[ Editors note:
 [
 [ I rejected a letter from Douglas Henderson which reiterated again his
 [ views about reproducing pianos, and I suggested that instead he might
 [ write on the theme, "The Duo-Art is a Themodist with a mechanized
 [ operator."  The text following is extracted and edited from a much
 [ longer letter which he transmitted to MMD, and independently to many
 [ MMD subscribers.
 [
 [ Robbie

The Duo-Art was just a robotic Pianolist, and if you read the writings of
White, Grew, Newman and others of the time -- all authors on the subject
when "hand-played" and/or "expression rolls" were being superimposed upon
the public -- their views were quite similar to mine.

The fact is, the Duo-Art is just an _additive_ to the lever-control
system of the earlier electric Pianola design, a Theme-Accompaniment
lever-controlled player that Aeolian developed but never fully marketed.

Early Duo-Art rolls were made from running pushup players with Metrostyle
65-88 rolls (with the tempi usually not followed and/or the printed
dynamics) and the later ones were graph paper jobs.  In between, it was a
mix of arranging and tweaking the jerky rolls that came from the Aeolian
vibrating-pneumatic 'recording' machine, developed in the 1890's and used
for a few 58-Note 'artist playback' demonstrations (which are documented).
As time when on, the industry made rolls they thought would "sell the
piano", and that was pretty much "it".

Had not WW1 begun Aeolian probably wouldn't have 'rushed' the Duo-Art
into the marketplace to fill the void being left by Welte in Pough-
keepsie, NY.  Remember, American Welte was a rival, especially with the
German Welte connection to Hamburg Steinway, and the 1910 Aeolian-
Steinway contract specifically mentioned "lever controlled players" (not
"reproducing"/auto. expression players, of which the Duo-Art became one
with the added-on accordion pneumatics).  Welte was mentioned by name in
regard to Steinway not selling them any more pianos for electric player
installations, in the States.

It shouldn't take much reasoning to realize that if you put on a set of
earplugs and a blindfold, your manipulation of the Pianola levers would be
"less-than-satisfactory" on many pianos, and differing on all.  I used to
call a Duo-Art "Helen Keller at the Pianola" on our museum tours, for
that's what a roll-controlled expression system really is.

The solution -- beyond scoring special rolls for demonstration pianos
(which I mentioned before) -- is to make "safe" commercial arrangements
that don't go too soft (for the sake of the valves) and don't go too
loud (for the sake of the hammers) and *narrow the playing range.*

This ends up as "background music" -- and after you've played 3 or 4
rolls, the same "gray range" is reached on most selections, usually laden
with excessive sustaining pedal that the artist never used.

What's so complicated here?

This isn't nuclear power or a NASA space flight!  It's a jury-rig
mechanism, with genuine musical capabilities, which never, on the old
rolls, duplicated what an artist played.  The rolls ran the same hand
controls, and 90% of the time less-effectively than a Pianolist could.

I'm tired of all this "legacy" and "there's-the-artist" hooey.  This has
always been an arranged-music medium whether the rolls were truly
hand-played or not.  The false statements and pseudo-science is being
uttered by those with a financial stake in maintaining the old
advertising mythology, or by those who don't know better.

Aren't you going to run yesterday's posting??  (Let the chips fall
where they may.)   [No.]

Regards,
(signed) Douglas

P.S.:  As to (quote) 'violently disagreeing' with the "reproduction of
dead pianists" ... knowing *how they sound* from audio, I have a right to
complain.  Hearing a Milne roll being hawked on MIDI or by a roll expert
as "That's George Gershwin playing" really offends me.  I guess my
problem is that I like music more than roll labels, and those who
rewrite history without *listening to music* from all possible sources.

 [ This is the last of this topic to be published.  Those who wish the
 [ full text of his letter, or who wish to communicate further, may
 [ write to Douglas Henderson at <artcraft@wiscasset.net>. -- Robbie