Don't want to take aspiringmusicteacher's keyboard thread off an a tangent, so I'm starting a new one for this question, but look at that thread for the background to this.
How do you deal with the dual use of the word "keyboard"?
I'm fully aware of what it means when referring to an instrument - the approach to which is completely different from that of the piano. I own a keyboard, but I don't really play "the keyboard" as an instrument in its own right. Other than changing the voice and the volume, I don't use any of the features on mine. I can realize chord symbols on a keyboard instrument, but I very rarely play from that style of notation. (You want me to play from chord symbols? Pass me a guitar!). I don't play the style of music that you usually find played on a keyboard.
However, I routinely use the term "keyboard" as a collective noun to encompass organ and piano (and possibly harpsichord and electric-keyboard-played-like-a-piano). If I say I'm going to check my theory written work on the keyboard, I mean any keyboard instrument which comes to hand. I'll talk about 'keyboard facility' to mean the ability to play staff-notated music on a keyboard instrument, 'keyboard navigation' to mean the ability to find one's way around a keyboard instrument, and 'keyboard skills' to mean the extra bits and bobs expected of an organist (and in some cases other keyboard players) - sight-transposition, score-reading, keyboard harmony, figured bass realisation, etc.
Is this something I should avoid? Does it actually cause any confusion, or would most people understand (maybe from context) that I don't mean 'keyboard - the instrument'? I think the terms 'keyboard skills' and 'keyboard harmony' at least are fairly widely understood.
But I'm now less sure about "keyboards" as a short-hand for "(classical) keyboard instruments".
T.
