Hello fellow travelers,  I have been following, with great interest
over the last couple of years, the discussions (or exchanges, if that
better fits them) on the subject of transcribing piano paper rolls into
electronic data files.

Doing this is no longer a mere wish but a reality.  This has allowed
me to enjoy a lot of (and continuously, if I so desire) beautiful piano
music when I rev up my 1927 Chickering with Ampico on which is
installed Larry Broadmoore's PowerRoll, using Brandle's WindPlay
program.  My thanks to both of you -- you made my life more enjoyable.

I do not claim to be a expert in the field of piano performing arts,
and I probably could not detect the fine nuances others use to either
approve or discredit a particular performance, whether it is from
rolls, PowerRoll or "live music", as some of the contributors to this
board seem to be capable of; at least that is what I am supposed to
believe.

Neither could I afford to have, store and maintain a large collection
of Ampico rolls of the quality that now reside on CD and files in my
computer!  Neither do I mean to imply that it is not necessary to
strive for "perfection" to obtain the best results, which in this case
is the identical sounding end-product when compared to the roll it
originated from.

In case that an "original" roll is damaged, warped, full of bug holes
and covered with fly specks, bad repair etc., a copy of it in
electronic format could at its best not be any better than the roll
itself, were it not that with special software with which many, if not
all, imperfections can be removed from the final version.  It is
precisely that .MID or .BAR file I want to listen to.

Granted, a paper roll could be made from such a file, but for me that
would not be a priority or desire at all, aside from running out of
physical, suitable space.  One thing I know for sure, such a paper roll
would not be any better than its "mother" electronic file, and in time
would lose out to it.

What we need besides excellent software is a design, its drawings and
specifications, so that those who want to scan their collection of
paper rolls themselves can acquire or build a device that can do so,
rather than having to depend on e few entrepreneurs that can do it for
them.  This would also minimize the vulnerability of this service always
being there as time goes on.

The market for electronic files in whatever format is, relatively
speaking, so small that there is very little chance that any restraint
to widespread availability of a scanner would make those that have one,
and use it to make commercially available files, a rich person.

In my discussions with some, definitely not all, people that have
excellent scanners available to them, it does not seem to me that they
want to keep their "baby" close to the chest, but rather the lack of
time and money (and patience) that is needed to convert, what they see
in front of them, into lines on a piece of paper, even if they have
that talent to do so.

Besides that it would be for them a rather uninteresting phase, as most
of them are accomplished entrepreneurs who inherently have a habit of
loosing interest when they have accomplished what they set out to do
and get completely turned off by what they view as mere drudgery.  This
is not meant as an indictment, but to state what comes along with the
character of the person we call "entrepreneur".

What we absolutely do not need are more so-called designs offered for
sale that no engineer, machinist or accomplished hobbyist can interpret
and where the rules of projection change from page to page, not even
mentioning errors in critical dimensions.

I am building a scanner which will be using the excellent software
designed by Richard Stibbons and where Spencer Chase has built as well
as contributed to the design and improvement of the scanner hardware
and its electronics.  Although my version will not exactly look like
theirs (I have no drawings), my hope is that it will do the same.  And
I have no shame asking them questions that come along for which I get
answers from them.

I believe that those interested in building their own scanner would
gladly pay for, for lack of another word, a "professional design
packet" that would put them in a position to build themselves or have
someone else build a scanner for their own use.

My estimate of cost to generate such a packet could very well be in the
neighborhood of $30K to $35K (300 to 350 hours at $100 per hour), or if
there is a qualified freelancer available the cost would be more like
$15K to $18K With a subscription of 40 people, which I believe is
possible; that would be an outlay of approximately $400 to $900 for the
design packet.  If less people would sign up the cost would of course
change linearly.

Assuming that each subscriber would be responsible for the building
phase an additional $1500 would be required by each for parts and
having some pieces built outside.  Those parts that could be built in
the average home shop should be done there.  So the total cost could
very well run to about $1900 to $2400 for each.

This does not seem to me unacceptable for those that are seriously
interested in scanning their own collection; at least I would be
subscriber number one, paid in advance.

Lots of us plunked down $1495 for Larry Broadmoore's PowerRoll, sight
unseen, but gladly to do so for knowing that Larry would eventually
deliver <dig, dig, Larry!>, and _needing_ and _wanting_ such a device.

Now I am awaiting you to tell me that I am all _nuts!_  If you do so,
which I really don't mind, do not only tell all of us why, but please
give us your method of addressing this need if you believe there to be
one.  In other words be constructive.

For those that believe that this is a good idea and would participate
if some good plan could be worked out, I offer my time and services to
further look into its feasibility as well as its practicality.  Please
let me know via MMD or by direct e-mail.

And with friendly greetings

Albert de Boer