I wrote in 020726 MMDigest that I used to cut the ends down on the
take-up spools on players made by Aeolian in the 1960's.  This solved
the problem of not being able to play the XP rolls that Q.R.S. sold.
It worked very well.

I measured the distance between the flanges on the take-up spool of
my Ampico A at the time and made the Aeolian take-up spool flanges the
same.  The Aeolian flanges on the players in that time period were
almost 3/8 inch wider apart.  As the longer rolls played the movement
of the tracker mechanism would cause the paper to telescope to the
edges of the take-up spool.  These rolls would then tear on rewind.
This is one player that changing the geometry of the spool box was
justified.

I would have liked to change the valve box to work like the Ampico
which had no valves but worked very smoothly.  The modern Aeolian
tracker valve box made drastic movements as it shifted the roll left
to right.  One has to wonder why the coin pianos never needed a tracker
system (and it is not because of superior paper or cutting of the
roll).

Some of the players made by Pratt-Read had a pneumatic under the take-up
spool that gradually moved the take-up spool flanges closer together.
Since there were so many different tracking mechanisms then I would
suspect that not all of them were perfect.

If I were still rebuilding 88-note players, I know I would change
the tracking method on many of them to include the better tracking
mechanisms of their competitors.  My personal favorite was the late
style Duo-Art that moved the tracker bar instead of the paper.

Don Teach

 [ So. Calif. technician Randy Cox sometimes modified troublesome
 [ roll mechanisms by attaching the metal take-up spool flanges
 [ with limber springs, so that a wandering music roll wouldn't
 [ be damaged at the take-up spool.  He said he offered to simply
 [ remove the flanges, but his customers were worried that the
 [ paper would "fall off" the spool.  -- Robbie