Two entries in the 6 Aug MMD seemed to me to capture the issues regarding
the preservation of mechanical music.  I agree 100% with D. L. Bullock's
position on the many different people and approaches, and that there is
little to no money to be made in the preservation.  Perhaps a few will
make some money producing copies, but no one is going to get rich doing
so.  He is right that there a lot of us with ideas and working systems,
but there is very little coordination of efforts.  He is also right that
if we don't get off our collective duffs the original material is going
to deteriorate beyond reasonable recovery.

Spencer Chase is one of many who have worked on the preservation problem.
He is right on the mark when he says "I would like to see ... a coopera-
tion among those involved in these efforts.  It would be a large enough
project without duplication of effort and may never get done if each
individual works on his or her own."  Well said.

I agree with comments that certain individuals don't want to share their
efforts, but the ones I have talked with have little reservation about
sharing their ideas and experiences.

Here is a proposal:

1.  Agree to a standard format for recording the material.  Several
people (and companies) have formats that may be satisfactory.  This
standard must be able to handle any direct mechanical media, and should
include recording images, such as printed words.  It should also be
"evolve-able".  We would create a committee, maybe a panel of acceptable
volunteers, to propose a standard and kick it around among us interested
people for comment.  After some reasonable (but short!) time we would
publish the standard.

Porting the output of the standard format to copying systems is outside
the scope of this proposal.

2.  Set up a forum where we can present and discuss our ideas and
experiences.  It is essential that we start with the position that there
are no dumb ideas, and that personal attacks are not allowed.  I suggest
it be done within MMD so a filter is in place.  Uninhibited chat sessions
can quickly degenerate.

3.  After the ideas gel a bit, define an approach to the mechanics of
recording the original media.  Paper rolls seem to be the most urgent
to record at this time, so that would likely be the first project.

4.  Create a coordinating entity (individual or committee) to direct
development of hardware, depending on the interests, resources, etc. of
those who want to participate in the project.  Perhaps we would even have
some money or equipment that would be available.  Rather than having an
individual trying to do the whole project, we could divide it into tasks,
with well-defined interfaces.

5.  At the completion of the project, document it so that the reader can
be built by those with the appropriate skills.

6.  Create an archive.  With backups, of course.  Anyone should be able
to request copies of material for a reasonable fee.  Maybe there could be
"royalties" for those contributors who aren't completely altruistic.

By far the most important part of this proposal, in my opinion, is
item 1.  There are obviously be many ways to create a reader, and I'm
sure that someone will do it differently than I would.  But having
something that can be built and used by many is also important.
Second in importance is item 6.

What do you think, fellow MMDers?  Are these ideas we can build on?

Bob Billings