no sharps are involved, major-but-doable stretch if sharps are involved).

You would think that with small keys one would have troubles getting "in between" the sharps. I thought so too, but hey, in practice no! Why?

As you can see from the picture, the sharps are somewhat thinner and the space in between them is very large (in proportion) i.e. normal in absolute terms. From the picture you will probably notice that the "proportion" makes look the white keys "fat" in the section between sharps. In fact, the space in between sharps is on par with or slightly better than my grand piano: on the latter in between some sharps my fattest finger can get it only with difficulty, whereas on the Korg any finger can get in with ease.

You might think that then the sharps are too thin and easy to miss, but in practice I've found that not to be the case.

You might think that playing with muscle memory would be hard because the distances are different, and there I can't help since I actively play without muscle memory (which I used for decades and hated)

Digression: as you may remember I've always been interested in smaller keyboars (PASK and the like) and I was leaning towards a 6" octave (after experimenting with 3D-printed models whose keys did not move), but I found in practical use that 5.5" is the perfection for me. So for people building their own reduced size keyboard like @DavisB I recommend getting one of these to test before you build a whole keybed and then realize you built the wrong size!

Back to the review, I'm loving it. So much so that I think I will buy the 61-key version (but I have to get rid of some other piano-related big object first, otherwise my wife is already threatened the noose...)

Pros (at least for me):

Great keybed, perfect size for my hands
Very well playable, decent dynamic for a non-weighted controller
Nice, clean, piano-like look without showing off as the dashboard of a spaceship
Small and lightweight to carry around with you always
Works out of the box with my Android phone
Inexpensive to the point that you would not worry about breaking it (e.g. during a camping trip)

Cons:

The keys are a bit too short -- it would be nice if they were at least as long as the clavichord if not even more
No aftertouch (I guess this would make it expensive, especially if polyphonic aftertouch which I think is what is needed, given the kind of music I'm interested in)
Not weighted (I guess this would make it into a totally different instrument, changing completely all the pros and cons besides the size of the keys)
Only switch pedal supported (I guess it's okay for portability and you can always use a USB pedal, at least in a studio setup)

DavisB

Anyone who's curious about narrow key pianos should try korg microkeys, preferably 61key version for a little taste of what you're missing out on.

It is indeed very comfortable.
Unfortunately velocity sensitivity is all over the place - partly due to low quality rubber contacts, partly due to very short pivot, so you're not quite home yet.

After you've played with an instrument that fits your hands, going back to clown-shoe-sized piano seems like a sick cruel joke.

It's called korg microkeys, even thought it's DS5.5 size - which is the Medium Human Size.
6.5" is XXXL size, 6" is Large, 5.5" is Medium Human Size and 5.1" is Small.

The ones above microkeys are 132mm/5.2" octave.

RIP

DavisB Anyone who's curious about narrow key pianos should try korg microkeys, preferably 61key version for a little taste of what you're missing out on.

I would go even further and say that everyone who can't reach a tenth on a regular piano should try one of the microkey 'boards. I wish I did earlier.... By being so inexpensive, there is no reason to not grab at least a 3-octave one on your favorite online store (but I agree, the 61-key would be best).

DavisB It's called korg microkeys, even thought it's DS5.5 size - which is the Medium Human Size.

Indeed!

DavisB Unfortunately velocity sensitivity is all over the place - partly due to low quality rubber contacts,

Strange, mine is fairly consistent, but perhaps because I played electronic organs for a decade (mine was not velocity sensitive, but my teacher's was and so I had to learn to cope with it). Still spring action, so not great, but not so horrible either.

DavisB partly due to very short pivot

I forgot to mention that in my review. You have to adjust for that but it's not hard: the board measures velocity, but your fingers impart force. The same force on the tip of the key will cause more velocity than close to the (imaginary) fallboard. However the resistance felt by the finger is different and I quickly learned to "go with the flow" without thinking: if it's low resistance, take it easy -- and if it's high resistance, push harder. I mean, not ideal, but playable, and even decent once you consider how much you're paying for (less than some toy pianos!)

DavisB After you've played with an instrument that fits your hands, going back to clown-shoe-sized piano seems like a sick cruel joke.

I'm starting to feel that way too, and just after a couple of weeks on a 3 octave one.

Last, but not least, on a separate thread and at your convenience, please share more of what you are doing with your own action. For example, I know you are using CNC router/mill but in how many "takes" you make a key? You do that from the top, the bottom, the side? How about the keytops, you certainly don't find correctly-sized ones in piano shops! What are you plan for the action? Thanks!

DavisB

Yes, a relaxed comfortable tenth (and a stretched eleventh) is the standard for natural piano playing. It's how pianos are ment to be played. Anything less - the piano is likely too large for your hands.
Which is very common, because the standard size is XXL.

I kind of imagine if you play on 37key version, you're going to severely limit yourself on what you're going to even attempt to play on it, not many fast passages, runs, jumps and so on, so you might not be brushing against the velocity sensitivity as much. 61key is also limited, but there's room to play.

Each new iteration/prototype has a different process, materials, sizing, as I learn things and converge towards the ideal.
There's quite a lot of ways to approach the process, and the one for the next prototype likely will be different.
For one, I'll try out front bushings with notably less friction/wider gap...

It's a 'weighted hammer' digital piano action. Which kind of tells everything, since all weighted hammer digital piano actions on the market are mechanically simple and virtually the same, with most differences being pivot length, downweight/upweight and bottom out feel.

The rest is to polish those few variables to perfection and have them even across the whole piano. In previous prototypes I've gotten them dialed in such that I like the feel better than PHA40/GHS/GH3, etc. Which is the lofty goal, not only to be super comfortable perfect size, but also be better or atleast up there with the top of the line "weighted hammer" actions.

aleath

I was very excited when I got a korg microkey a while ago, because it was finally a window into the feeling narrower keys can give. But I was sorely disappointed by the shortness of the keys. I still enjoy playing on it, and I don't find the sensitivity too bad.

@DavisB I would love to know more about how you are making the hammer mechanism of your action. You might have seen a post I made a while ago about a 24 key prototype I built, but mine is simpler with no hammer action, it is just counterweights on a seesaw and a software simulation of a hammer in response to key position. For now I'm finding that keys and electronics alone are more than enough to keep me busy without adding a hammer action to the mix!

RIP

DavisB Yes, a relaxed comfortable tenth (and a stretched eleventh) is the standard for natural piano playing. It's how pianos are ment to be played. Anything less - the piano is likely too large for your hands.
Which is very common, because the standard size is XXL.

By this metric even the microkey is too large for me 🤣 -- But I'd take that size any day versus the current size.

DavisB I kind of imagine if you play on 37key version, you're going to severely limit yourself on what you're going to even attempt to play on it, not many fast passages, runs, jumps and so on, so you might not be brushing against the velocity sensitivity as much. 61key is also limited, but there's room to play.

True, but after many decades of traditional music education with results completely unsatisfactory to me, I've restarted from scratch for the umpteenth time (I think I now have found the appropriate teacher/approach that I sought my whole life). At the moment I play only on 18 keys and my teacher told me that we will expand to 31 keys soon. As such, for a while the 37 key version is fine and as I wrote I do plan to buy the 61 key version afterward.

aleath But I was sorely disappointed by the shortness of the keys.

Maybe because I also play the clavichord which has short keys (and with very limited key depth), I was not "sorely disappointed". Yet I agree with you that it is a limitation, and listed it as such in the cons section