The different mechanical switches?

[Dr.Chipotle]

So im familiar with the Cherry mx switches, but there are others. What are they and how do they differ from the cherry ones?

[SpAmRaY]

http://deskthority.net/wiki/Category:List_of_all_keyboard_switches

[Oobly]

Well, while Spamray's answer is quite definitive, there are a few groups of mechanical switches most often discussed and used by GH'ers.

1. Cherry MX - you know about these. Cherry also make ML (low profile switch, keycaps not compatible with MX) and MY (spring and membrane, with MX compatible keycaps) switches, but neither are as highly regarded as MX.
2. Alps - Original Alps were made by Alps Electrical and Forward Electronics. When Forward Electronics threatened to stop production, Matias designed their own version of the switch and continue to make them. Commonly, Alps is synonymous with their SKCL / SKCM series and Matias variants.
3. Topre - Made by Tokyo Press (Topre) these switches are essentially rubber domes with conical springs under them. They use capacitive sensing, so have no physical electrical contacts.
4. Buckling spring - these rely on the collapse of a spring to provide tactility and actuation. There are 2 variants, one with membranes under the "hammers" (used in IBM Model M and modern Unicomp boards) and one with capacitive sensing (IBM Model F).
5. Beam spring - Capacitively sensed switches with flat metal springs that invert when pressed. They usually also use a "normal" spring to increase the force required.
6. Hall effect / magnetic reed switches - These use a magnet in the plunger of the switch which activates either a magnetic reed switch or is sensed by a hall effect sensor (magnetic flux sensor).
7. NMB Hi-Tek, "space invaders" - mechanical switches with vertical contacts and breaker bar in the slider.
8. There are a lot of others, but most are obscure and / or rare nowadays.

The most common (and the ones still available new) are Cherry MX, Topre, Matias and Buckling spring.

[jacobolus]

Where do you live? Your best bet for finding a great variety of keyboards to test out is to get together with local geekhack members and each bring a few keyboards. (Or if you live in the SF Bay Area, just let HaaTa bring all the keyboards.)

It’s really hard to tell what you’ll like or dislike based on reading other people’s descriptions or watching videos. You just have to feel the switches yourself.

[Findecanor]

The only significant mechanical switches currently produced, besides Cherry MX are:

* Clones of Cherry MX by Kaihua (Kailh and Razer) and by Gaote.
The difference in feel from Cherry MX varities are only slight, but some people are more picky than others. The quality of some switches compared to Cherry MX is in question.

* Matias' switches. These are clones of the classic Alps SKCM series with which many keyboards were made in the '80s and '90s.
Like Alps and other Alps clones that came before, the key travel is only 3.5 mm and the activation/tactile point is higher up than Cherry MX. Lighter initial resistance also. Matias makes a clicky switch and a tactile/damped switch.

* Buckling Spring from Unicomp. Same as in IBM Model M.
Clicky. Hard spring. Activation/tactile point quite low. Loud.

Whether Topre switches are mechanical or not is a point of contention among enthusiasts ...

Then there are lots of switches that were made in the past. Some clones of Alps that even stopped production in the last decade and there may still be modern keyboards of them out there.
The rest are almost only found in vintage keyboards on the second-hand market but there are lots of people on this board that buy, refurbish and use various older keyboards, or take old parts and put in DIY keyboards.

[FoxWolf1]

The only significant mechanical switches currently produced, besides Cherry MX are:

What counts as "significant"?

You can get Greetech MX-compatible switches in an A4tech keyboard (Bloody B540).

There's some kind of ALPS-style switch (not Matias by the looks of it) being used in super cheap keyboards from MG and Flagk, though these have not yet made it to the Western market.

Possibly some others but I don't have time for any big website-dives at the moment.

[jacobolus]

There's some kind of ALPS-style switch (not Matias by the looks of it) being used in super cheap keyboards from MG and Flagk, though these have not yet made it to the Western market.

Does anyone have some of these? I’d be curious to try a few loose switches.

[Findecanor]

What counts as "significant"?

Not being too uncommon or unusual.

[fohat.digs]

Whether Topre switches are mechanical or not is a point of contention among enthusiasts ...

I always get a chuckle over this.

To my way of thinking, there are "switches" and there are "mechanisms" which may or may not be functionally equivalent.

Topre, buckling springs, "Acer" and probably many others do not have "mechanical switches" at all. They have mechanisms with various component parts which press down to activate some sort of switching circuit incorporated into the flat substrate at the bottom. My personal opinion is that "plungers over domes" do not usually rise to the definition of "mechanisms" but they can be nice, too.

This is not to denigrate these types, of course, they are perfectly acceptable and excellent methods of keyboard construction.

And, in fact, I can see how there may be advantages to not having the electrical and mechanical components integrated (I am thinking of the NMB Hi-Tek in particular here) so that minor mechanical glitches do not kill the keys altogether.

Separate switching circuits may give marginally better protection against damage such as spilled liquids, but with the disadvantage that individual dead switches cannot be easily replaced.

Keyboard science!

[jacobolus]

To my way of thinking, there are "switches" and there are "mechanisms" which may or may not be functionally equivalent.

Wait a minute...

There are “mechanical switches”, and then there are “mechanisms which perform the action of a switch”, is that what you’re saying?

By any kind of technical definition, all keyboards use “mechanical” “switches”, except for those type-on-a-projected-laser thingies, touchscreens, interpret-your-hand-gestures-in-the-air, etc. type of solutions (which to be honest I wouldn’t call keyboards because they don’t really have keys).

The “enthusiast” community on the other hand likes to use the word “mechanical” to basically mean “everything that isn’t a rubber dome over a membrane”... which is a pretty silly definition, but whatever. In my opinion it’s not worth worrying about the precise boundaries of the word. If someone wants to include Topre switches under the “mechanical” umbrella, they should feel free.

[dorkvader]

To my way of thinking, there are "switches" and there are "mechanisms" which may or may not be functionally equivalent.

Wait a minute...

There are “mechanical switches”, and then there are “mechanisms which perform the action of a switch”, is that what you’re saying?

By any kind of technical definition, all keyboards use “mechanical” “switches”, except for those type-on-a-projected-laser thingies, touchscreens, interpret-your-hand-gestures-in-the-air, etc. type of solutions (which to be honest I wouldn’t call keyboards because they don’t really have keys).

The “enthusiast” community on the other hand likes to use the word “mechanical” to basically mean “everything that isn’t a rubber dome over a membrane”... which is a pretty silly definition, but whatever. In my opinion not worth worrying about the precise boundaries of the word. If someone wants to include Topre switches under the “mechanical” umbrella, they should feel free.

The demarcation problem for mechanical keyboards is real. You can define it based on a number of factors. My favourite were "actuation not at bottomout" and "includes metal in the switching mechanism" both of which include topre and model M and exclude a normal RDOM KB.

I wrote up a whole essay on it then decided not to post it as I figured there'd be no interest.

[fohat.digs]

I wrote up a whole essay on it then decided not to post it as I figured there'd be no interest.

Flame on.

[JPG]

To my way of thinking, there are "switches" and there are "mechanisms" which may or may not be functionally equivalent.

Wait a minute...

There are “mechanical switches”, and then there are “mechanisms which perform the action of a switch”, is that what you’re saying?

By any kind of technical definition, all keyboards use “mechanical” “switches”, except for those type-on-a-projected-laser thingies, touchscreens, interpret-your-hand-gestures-in-the-air, etc. type of solutions (which to be honest I wouldn’t call keyboards because they don’t really have keys).

The “enthusiast” community on the other hand likes to use the word “mechanical” to basically mean “everything that isn’t a rubber dome over a membrane”... which is a pretty silly definition, but whatever. In my opinion not worth worrying about the precise boundaries of the word. If someone wants to include Topre switches under the “mechanical” umbrella, they should feel free.

The demarcation problem for mechanical keyboards is real. You can define it based on a number of factors. My favourite were "actuation not at bottomout" and "includes metal in the switching mechanism" both of which include topre and model M and exclude a normal RDOM KB.

I wrote up a whole essay on it then decided not to post it as I figured there'd be no interest.

My opinion is that the expression "mechanical keyboard" is only a way to identify a keyboard with a better mechanism for detecting the actuation of a key than those with nearly no mechanism (aka rubber dome).


But in fact, since things move and/or deforms in every keyboard (expect lazer thing maybe), they all have some sort of mechanism and engineering to do so. But since the more complex mechanism are often the ones that feel better there's this common acceptation that to consider a keyboard mechanical it requires more than 2 pieces of rubber and an conductive material crushing together to be part of this big family.


But in the end I have only 2 comments to add:


1. I am sad to see the world of mechanical keyboard going the cheaper route at a very fast rate. At this rate they will sell rubber dome keyboards under the name mechanical keyboard in a matter of a few years.


2. The only keyboard that matters anyway is the model F. So I don't care to argue more than that with anyone. Say that model F is not mechanical? I don't even care since it's just so superior. I don't need a model F club either as the Topre lovers seems to require. I just enjoy my keyboard and know in my hearth that it's the best.




 

[fohat.digs]

2.  Say that model F is not mechanical?

By my definition an IBM Model F does not have true mechanical switches.

Counting the controller board as "one" piece, a quick tally indicates that an F-122 comes apart into approximately 520 pieces.

A keyboard with mechanical switches such as "complicated Alps" with many parts in each switch could easily have twice that many, I imagine.

[davkol]

Model F? Whatever. But what about Acer or Fujitsu Peerless switches (spring over rubber dome over membrane) or Tai Hao APC Alps-clones (spring over rubber dome over PCB)?

[dorkvader]

I wrote up a whole essay on it then decided not to post it as I figured there'd be no interest.

Flame on.

I think we can both agree that most people have little interest in philosophy. My response was written as an excercise in philosophical discourse, not as a piece of flamebait or general trolling. While I don't expect sarcasm from established erudite members such as yourself, I wou;dn't think it the right "tone" to match with the type of post that GH'ers are wanting to see and respond to. I would be upset if I posted that and only got sarcasm and trolling, so I just PM'd the document to some people who might find it interesting.

My opinion is that the expression "mechanical keyboard" is only a way to identify a keyboard with a better mechanism for detecting the actuation of a key than those with nearly no mechanism (aka rubber dome).

Indeed, I think most people use the term to mean that, but really it just becomes a "sand heap" issue. At what level of perceived "quality" does a keyboard become mechanical? Effectively it's just like saying "well these are mechanical because I think they're worthy". A fine position to hold, but somewhat selfish and hard to define, especially for keyboards you haven't tried. This position has a lot of potential issues that one must be aware of were they to espouse it.

But in fact, since things move and/or deforms in every keyboard (expect lazer thing maybe), they all have some sort of mechanism and engineering to do so. But since the more complex mechanism are often the ones that feel better there's this common acceptation that to consider a keyboard mechanical it requires more than 2 pieces of rubber and an conductive material crushing together to be part of this big family.

and more complex mechanisms often feel no better and introduce more possibilities for failure. For example vintage futaba switches are one of the most complicated mechanisms known, and they are just linear (and usually scratchy). Linear complicated alps can be the same way. On the other hand, hall effect switches have just a few parts (sensor, housing, stem, magnet) and are one of the simplest designs possible: yet many people consider them to be amongst the best linear switches around. Perhaps it can apply to the general "RDOM vs. better" but it's hardly universal. This is a serious limiting factor which should be thought about if you want to take that position. Also, at what "level of complexity" do we consider a switch mechanical? another sand heap I think.

But in the end I have only 2 comments to add:


1. I am sad to see the world of mechanical keyboard going the cheaper route at a very fast rate. At this rate they will sell rubber dome keyboards under the name mechanical keyboard in a matter of a few years.


2. The only keyboard that matters anyway is the model F. So I don't care to argue more than that with anyone. Say that model F is not mechanical? I don't even care since it's just so superior. I don't need a model F club either as the Topre lovers seems to require. I just enjoy my keyboard and know in my hearth that it's the best.




 

1. I don't necessarily abhor cheapness. Any design I see that can make it cheaper or easier to manufacture without sacrificing other aspects is a design I really love! It means it was well engineered. I like to see signs of good engineering in my keyboards. While it's nice to take apart the sort of no-expense-spared no-holds-barred type of keyboard, the ones I find most impressive are the ones that do account for price while maintaining a high level of quality.

2. agreed: we shouldn't focus on this issue of 'what is mechanical". I see this is an "enthusiast" community where people really enjoy rubber dome keyboards like Topre, and membrane keyboards like the model M. I really like my rubber dome olivetti keyboard I got imported (NIB) from France. Even if it's "just" a rubber dome, I like the feel. This shoudl be the focus, not some "elite club" defined around a patchy (at best) definition.

By my definition an IBM Model F does not have true mechanical switches.

Counting the controller board as "one" piece, a quick tally indicates that an F-122 comes apart into approximately 520 pieces.

A keyboard with mechanical switches such as "complicated Alps" with many parts in each switch could easily have twice that many, I imagine.

As I said before, defining "mechanical" by number of components is a hard position to take. If that is your, please can you clarify your definition? I am interested to hear it. Also, if it has two-piece keycaps, your number is a little low. (122*5 (keycap top, keycap bottom, spring, flippy, barrel) + case plastic (3) plus screws (3 in the case and 0-4 attaching plate to pan) + metal plates (3) + pcb + controller + cable + feet (at least 4 pieces each side, depending on what foot)

[Findecanor]

1. I am sad to see the world of mechanical keyboard going the cheaper route at a very fast rate. At this rate they will sell rubber dome keyboards under the name mechanical keyboard in a matter of a few years.

"Mechanical keyboard feel" to sell rubber dome is already a couple years old by now.

[JPG]

1. I am sad to see the world of mechanical keyboard going the cheaper route at a very fast rate. At this rate they will sell rubber dome keyboards under the name mechanical keyboard in a matter of a few years.

"Mechanical keyboard feel" to sell rubber dome is already a couple years old by now.

What I wanted to mean is simply that I am happy to see that good mechanical keyboards are gaining popularity like the Filco and such, but I am sad to see that since it's getting a lot more attention many companies are selling some of those keyboards with much less good quality. The design is important, but the implementation is also important. If you take a good design but not only reduce the stuff that is not necessary (that won't affect the quality of the keyboard if removed) but also start to remove stuff that has an impact on the quality of the keyboard (bad solder, case that is not strong enough, switches with less good materials, etc.) then you affect the quality of the keyboard in order to reduce the cost and that's sad. I would be happy to see a company produce a new model F with the same quality as the original but at a lower cost, but the truth is that the keyboard produced would be almost certainly of way lesser quality.

[fohat.digs]

2. we shouldn't focus on this issue of 'what is mechanical".

As I said before, defining "mechanical" by number of components is a hard position to take. If that is your, please can you clarify your definition? I am interested to hear it. Also, if it has two-piece keycaps, your number is a little low. (122*5 (keycap top, keycap bottom, spring, flippy, barrel) + case plastic (3) plus screws (3 in the case and 0-4 attaching plate to pan) + metal plates (3) + pcb + controller + cable + feet (at least 4 pieces each side, depending on what foot)

The number of parts is irrelevant. A "simple machine" can be a single part.

I conceptualize a "keyboard switch" in terms of a discreet switching mechanism, something that you could make into a keychain or a trigger to make a light blink. If you can isolate a single one of them, wire it up, and have it do something, that is a mechanical switch.

If there is a field such as a capacitive PCB or set of membrane layers wherein the actual switching is taking place, and the function of the keying mechanism is to just stomp something down on it, at a particular place, to get a reaction, then I would really look at that as more of a "mechanism" for the "activation of a switch" than an actual switch.

Totally splitting hairs, of course. And it is silly to worry about whether the electrical pulse comes out of the body of the switch or somewhere nearby.

*    *    *    *    *

I was not considering taking the spring hammers (spring + pivot plate) apart since I have never done it. I was thinking something like:
122 caps
116 stems
122 barrels
122 spring hammers
5   stabilizer wires
10 stabilizer tabs
9  screws
2  clips
1  cable (not separated into parts)
3  plates
1  PCB
1  mylar membrane
1  foam mat
1  controller board
3  case shell parts

but I forgot about the feet altogether. 5 parts each on the 122, or is it 6?

[Oobly]

2. we shouldn't focus on this issue of 'what is mechanical".

As I said before, defining "mechanical" by number of components is a hard position to take. If that is your, please can you clarify your definition? I am interested to hear it. Also, if it has two-piece keycaps, your number is a little low. (122*5 (keycap top, keycap bottom, spring, flippy, barrel) + case plastic (3) plus screws (3 in the case and 0-4 attaching plate to pan) + metal plates (3) + pcb + controller + cable + feet (at least 4 pieces each side, depending on what foot)

The number of parts is irrelevant. A "simple machine" can be a single part.

I conceptualize a "keyboard switch" in terms of a discreet switching mechanism, something that you could make into a keychain or a trigger to make a light blink. If you can isolate a single one of them, wire it up, and have it do something, that is a mechanical switch.

If there is a field such as a capacitive PCB or set of membrane layers wherein the actual switching is taking place, and the function of the keying mechanism is to just stomp something down on it, at a particular place, to get a reaction, then I would really look at that as more of a "mechanism" for the "activation of a switch" than an actual switch.

Totally splitting hairs, of course. And it is silly to worry about whether the electrical pulse comes out of the body of the switch or somewhere nearby.

*    *    *    *    *

I was not considering taking the spring hammers (spring + pivot plate) apart since I have never done it. I was thinking something like:
122 caps
116 stems
122 barrels
122 spring hammers
5   stabilizer wires
10 stabilizer tabs
9  screws
2  clips
1  cable (not separated into parts)
3  plates
1  PCB
1  mylar membrane
1  foam mat
1  controller board
3  case shell parts

but I forgot about the feet altogether. 5 parts each on the 122, or is it 6?

So you wouldn't object to me saying that your Model F is not a mechanical keyboard since it doesn't use discrete mechanical switches? Get off this site with your non-mech board! Also all you Topre mechanical wannabes, scram! And you guys with Model M's! 

I reckon it's hard to stick to a strict definition of "mechanical" vs non-mechanical keyboards, since technically ALL keyboards that have moving parts are mechanical, IMHO. A slider sliding in a barrel with some form of resistance is a machine. So even rubberdomes are mechanical. Having discrete switches as a definition doesn't work, because Topre, Model M and Model F. Non-membrane doesn't work because Model M. Non-rubber dome doesn't work because Topre.

The ONLY constraint that I can find that fits all mechanical vs non-mehcanical by the weird GH demarcation is....

Wait for it.....

"Mechanical"^tm keyboards use individual metal springs in their switch mechanisms.

You can adjust the definition to "individual metal coil or cone springs" if you want to exclude scissor switch boards, too.

[divito]

"Mechanical"^tm keyboards use individual metal springs in their switch mechanisms.

+1 (though I'm sure something will be brought up to discount) -- watching thread with interest

[davkol]

Yup. If I remove springs from Cherry MY switches, do they cease to be mechanical?

[Oobly]

Yup. If I remove springs from Cherry MY switches, do they cease to be mechanical?

Nope, not in the real world, but here in GH, yes. Or maybe. They still have the leaf spring, so that fits my description, so no. Unless you use the qualified version that adds "coil or cone springs". Then yes.

As I said before, all switches are mechanical, but for the purposes of what GH in general considers to be a "mechanical" keyboard I think my definition is the closest.

[davkol]

brb googling hydraulic push buttons.

[Oobly]

brb googling hydraulic push buttons.

 

[fohat.digs]

Get off this site with your non-mech board!

I hope that everyone realizes that this is as close as I get to trolling.

[CaptLock]

Try a IBM Model M!

[dorkvader]

Get off this site with your non-mech board!

I hope that everyone realizes that this is as close as I get to trolling.

I think so. It was clear to me at any rate.

"Mechanical"^tm keyboards use individual metal springs in their switch mechanisms.

+1 (though I'm sure something will be brought up to discount) -- watching thread with interest

The other "common" argument that includes keyboards we tend to like and excludes ones we don't is"
"Mechanical"^tm keyboards actuate before bottom out. This excludes some keyboards such as alphameric capacitive and possible keytronic foam&foil, but they are pretty uncommon and not everyone even likes them anyway.

---
One thing to consider: it might be possible to make model F completely modular. Analog stuff is tricky, so maybe not.

[fohat.digs]

So, are we in agreement that ALL keyboards, with the exception of something like this:



are "mechanical keyboards" even something like this:




while the debate continues over what defines a "mechanical switch"?