Greetings Readers,  In response to Nicholas' questioning of my opinion
and motivations, I would like to start by stating that I consider the
Duo-Art system (mechanical device together with its software) to be one
of the finest advancements of the previous century.  There have always
been talented individuals, artists and engineers and the Duo-Art as
well as other mechanical musical devices prove this very well.

I understand the Duo-Art very well as I have lived with and loved them
for many years now.  I am constantly amazed at the musical performance
that results from having everything in as close to perfect order as
possible.

This is not due to brilliant engineering.  I recognize brilliant
engineering when I see it.  I am not some 18-year-old kid who believes
that technology was invented last year and do not judge products of the
past, or even ones of today by these standards.

The Duo-Art was an evolution of the Themodist system and an attempt
to produce a full reproducing system with minimal legal troubles in
spite of existing patents.  From the point of view of an easy system to
program and maintain, it falls very short.

I have only heard rumors regarding the engineering of the system and
can not be sure of what I have heard, but the device itself is good
evidence of limited engineering skill applied to its design.  We are
not talking of 18th century engineering -- mechanics and pneumatics
were well understood in the early part of the [20th] century.  They
were state-of-the-art, and there are plenty examples of wonderful
design and manufacture.

The Duo-Art was designed with little regard for what was understood
then.  It was a crude adaptation of previous technology stretched to
the limit, rather like what has become of the Windows operating systems
of today.

This design placed a tremendous burden on the editors, whose job would
have been greatly simplified with a better design.  In addition it
requires virtually perfect operation of all components of the system in
order to produce musical results.  This is not true of other systems
that make use of feedback to obtain consistent results in spite of
inevitable wear of components.

It is unfortunate that the Duo-Art with its excellent theme system,
able to produce accents equal or better than any other system, is also
the most difficult to maintain.

Availability of materials equal in quality to those used originally is
gone or going fast.  This is especially troublesome for the Duo-Art as
it does not take much to put it out of range of producing acceptable
music when materials fail.  Substitutions are especially difficult to
make as the system is not self compensating so we are stuck with using
inferior materials with similar properties and hoping they will last.
All of this contributes to a declining interest in these instruments
which greatly disturbs me.  I would like to see future generations able
to experience these fabulous living relics of the past but there are
too many factors working against them.  When the instruments are not
playing at their peak, they are a mere curiosity and are not likely to
be revered and preserved.

The above concerns are largely responsible for my interest in digital
preservation of the music and the development of systems to allow these
instruments to play from these files.  The more options there are that
might allow this music and these instruments to survive, the better.
They are still being gutted every day and it is just wishful thinking
that enough interest can be maintained to preserve them as the rolls
and the instruments themselves are lost.

Recutting of rolls is a worthy goal but it is not going to continue on
a large scale if there is not even a minimal profit in it.  With fewer
collectors and fewer instruments in good enough condition to allow the
owners to truly appreciate the range and quality of the music, there
will be little demand for music rolls.

I make my scans available to anyone who will use them to produce new
rolls.  I am still amazed at the music that can be produced from a
simple paper roll moving across a tracker bar and would love to share
this experience with others.  It is truly magical.  Unfortunately there
are very few who have found it magical enough to contribute a major
part of their lives to doing whatever they can to preserve this
wonderful musical treasury.  Of the few who have, there are almost as
many styles and approaches to doing so.  I think that we need to stop
criticizing the efforts of others and work together to each do our best
and hope that the combined effort will result in success.

I enjoy listening to my Duo-Art (and Welte, if I had more music for it)
for hours at a time and prefer the music to be as perfect as possible.
I do not enjoy hearing the effects of warped and mistracking paper and
find it more difficult to relax when playing a rare roll that might be
playing well, or at all, for the last time.  I can not afford to have
rolls recut for al the music I want to own nor to continue collecting
rolls that are increasing in value and decreasing in quality.  I also
can not afford a servant (and two pianos) to change the rolls so that
I may enjoy the music without interruption.  I can have all of this
just by spending most of my time borrowing and scanning rolls and
playing them on my computer interfaced pianos.

I can listen to a series of 15 Chopin Nocturnes or several Beethoven
Sonatas or any combination of music without interruption.  Without
having to find the rolls and without fear of damaging them.  Most of
all, I can hear it as it was when the rolls were new and the
instruments in perfect order.  I don't have to make excuses for the
condition of the rolls.

Best regards,
Spencer Chase
Garberville, CA
http://www.spencerserolls.com/

 [ Recording sessions for the Welte-Mignon commenced in 1904; in 1905
 [ the Welte-Mignon Vorsetzer was in full production, accompanied by
 [ a large library of music rolls.  This was several years before the
 [ Duo-Art system was marketed.
 [
 [ The Welte-Mignon control system was designed, in accordance with
 [ good engineering practice, to meet the design goals established by
 [ the firm, namely, to produce a reliable system that would work to
 [ specifications with minimum maintenance.  The design was probably
 [ the first player piano system to consciously utilize negative
 [ feedback (e.g., in the many suction regulators) to assure that the
 [ system continued to perform well in spite of deterioration of the
 [ components.
 [
 [ Inventors Edwin Welte and Karl Bockisch were granted patents in
 [ Europe and USA which were subsequently licensed to competing firms.
 [ See the partial list at http://Pictures/Welte/patents1.html
 [ -- Robbie