First of all, I want to thank everyone who has responded to my question
concerning the demand for mechanical music instruments. Many people have
written astute, well thought-out comments. I plan to add my own comments
in a few days.
John Tuttle wrote:
> What I think a lot of the members of this group fail to realize when
> accumulating information or presenting opinions is the fact that the
> vast majority are deeply involved in the hobby/business of these
> instruments and the viewpoints of the average person are not addressed.
> My point is that I believe the results of Scott's survey are heavily
> biased and do not represent the viewpoints of the people that really
> count; the tens of thousands of player piano owners.
After re-reading Scott Currier's original post, I don't believe he
was trying to conduct a scientific survey on the subject; he was just
interested in hearing what other people think.
John Tuttle's survey shows signs of bias, or the possibility of skewed
results. The survey consists of one open-ended question. How will the
results be statistically analyzed? What is an "average" player piano
owner? What criteria were used to define this average? Why were MMD
subscribers eliminated from the average?
People with Internet access are the only ones who can respond to John's
survey. Many player piano owners do not have Internet access, or do
not own a computer! These "average" people have automatically been
eliminated from the survey, even though their opinions are valuable, too.
It is one thing to ask for other people's opinions; it is another thing
to infer statistically valid conclusions based on these collected
opinions. The 600 or so MMD subscribers do not need to come to ONE
definitive conclusion on every issue, whether it be solenoid players,
glue, or the value of mechanical music instruments. There is ample
room for more than one point of view.