>[ Although the holes in the paper are big, the height of the slot
>[ in the tracker bar may be quite tiny:  Richard Vance measures
>[ 0.038 inch slot height in an Aeolian 65-note tracker bar.
>[ -- Robbie

Robbie, I think there's more to this than what's been said.

I've definitely noticed a difference between original A rolls and small
perforation recuts.  If the pouch well is not sealed 100%, and the
instrument is not performing 100%, there is a difference in repetition.
Why did Seeburg stick to the large perforation scales for all their
instruments?

I believe there's also a tolerance issue here, too.  The larger
perforations give a slight advantage in tracking tolerance.

It's true that, if the pneumatic system is operating like new, you
won't notice much of a difference with variation in hole diameters, but
with all variables of the large perforation scale operating at full
potential, there should be some difference.

This makes me want to do some testing!

Brian Smith

 [ I have several theories but I'd rather hear the experienced techs
 [ reply to Brian's questions; they're tough!  There's one thing I'm
 [ sure of, though: in the 1920s the instruments played only new rolls,
 [ so they didn't have problems with recut rolls.  -- Robbie