against the x-shaped stand

This post has one purpose: to vilify the X-shaped keyboard stand. This type of stand is as bad as it is universal. Tons of musicians use it — why? Because it's convenient? It's actively inconvenient. Because it's cheap? Good stands are roughly the same price. There is no excuse for it.

Sure, it looks like a good idea at first. I remember the first time I saw one, and thought, "Wow, that's smart! It just folds right out on a single fulcrum." And the way it adjusts height is built in: no troublesome telescoping legs that don't match and rely on screws that strip or get lost: you just make the X wider or thinner and the height adjusts that way.

Except it's horrible, because [a] it doesn't go high enough, and [b] it doesn't go low enough. True story. A six-foot-three keyboardist like me can't stand and play comfortably because if it's at the right height it's far too narrow, and the keyboard perilously sways. I did this for right around a decade at a church gig: the keyboard never fell off outright, but it never stopped rocking back and forth. And then there's [b]: most X-stands don't have a notch that allows the keyboard to sit at the height of a piano. Gaaaaagh! A stand that's designed to hold keyboards but can't actually get to the height of a piano is a stand that isn't thought through.

So, you can't sit down and play it (at the right height), and you can't stand and play it (at the right height, if you're average height or taller). Most players just play it at the wrong height. The thing actually encourages stress injuries.

All of which would be bad enough if it folded compactly: but what you see is what you get. Folds up easily; nice and flat; but long enough so that it's trouble for a trunk or cab.

Then there's the small issue of knees. Every keyboardist has 'em. And every keyboardist who uses one of these infernal stands has bumped those knees against it. Sitting or standing, there's no good way to actually be at the keyboard in a way that functions.

Who designed this thing? Who is responsible for this? Who thought it was a good idea?

For my entire professional career, I've used the tabletop stand:

It's sturdy, travels well, telescopes down into a nice packable unit, goes as high and as low as you want it (at least with my Roland keyboard models, which I also used for 23 years), looks decently professional, gives you plenty of leg room sitting or standing, and is relatively inexpensive. Why on EARTH wouldn't you get one of these instead?

But that's not your only choice. There's also the Z-stand, an ingeniously simple, well-balanced thing that's perfect for gigging of any type:

... or this nicely squared-off one, that simplifies the tabletop design. A little more cumbersome to pack, but great for the job:

And then there's the one I use now, called the T-stand, because it folds up into a concise T-shaped thing. Light, sturdy, everything you want and nothing you don't. I got it because I got a new keyboard, which is enough taller than my old Roland models that it sits too high on the trusty old tabletop of yore.

With the keyboard on top of it, all you see is the legs sticking straight down. It even looks better, more professional, than my old tabletop version. And it weighs 18 pounds.

All of these serve their — I was going to say they serve their purpose better than the X-stand, but that's not it. They serve their purpose. They actually do what they're there to do. This vaults them to a place far above the extremely awful, bone-headed, excuse-less X-stand. And yet they don't sell nearly as well. Why? Why? Why?

The X-stand's existence cannot be justified. It defies all principles of the free market. It must never be bought again. If you are ever in a position to buy a keyboard stand, get one that works — do not reward the makers of the X-stand by buying one, ever.