Wayne Stahnke made us this generous offer in MMD 97.08.21:
> In order to acquaint readers with this notion, I have prepared a package
> that will allow any subscriber of the Digest to examine a restored master
> roll. This is a valuable exercise; the internal structure of a master
> roll, and the advantages of using it, are best appreciated by examining
> one or more rolls themselves. The equipment required to use the package
> is as follows:
>
> (1) A computer capable of running Windows 3.X or Windows 95,
> (2) The ability to unzip a file,
> (3) A copy of the Ampico roll of Rachmaninoff playing his Prelude
> in C-sharp minor (this must be a roll made in the 1920s, not
> a recut),
> (4) A magnifying glass,
> (5) Sufficient interest and patience on the part of the user to
> invest at least an hour in hole-by-hole examination of the
> paper roll and master roll image.
If someone would lend me the Ampico roll of Rachmaninoff playing his
Prelude in C-sharp minor, in good condition, I will scan the appropriate
portions of the roll, and provide high resolution graphic files of such.
Those files will be added to Wayne's "tutorial package" for members who
don't have the roll.
Thanks all.
Laurent Coray
[ Editor's Note:
[
[ Your editors are in the same boat as Laurent. I'd also like to
[ do the exercise that Wayne suggests (and I know Robbie would too).
[ In his message, Wayne accidentally implied one of my favorite
[ oxymorons. He said that you must have "A copy of the Ampico roll
[ of Rachmaninoff...", but that a recut won't do. I believe that
[ "original copy" is an oxymoron. Sorry Wayne, I couldn't resist ;-)
[
[ How hard are "originals" of the specified roll to find ? Are they
[ common enough that requesting to borrow one is not unreasonable ?
[
[ I'm very excited about Wayne's offer, because I know he has really
[ thought [ out the issues carefully. I'd hate to be the dark while
[ others are discussing this topic!
[
[ Thanks
[ Jody
|