Jody,

I also have avoided buying the Gershwin Volume II CD for the same
reasons Spencer so clearly articulated however strongly.

My main objection is the use of the word "restored" on the liner notes
of Volume I.  I can't help but think that this was a veiled attempt to
put the work into the same league as Thomas Stockham's restorations of
Caruso's mechanical phonograph recordings.  At least Stockham was using
recognized digital signal processing science to remove mechanical horn
distortions.  My question to Wodehouse is what needed "restoring"?
Should I consider running VisiCalc on an IBM-PC running an Apple][
emulator a "restoration"?

I won't comment on the quality of the recording, but I think Wodehouse
did us all a disfavor by implying that the Disklavier miraculously
resurrected the "Ghost of Gershwin" while the original pneumatic
instrument for which the rolls were engineered could not.

JMHO,

-Ed