I have long been aware that piano rolls manufactured by the Atlas
Player Roll Co. of Newark, New Jersey, tend to perform superbly on
single-valve players.  The Atlas brands are Acme (sold by R. H. Macy),
Atlas, Landay, Ray-DiO, Ritz and possibly others.

 [ See http://www.mmdigest.com/Gallery/MMMedia/atlas.html  -- Robbie

It has been well established that double-valve players, with rare
exceptions, are less subject to poor performance on soft playing than
their single-valve counterparts, all other factors being equal (as
they rarely are).  The sad state of most players today amplifies this
difference.  Without going into a lot of detail, it is simply a matter
of tolerances in construction as well as aging characteristics.  At any
rate, it is amazing what a typical single-valve action can do when
playing an Atlas roll!

Over the years I had collected several dozen Atlas-made rolls, none of
which have the usual round, square or flat-sided round perforations.
Instead, all perforations are rectangular, the equivalent of two square
holes together, giving sluggish valves plenty of extra time to perform
their function.  Naturally, fast repetition, the bane of single-valve
systems in general, is impossible.  But the Atlas arrangers had clever
ways of getting around this limitation.  The results are in most
instances delightful.

I concluded that Atlas rolls were made from 1:1 masters controlling
rectangular punches capable of producing single holes with a height
about twice their width.  The advantage of this system is that rolls
could be cut in half the time it takes using a 2:1 master, bringing to
the market a lower-priced roll that performs exceptionally well, and
definitely superior to cheap 1:1 mastered rolls made with conventional
punch-and-die sets.

Well, I then came across an Atlas roll that for a while burst my
bubble.  It is #3715, "Who Wouldn't Be Jealous Of You", a 1929 tune
played by Phil Lynch.  It was made with square punches, evidently in
the same factory, and sounds like its artist was trying demonstrate
the ability of an Atlas roll to produce really fast repetition (on an
instrument up to that task)!

And then there appeared another Atlas oddity, #426, "Tester Roll For
88 Note Pianos".  Its repetition test uses the same elongated perforations
you would expect to find on an Atlas roll -- not much of a challenge to
any player action except when a note is not working at all.  But at the
end of the roll there is a brief musical selection evidently made with
square punches!

The anomalies just described caused a collector friend to conclude
that any Atlas roll made from a 1:1 master was double-punched like many
of the early 88-note rolls were, but using double spacing between
increments instead of half-spacing.  My earlier conviction remains,
however.  The ability to cut good-sounding rolls in half the time is
a cost-cutting feature too important to pass up.

To this day I can find no evidence that any Atlas rolls were ever
double-punched.  A clue lies in the reroll perforations intended for
Duo-Arts at the end of each Atlas roll.  On my two rolls made with
square punches, these perforations are square, with bridging in
between.  On all my others, meaning the vast majority, perforations
for this same purpose are rectangular, also with bridging in between.

Does anyone know for absolute certain how Atlas rolls were made?
I would like to learn more about the history of this company.

Jeffrey R. Wood