I was well aware of the limitations of using such devices for making
rolls, but was curious nonetheless.  Some of the objections Spencer
Chase mentioned are things that some of us might be willing to live
with, most notably the lack of speed.  A Leabarjan perforator is not
the fastest machine in the world either.  If I had to wait hours to
get copy of a roll that was unavailable anywhere else, I'd be happy
to live with that.

As for the size of the holes and the limitations of the cutter, I'd
imagine that some of the higher-end (and admittedly more expensive)
machines might be able to do the job on all but perhaps the "snake bite"
holes for a Duo-Art roll.

The goal here is not commercial production, but a way for a hobbyist to
either duplicate existing rolls, perhaps leveraging Spencer's scanning
efforts, or create new compositions for our instruments.  I'd sooner
invest $3000 in an admittedly slow but compact "home perforator" than
put solenoid valves in my valuable old instrument to drive it with
e-rolls.  The reason being that I'd prefer to keep my instrument as
original as possible rather than turn it into the equivalent of a "hot
rod".

Whether it use lasers, cutting blades or punches, I keep hoping that
an affordable low volume roll making solution will become available in
the not-too-distant future.  While I applaud all those who continue to
produce rolls commercially, I fear that lack of demand and old age will
keep them from giving us a source, however limited, of titles for the
instruments we own and those yet to be restored.

Ed Chaban