Somehow the cyber gremlins changed my subject in yesterday's post to
"Art-Echo Rolls Aren't Simial to Ampico".  What the heck is "simial"?
Simian I know (which most of the rolls aren't), but simial?

 [ The simian who edited last night couldn't spell.  ;)  -- Robbie

Oh well.  Robbie asked about terminology, as in: "Seek Evidence of
Artecho, Art-Echo & Art Echo"

I have attached scans of two roll labels.  If I did more digging,
I could probably find other variations as well.  As you can see, QRS
didn't seem settled on the matter so I suppose that Robbie can choose
whichever he likes for MMD purposes without causing any ghosts to
commence rotation.

Also Robbie said, " ... this reproducing system developed by Melville
Clark and installed in the Clark Apollo pianos."

The Art-Echo (you see, I spell it automatically with the hyphen) was
available installed in a great many different makes of piano under the
name Art-Echo (or Artecho or Art Echo).  In Emerson, Lindeman and
A. B. Chase pianos it was called "The Celco Reproducing Medium".  In
Wurlitzer pianos, after Wurlitzer acquired the rights, it was called
"Apollo".

The Melville Clark Apollo was generally something different entirely.

When I see a Melville Clark piano bearing the name "Apollo", I
generally expect either an 88-65-wide 88 roll playing foot pumped
player, the standard 88-note Melville Clark player, the Solo-Art Apollo
or the Apollo X mechanism.  The last thing I would expect to find is an
Art-Echo mechanism, although nothing is impossible of course.

I learn something new every day it seems.

Dean Randall

 [ Thanks for the images, Dean.  I'm planning a web page now to gather
 [ (1) the physical evidence and (2) the arguments.  The current phase
 [ is evidence of spelling, and who used which spelling.  Which piano
 [ brands called the system "Art-Echo"?  I'd like to see photos of
 [ advertisments, etc.   -- Robbie