Interesting article!  No matter what field of collectibles that
someone engages in, these kinds of issues will surface.  I have been
collecting antique musical related items for over 40 years and if
there is one thing that I have learned, it is to go easy on being
critical or elitist.  In many cases, even if someone does not restore
an instrument, they may have saved it for future generations (except
for the idiot who used white glue to rebuild an expression system on
a Mason Ampico -- don't ask!).

From my experience, someone will always own instruments nicer than
mine and someone will always own instruments in worse condition.
Unfortunately, pneumatic systems are very expensive to rebuild and
the days are long gone when a simple patch or new hosing will solve
an instrument's problems.  Today, we are dealing more often with major
problems in the piano itself.

On the other end, the "law of diminishing returns" will begin to apply
at some point.  I want my instruments to play correctly but are they
new?  No!  What are you willing to live with and what can you afford?
Those are issues that we all have to face and solve for ourselves.

Years ago, when I was starting to collect, an antique dealer told me,
"Buy the best that you can afford to buy and enjoy it.  You can always
trade up."  This is something that I have done with my phonographs
and pianos over the years.  Unless we have had substantial financial
reserves, we have all been bottom feeders at some point.  Sometimes,
those bottom feeder pianos have been the start of collections and
brought more fun and joy into a family's life than the very finest
reproducing piano.

The most important thing is that people enjoy the instruments that
they own and appreciate them.  These machines are all old.  They all
need work and they need to be maintained.  None of this is cheap and
it is an issue to find experts locally for instruments especially
with reproducing systems.  Contrary to popularly held beliefs by some
of us, most techs do not work on many reproducers as opposed to 88-note
players.  A reproducer is far more fussy and less forgiving plus,
I believe, there is an art in adjusting each of the respective systems.

It still think that it is sad every time an intact player is gutted and
or sent to the dump.  It means that there is one less instrument which
could have been a candidate for new rolls.

Randy Hammond