Talk:Piano roll

	Music portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Musical Instruments, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of musical instruments on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Musical InstrumentsWikipedia:WikiProject Musical InstrumentsTemplate:WikiProject Musical Instrumentsmusical instruments articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Prokofiev

There's a few youtubes that claim to be piano rolls done by Prokofiev, some of him playing his own music. Does anyone know of any sources that say whether or not they're real? Should he be added to the list of composers whose works are recorded on a piano roll?

REGULAR-NORMAL (talk) 03:56, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Prokofiev really did record piano rolls for the Aeolian Company's Duo-Art system. See their music sales catalogues generally for details. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Undergroundpianola (talk • contribs) 11:48, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

merge

I agree with the merge sentiment. -- Austin Murphy 16:53, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Piano Rolls, as the name implies, are specific to player pianos. The information in the Piano roll article is not relevent to Music Rolls in general as these are used on many other different types of instrument, (e.g. organs). While the Music Roll article does need to be expanded, the information that can go into it is not the same as that for Piano Roll. PaulJones 10:47, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi PaulJones, how do you feel about merging Piano roll into Music roll? -- Austin Murphy 18:03, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If they had to merge, I would be happier with piano roll going into Music roll. However, I think that there is enough difference to maintain two seperate articles. Being related, they should reference each other though. PaulJones 09:48, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose proposed merge. Both are legitmate subjects, related but not the same. The stubby "music roll" article can use expansion. -- Infrogmation 18:40, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral. I doubt that the music roll article will be expanded unless it is merged with piano roll. My guess is that those interested in music rolls will not care enough to expand the article with other uses of the music roll unless it is dominated by piano rolls. But I could be wrong. For now I think it's fine as a stub. Oicumayberight 01:57, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agree If there is any question for its use for other instruments (such as the organ) than simply specify keyed instruments. Piano is after all the primary instrument for this technology

Question Can anyone explain what differentiates a Piano Roll from a Music Roll? -- Austin Murphy 16:11, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Music roll is the generic term, while piano roll is specifically for a roll used on a player piano. Many other types of instrument, e.g. organs and orchestrions can also be played by roll. Most of the history and discussion relating to piano rolls has no relevence to rolls used on other instruments. PaulJones 10:59, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Piano roll view

Today, "piano roll" also means a special view to sequencer tracks (e.g. in Rosegarden) where your musical events are displayed in a matrix rather than in a score. I would love to deliver a synopsis of an original Rachmaninov piano roll (where to find a scan?) and a screenshot of Rosegarden (GPL). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.60.27.0 (talk) 10:35, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Roll-up Pianos vs Piano Rolls

Can we mention that piano rolls (rolls of music for player pianos) are different from roll-up pianos and redirect to the piano article in general. Also roll-up pianos at least deserve a mention on the piano page. This is a roll-up piano http://www.buyrolluppiano.com/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.184.182.247 (talk) 03:02, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Piano rolls still made?

the article says piano rolls stopped being made in 2009. the reference for this suggests qrs stopped making them in 2009. yet the QRS website still lists many titles available for sale, and says they are the last maker of them. can someone clarify this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.87.143.3 (talk) 22:22, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

QRS are still making music rolls. The amount of music the market demands each year has sharply fallen in the past couple of decades so the machinery is only run intermittently in order to replenish warehouse stocks. In their heyday machinery was run 24-7. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Undergroundpianola (talk • contribs) 11:52, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reproducing rolls - actual performances?

Because of the secrecy of the roll makers' methods, the difficulty in actually capturing a performance mechanically or electro-mechanically, the acknowledged post-editing of the produced master roll, and the obvious advertising hype ("The Master's Fingers on Your Piano"), it's not incorrect to wonder if any of the reproducing rolls actually capture the performances of the artists whose names appear on the rolls. Similarly, there is the lesser issue of the provenance of early disc or cylinder audio recordings by famous instrumental performers--was it really that famous name, or was it a stand-in, playing for that disc recording?

It is indeed possible, as demonstrated by Douglas Henderson of ARTCRAFT music rolls, and possibly others, for an expert using a Leabarjan hand-operated music roll punch to produce a "reproducing" roll that imitates very well the performance of an audio recording of piano music.

Is anyone aware of any published studies comparing the acoustic and piano-roll performances attributed to individual artists? Or studies that have sought out and evaluated business records from makers of piano rolls and acoustic records, to discover whether or not the artists themselves lent anything more than their famous names to the product? Snezzy (talk) 13:38, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Douglas Henderson's claims are purely extensive diatribes of self-professed self-generated self-serving advertorial that do not stand up to scrutiny whether factual or musical. They are based on false assertions and logical fallacies none of which bears up under research or examination.

There are CDs available of comparisons between acoustic and electrical audio recordings and their contemporary piano-roll counterpart recordings. Plenty material may now be compared via YouTube for free.

To assert that there was "roll maker's secrecy" is nonsense and ignores reality. Most manufacturers said precisely how they captured recordings in their own materials and showed the machinery in photographs. Surviving patents (available online) and physical machinery (viewable in several museums) and personal recollections of recording artistes and recording employees extensively attest to the rest all of which have been published. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Undergroundpianola (talk • contribs) 12:01, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Illustrations

This article would be improved by more illustrations. There are a number of illustrated advertisements at http://www.pianola.org/history/history_pianoplayers.cfm, which are more than 100 years old (as shown in the captions). The copyright, if any, on them has therefore long expired and they are in the public domain. I suggest that use of one or more such illustrations should be included with this article to better illustrate the discussion. PraeceptorIP (talk) 15:54, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

George Antheil should be mentioned

--User:Haraldmmueller 07:44, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]