In yesterday's Digest, Spencer Chase asked for comments concerning
the desirability of reproducing webbing patterns (he calls them
"chaining patterns") when replicating original rolls.  There are
six reasons why this aspect of roll manufacture should be preserved
throughout the replication process:

(1) There is musical information contained in the webbing.  In some
Licensee rolls, for example, the master rolls were originally fabricated
with the perforation lengths corresponding to the actual note lengths,
that is, the lengths played by the pianist at the recording session.
At a later time, some notes were extended for various reasons.  When this
is done, the webbing pattern is interrupted by a slot, clearly indicating
the start of the (artificial) extension.

(2) It often happens that there were perforator errors when the final
production roll was punched.  The most common error is a single over-punch
caused by the failure of the return spring to act soon enough.  Many, if
not most, of these over-punch errors can be spotted by eye by examining
the webbing pattern.  Other, more complicated errors can also be found,
usually by eye.

(3) Modifications to rolls were often made using alternate webbing
patterns.  The most obvious example of this is early Ampico rolls that
were subsequently re-coded for use with the New Ampico.  The new webbing
style is clearly apparent in the crescendos (1B, 5B, 5T, and 1T), and can
also be seen in other places as well.

(4) In some rolls, Licensee rolls among them, there was only one phase
of webbing (punch-skip-skip-punch).  The phase of this webbing provides
a check on the correctness of the scan and perforation process.  In this
case the loss would be particularly egregious.

(5) In many instances, the webbing pattern used by a manufacturer changed
over the course of the years.  The particular pattern allows identifi-
cation of the period and manufacturing branch responsible for the
production.  British Duo-Art rolls are different from American Duo-Art
rolls, for example.

(6) There is no argument whatsoever in favor of destroying the original
webbing.  No "new" pattern is superior to the original pattern in any
way.

Alas, purchasers of recuts don't demand this authenticity and precision.
The techniques exist, but the market isn't there yet, and so the
development of economical methods only proceeds slowly.

I hope this note has been helpful.

Wayne Stahnke