Hello there: I want to add to Bruce Grimes' letter to MMD about
recutting Duo-Art rolls.  First, I want to say that recutters who put
in a huge "snakebite" perforation which consists of two adjacent holes
on the tracker bar are not accurately recutting the rolls.  I am not
going to say the results are 100% unsatisfactory, but it just is not
right.

I want to mention that I have an original Artrio-Angelus test roll with
an interesting test.  I am not an expert with this system, but it does
use the Themodist snakebite perforations.  As a matter of fact, it is
well known that Aeolian made the rolls for this system, which were then
sold as Angelus rolls without the Aeolian name appearing anywhere.

The test I am referring to shows how a single snakebite (two tiny
side-by-side holes) accents a chord.  After this, the test is repeated
but now the snakebite is doubled; that is to say, one appears
immediately after another.  The test roll states that this accent must
be louder than the first test.

Now, I will admit that this test does not appear on any Duo-Art test
rolls, but considering the extra expense Aeolian went through to make
those adjustable solid brass upper valve seats on the primary valve box
(immediately to the left of the spool box) and that the whole idea of
the snakebite perfs are to create accents that have a finer timing
"resolution" than the conventional note holes, it cannot be argued that
Aeolian went through all this trouble for something that would not make
a difference, or that they were stupid to think it would make a
difference.

I also would like to point out that the only test roll I have ever seen
recut for the Duo-Art is clearly marked "Test Roll #3", and it came out
after 1925, when Aeolian changed the size of the note pneumatics.  Much
rarer is the roll called "1921 Electric Duo-Art Tester" which I believe
is "Test Roll #2".  The chord tests are different from the familiar #3
roll.

The rarest Test Roll of all is the one before this, which I believe
is "Test Roll #1".  My friend has the only copy I know of or have even
heard of.  I examined it, and the chord tests are different from any
other.  I believe this is the Test Roll that was used from the
introduction of the Duo-Art in 1913 to 1920, when Roll #2 was issued.

I think it is unfortunate that not only have these two Test Rolls never
been recut to my knowledge, but that they are virtually unknown to the
vast majority of enthusiasts in this field.

Randolph Herr