Spencer Chase said [050823 MMDigest]:

> Another issue is the condition of rolls that have survived to the
> present.  British rolls have a few advantages that allow them to
> survive in better condition.  First, the paper is generally better,
> in many cases it is as good as the U.S. Audiographic rolls.  The
> spool flanges were rarely (never maybe) made of metal so they do not
> bend or rust, both of which are can cause major damage to the paper
> as it hits the rusted or warped flange.

Having taken UK rolls to America to be played and vice versa, I'd say
it boils down to the statements: (a) many US rolls were made of very
cheap paper which was not adequately washed in the rolling, especially
in the earlier years; and (b) US Duo-Art pianos play with noticeably
greater "snap", which I would put down to greater suction range
between powers 0 and 15.

So UK rolls play with greater dynamic range in the US and US rolls
sound a bit dim in the UK.  This is not marked, though.  The original
British editors of US-coded rolls used to "dot them up" a bit before
UK issue with single-punch power-1 additions in the accompaniment
coding in particular -- rather like a Recordo!

This is only a dilettante opinion and I expect to be sat on by the
experts.

Dan Wilson, London