In 991203 MMDigest Craig Brougher expressed much doubt about the
Kastonome accenting system:

> Now I am wondering how it works, of course.  For instance, how was
> it possible to stack accent holes on top of each other in columns and
> yet get the accent for a specific note on the sheet, without also
> accenting all the other notes in the column, which might coincide
> with some notes playing at the exact same time?
>
> I can imagine that the designer would probably stack unlikely notes
> together, but after that all you can say is, the piano would be
> limited to music that didn't play unlikely notes together.

You really need to examine the rolls and the instrument to understand
this.  The only run of notes that would cause a "theme" perforation to
accent the wrong note, as I said in one of my messages, would be a fast
downward arpeggio of notes.  These would also have to be spaced apart
by the "theme" column spacing on the tracker bar.

Douglas Bush has given us, from an actual instrument, four bass columns
and six treble columns of 9 notes, less 5 at the treble end to give
85 overall, so 9 notes apart.  An arpeggio of this nature must be
virtually unknown in music and even if it weren't, and to avoid chance
occurrences of notes in that same pattern, Kastner only had to adjust
the note timing on the roll suitably by altering the tempo slightly.
(My earlier recollection of five plus five columns of eight notes is
evidently wrong.)

> The next question is how the accents were achieved.  The player stack
> was just an ordinary stack (Autopiano), or so it appears.  That means
> that the "individual accent" is going to be expressed across the entire
> stack at a time and then "bang-bang-bang-bang-bang" down the column of
> unwanted holes as well, even though it was intended for a specific note
> or chord (it would be interesting to hear what would happen during
> rhythmic arpeggios and runs up and down the keys, too).
>
> Possibly the stack was "split."  But the best you can get with a split
> stack is still no more ideal than any other reproducer can manage, and
> the true dynamics of the accents are impossible to achieve.

The stack was not ordinary at all.  It had two suction manifolds.
In an ordinary double-valve stack, the secondary valve operates as
a "changeover" between atmosphere and main (treble or bass) stack
suction.  In the Kastonome, the theme pouch (one per note actuated by
the additional ports in the tracker-bar) operated a second "changeover"
valve inserted in the suction supply to the usual secondary valve,
switching the supply from subdued main suction (lowered by operating
the "Kastonome" switch) to "theme" main suction.  Thus a theme pouch
operating by itself did not actuate the pneumatic.

With normal rolls, the "theme" suction manifold, pouches and valves
were never used.  The system thus provided instantaneous theme power on
any note without any need to delay or advance it as with Aeolians
"Themodist" and similar systems.

I have three or four Kastonome rolls here somewhere, survivors of a box
of 30 obtained in a job lot in the 1960s and swapped for plain rolls
with a collector who had a defunct Kastonome-fitted Grotrian-Steinweg
upright.  He never repaired it and when it was sold it went to a re-
storer who simply converted it to a plain player.  The rolls do turn
up in England quite a bit but they're mostly unexciting Edwardian pops
-- "The Arcadians", Poet & Peasant" -- that kind of thing.

> It is an amazing system, for sure.  This is a real collector's item,
> and I congratulate Inigo for finding it.  I hope that he can get it
> fully operational, once again, but I wouldn't want it for my first
> player piano.

I'd put up with quite a lot to get a Grotrian !

Dan Wilson

 [ Thanks for the explanation, Dan.  It sure seems that the
 [ Kastonome was indeed "a Themodist/Solodant for each note."
 [ I will put a web page for this unique system at the MMD
 [ tech site, http://mmd.foxtail.com/Tech/  -- Robbie