Ringing Forums

I little while ago I proposed 3000 as a target, — Simon Linford

3000 is a lot of peals!

Recent discussions on here suggest that many associations are in a dire state — John de Overa

If you mean that ringing in those associations is in a dire state, then the CC is focussing strategically on how that can be improved through its support for member Associations. If you mean that the Association itself is in a dire state and has become dysfunctional, then the CC could provide support in how to restructure or reinvent itself probably based upon the things that more successful associations have done. It could even recommend setting up a new association. However, at the end of the day, a local association needs local people and all CC representatives and workgroup members are likely already involved with their own local associations, so you can hardly expect them to move to a new area to reboot ringing in that area.

Is it not you that is out of touch with the Council, @Robert Brown? When I read last year's AGM report and attended the AGM, I was really impressed with the level of activity by all the workgroups, with volunteers committing substantial time and effort on things that do benefit the ringing exercise on a tiny budget (a few pence per ringer per year). There was also an encouraging sign that Associations are starting to appoint younger members as CC reps, and this was a key argument that caused a motion to reduce the number of representatives to be lost.

I frequently see the comment "What does it do to help Fred or Freda at our tower?" or "How does it improve the standard of ringing in our area?". These questions miss the point that the CC should and does focus on those things that can't easily or economically be done at a local level, or by a local Association. While the Council is right to have a focus on the importance of recruitment and retention, which is immensely challenging, it can only do this at a strategic level, providing leadership, guidance and resources to support local endeavours. It is also just one of many services it provides.

When we were putting together the Framework for Method Ringing, we were tasked with producing a simple and permissive framework with a goal of avoiding arbitrary rules and value judgements. We sought to find the logical boundaries that define the limits of method ringing, and ensure the framework supports everything within these boundaries.

While two-bell ringing may seem pointless to many of us, it did seem like the logical minimum to be able to define a method. There was also another reason for including it. We tried very hard to think about everything that might be possibly rung in the future to explore method ringing further, and one of these was ringing methods side by side, such as Minor on the front six and Minor on the back six of a twelve arranged to avoid any of the twelve-bell rows being false. This has already been done a few times. Extrapolate further and you might splice methods of different stages together to create your rows. If perhaps part of the composition was to ring Cambridge Royal on twelve while two bells dodge behind, then you need a two bell method to describe the dodging. That needs Cross Two. If you look at Cambridge Two, you can see that it has two bells both ringing Cambridge frontwork.

So we decided that including two and three bell methods in the CCCBR Methods Library does no harm, allows us to properly record the methods reported in past performances, and may well prove useful to ringers in the future.

↪Ian Sterritt That's the same link you posted a couple of weeks ago. Did you mean to post a different one? — John Harrison

I discovered Ian's post had been lurking in a moderation queue for about 3 weeks, so released it. Sorry for the delay and probable duplication.

The most compact description of the ringing would seem to be within the performance report -1234-1234-14.34.14-1234-12,34 (30 characters) — PeterScott

But which could you remember a month later?

Minimus ringers ran out of new methods to ring for which a single extent was possible. They then started exploring methods that comprised multiple extents. Great Massingham TP Minimus is an example. While it is false within each lead, the plain course contains exactly three extents, so is true - making it easy to ring true performances. Methods like Bristol Minimus (now Demi-Bristol Alliance Minimus), which has been rung at least since the 1970s are trickier, since the plain course is false - while containing one extent, it contains multiple rows from more than one other extent. Nevertheless, that can be rung in true performances by varying the hunt bell.

On higher numbers, methods inadvertently false in the plain course were created as link methods in spliced. The methods are generally rung a lead at a time, and in combination with other methods form true peals. The former Methods Committee of the Central Council came under much criticism for introducing a concept of non-method blocks to describe them, when it was much more straightforward to remove the rule that said that methods had to be true in the plain course. The Framework for Method Ringing, implemented in 2019, did just that.

I have approved the post :smile: These forums have the ability to like posts, but a decision was made to turn the feature off. I think is useful - better than having to post just to say I agree.

The first thing I heard her asking someone else was "what's a course?" — Simon Linford

Good question! Not necessarily easy to answer concisely and definitively.

Here are some useful resources. Please share any others you have found:

• Central Council Compositions
• A Handbook of Composition by John Leary
• Method Splicing Part I and Part II by Giles Thompson [If someone has a copy of these, could they scan them so they can be made more widely available - they were self-published and no ISBN, so will be lost otherwise]
• Change Ringing by Wilfred G Wilson chapters 15-20
• Introduction to Composition - A webinar by Mark Davies
• An Introduction to Composing Part 1 - A webinar by John Warboys
• An Introduction to Composing Part 2 - A webinar by John Warboys
• Bellringing and Maths - A webinar by Mark Davies

The challenge to new composers in today's world is that computer programs have been developed that can search for compositions far faster than a human. That does not mean that there is nothing for a new composer to do, but it means that anything truly original is likely to come from some who can come up with a creative idea and have the computer tools or programming knowledge to be able to develop and explore their idea. Many of the principles used by composers in the era before computers, such as the use of false course head groups, have become as useful as doing multiplication with a log book or slide rule when you have a calculator sitting in front of you.

There seems to be some confusion. The video link Tina posted is promoting bell ringing in Spain, not Italy.

W&P is running a £1.59m HTB (Holy Trinity Brompton) experiment in Basingstoke involving four churches, that started in September 2022, including the rings at St Michael (8) and All Saints(10). The leadership team appointed have virtually no experience and the locals are not impressed!

https://anglican.ink/2022/07/21/diocese-of-winchester-receives-1-59-million-in-funding-to-support-church-growth/

Even before the Daily Mail article laid it out, it was clear that Julie is a pathological liar and misled the public about the very large sums of money (£millions) that were and would be raised if ringers rang quarters and peals. The sum she was accused of stealing was small by comparison.

If the methods are renamed, it does not change the historic performances printed in the Ringing World. Clearly those can't be changed. However, it would mean that the methods can be rung again in future without using her name.

The digest is generated completely automatically by the site, so this could only be influenced by changing the information in the original post. I suspect that would result in the summary being cut short even earlier, and it already doesn't show all the methods. It does give you a click through to the original post though, and that is better because you can then click on a method or interest to show you a blue line.

And here is another better one of the old Bow bells:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VOb6hB_lfMI.

Not dated, but the recording is listed in Homochord Records catalogue of 1926.
https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/read/32623773/homochord-1926-british-library-sounds

Some relevant context for possible dates:

• Big Ben in 1890: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iOl5rPP47pA
• First broadcast ringing 1925 (though it is not clear from this whether the BBC have a recording of this, or whether it was played on the Feedback programme): https://ldgcb.org.uk/news/news2014/crowland_radio4.php
• Pre war Bow bells undated: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=13NJdbjhLFI
• Westminster Abbey 1947: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8MhR03ddTSw&list=PL3kG3TM8jFKgMFvPFJcP2Na9KbVP0-8Up

This is just about understanding how to use Ringing Forums, @Peter Sotheran, and is nothing to do with Twitter or anything else. Above the box you type your message in are a number of icons. If you click @ and enter someone's name, it is called a "mention". It sends an email to the person mentioned alerting them to the mention.

Similarly, to upload your photo to the Forum you click on the icon with an upwards arrow, then select the photo from your computer. Once uploaded, it lists it underneath with an insert button so that you can include it where you want in you message - like this:

You can click the Preview button to see how it will look before posting the comment.

Click on the last icon to first upload your photo, @Peter Sotheran then you can select it to show in your message.

It is the case though that similar marks appear lower down on church walls, which is why I said "usual explanation". I agree that sharpening a blade is done flat to a stone, and why use the church anyway rather than spare stone blocks.

The marks are so numerous and deep at Sawston, you do wonder how many hundreds of years of pulling and replacement ropes would be required to make them by ropes attached to bells.

The usual explanation given is the sharpening of weapons or tools.