I didn't respond to Albert de Boer's question about non-reproducing
Duo-Arts (except with a crack that they're common; I have a 1927 one
here...) because I thought most MMDigesters would have more info than
me.

The perpetrator of this ill-usage was, I am sorry to say, none other
than the copyright holder, Aeolian-American Corporation, in the middle
of their ill-fated attempt to break back into the player market at too
low a level to be successful.

The players were appallingly made and when I showed interest in one
in a London showroom and said I was familiar with players from visiting
Mary Belton's Original Pianola Shop in Brighton, the manager offered me
consultancy rates to come in and repair the remainder of the stock
which they hadn't been able to get going.  Since the problem was
evidently warping of the stacks, thanks to use of kiln-seasoned wood
in a humid climate, I declined.

If you look in the Bowers Encyclopaedia, you will even see an ad for
the offending instrument: a Hardman Peck Duo-Art. It was nothing more
than a slightly plushier version of their 88-note, sorry, 80-note
console.

Why on earth Aeolian-American Corp. should imagine that this name,
known only to people who would be offended at this use of it, would
help to sell their consoles, is a total mystery. I just hope that one
day one of those folk will stumble over this Digest and give us all
the lowdown on that whole sorry episode.

Obviously this wasn't an idea that worked, or more of us would know
about it, and I think the name Duo-Art was only used for a year or so,
around 1964.  Sad, very sad, because I almost honour Aeolian-American
for the attempt. It gave us post-WW2 roll boxes emblazoned AEOLIAN !
In England at least, that's still a name to conjure with.

Dan Wilson, London