There is a considerable difference between the giving of mechanical
music devices and related material to a recognized museum, whose
purpose, one supposes, is to display same and provide access to it,
as is certainly the case with the many fine organizations mentioned
from time to time in the MMD, as opposed to a more generic university
or other school.

What we (Tom Lear, Terry Smythe and others) are cautioning, is donating
to a university or other "site" of learning on the premise that they
will not only be delighted to get, but will take steps to preserve and
make available.  The University of Maryland is one of the more admired
schools in the country, from what I am able to determine, and its
proximity to the nation's capitol is also a definite plus.  Further,
in the early days of the 1970s decade, there was an active music
facility there, captained by a professional pianist, who ultimately
mounted a well-regarded piano competition.  It may still be active, of
that I am not sure.  However, the donation of the piano archive doesn't
seem to have affected this entity, despite the historic nature of the
collection.

Until recently it was lodged on the 3rd floor of the Library, and had
only certain visiting hours, needing to be advised in advance.  Despite
the acquisition of one of Wayne Stahnke's Boesendorfer SE-290 "Imperial"
concert grands, little attention has been paid to the roll portion of
the collection, other than sporadic acceptance of (misguided)
donations.  It took a fairly long time for them to assess and make
available (again on advance notice) the Davis-Howe collection of
material related to roll recording assembled by Richard Howe.  They
still "hold their noses" to my way of thinking about the whole business
of rolls being documents of historic importance.  "Can't compare to
disc recordings," even those dim 78's from the acoustic period.

Finally, they have resisted all suggestions as to acquisition of
properly-adjusted reproducing pianos, and turned down Tom Steuer's
Tushinsky Vorsetzer, offered for sale by his widow some months ago,
which would have solved all their problems, at least for the three
principal modes: Duo-Art, Ampico and Welte.  However, I have to
acknowledge that Ron Sanchez of the Player Piano Co. in L.A. advised
me against acquiring it, stating that he felt it never worked
satisfactorily.  I had offered to pay some of the cost, in conjunction
with the Library's acquisition.  Still, it would have provided at least
SOME idea of a given roll's worth, in my opinion.

They have since created a new "home" for the collection, which I have
yet to visit, being persona non grata there in terms of my attempts
to recover my personal Duo-Art collection some time ago.  They invoked
"laches" (a legal term referring to the time frame, the archive having
been donated in 1977, and my request made nearly 20 years later).  In
general, I feel that their position is "we have the rolls, discs, tapes,
sheet music etc.  If you want to see any of this, come here.  We can't
and won't bother with long distance."  Thus their refusal to lend the
rolls for copying, which should be clear to anyone even remotely
connected with the rolls, is perfectly safe and indeed does not subject
the roll to even the pressure of a single playing.  True
"dog-in-the-manger", without doubt.

Finally, it took much complaining to get them to acknowledge that
the original International Piano Library (IPL) was my inspiration in
Cleveland in 1965.  They mention it now in their publication, but have
declined to put me on their mailing list.  I had to "beg" the former
director for a copy of the present one at the time.  I hope this
recounting will make any of you who are puzzling over what to do with
your collection, once you've departed, think twice.  Better to simply
sell it off on eBay or mention its availability  on the MMD.  This way
at least it will be appreciated and used.

Albert M. Petrak, Founder
The Reproducing Piano Roll Foundation