Ringing Forums

Not entirely sure, but probably the best outcome is not to have anything to do with religion itself.

'The church would have few if any ringers or musicians for its goings on if only churchy people were allowed. I remember, a large number of years ago, the cathedral organist of an RC cathedral always rushing off for a cigarette or several once the sermon started (a verger, or similar, would alert him once it seemed the flow of words was about to dry up). For me, having spent many years in church music, and having started with some very slight semblance of going along with their faith, have now none at all. Mercifully, as far as church music is concerned I have for the pas few years run the music at a place which has no clergy, but entirely BCP and fitting music with an entirely auditioned choir. There are no sermons.

Yes, that did seem, in the past to be the case.

I used to be a member of some associaitons/guilds, but not for many years now. The 'despair' makes, often, the prospect of going anywhere in this locality uninviting, as a result I slighty know (or, perhaps, might recognise in context) some ringers around here, but very few. Others have come and gone.

My impression is that the practice situation is the old, all comers (or, in fact very few) model. I do not know in which association or guild I live - even seven or so years ago (the last time I went rinigng) such things did not seem relevant. From this location, I have no idea where there might be any enticing ringing.

Yes, mine was an entirely personal view of that which I have witnessed. Until about seven years ago, until I relinquished a DofMusic role at some religious place, I would occasionally go up to join in ringing, after finishing some organ practice, and before 9pm. In general the standard of ringing was awful - and there seemed to be no useful ambition*. The impression I had was that, while there were occasionally some learners, some did not wish to learn. It is this which seeded the despair. Further afield (or, at least, as far as I might care to drive), things seem similar - so one heistates to use the petrol.

When I started to ring, there was no tolerance of wasting time - one had to be alert even if not actually ringing, and as a learner striking had to be the sine qua non, though, of course, method ringing came very soon after. IIRC, the expectation was that at least one new method would be learnt offline before every practice. This, to my mind, gave a purpose to going there at all - part from the proximity of some excellent pubs, mostly mercifully devoid of any kind of music!

* - any discernible ambition felt as though the aim was to crash through something trivial and that was sufficient.

One despairs. If there is not the quest for advanced methods (used in practice through peals, and, crucially way from bells at all, i.e. construction, etc.) then how can the activity be properly sustained as a living art? Peals are the melting pot and the draw for advances.

In my present location, there is, it seems, nothing more than occasional quarter peals (of mainly <= 7). Quarter peals have always felt to me to be over before they have begun - and do not, in general, provide the aspiring ringer to enhance their striking, for example. Nothing to sustain the mind there - and even less to wish to attend a practice night with even lower standards.

Whilst I have been away from ringing it seems that there have been several augmentations to 12 or more. That is a stirring thought - but the level of local ringing seems totally to ignore the possibilities of advancement (in methods and in performance). 'Leaders' in these places appear utterly to be incapable of seizing the possibility of seeding aspiration in their bands - even if they themselves have a sense of such aspiration. A chasm appears to exist. Perhaps there is a line of demarcation between crashing about in 'practices' and more adequately demanding ringing. (Coupled to thiis is the deleterious effect of too much non-ringing in practices: ages spent sitting around doing nothing.)

[Personally, I've been thinking, recently, of resuming ringing - but it seems there would be no point.]

I'd have thought the main reason to ring a peal would be in the devising of a new complex method, and in devising a suitable composition in it.
It is, of course, not a statutory matter to publish the fact of a successful peal, nor to advertise it in the first place. Though I never kept records of peals I was in beyond the first few years, I'm not sure I could recall if any were not published. That aspect of it never seemed to matter.

Absolutely agree.

P.S. I didn't wish to high-jack a debate for the ringing community, just to adduce a process used in relation to to other large and valuable assets to be found in churches of various types.

It is interesting that many instruments of small specification are indeed being transported to the continent. Frequently these will be of Victorian provenance from non-conformist buildings.

Yes.

I understand, though, that most cases of British organs going to continental churches are cases where the previous instrument was failing in some way for another, and the authorities sourced an instrument (from this landmass) which they felt suited them, had a decent provenance, and represented a tradition of organ building separate from that in their own nation.

It does, certainly, seem that ringing in Anglican churches is now realising a considerable threat.

Are there any robust systems, working together and continuously with the CofE authorities, and actively aligned with any organisations looking for rings of bells? It may be that some preservation, albeit in different locations, might save bells themselves.

It seems, from the periphery, that recruitment and retention of practitioners of the art is extremely piecemeal. I hope I will be proved wrong; however, the comparison with, say, 50 or even 30 years ago appears stark.

When I started ringing I had also been studying organ for some time. The number of organs in decent repair was high, and churches were mostly happy to have them played. The same seemed to me to be generally true for bells. Numbers of ab initio recruits, and towers where there were sufficient adept ringers and ringing teachers abounded.

In the interim, for the former, a number of factors have caused a semi-catastrophe in that the lack of support for proper services and choirs caused many (both congregants and musicians) to desert the church as a whole. 'Modern' practices arose during the 1950s and 1960s, prompted by a mis-directed view of what would stimulate increases in congregational numbers. The upshot being, allied with other factors, to drive many previously supportive individuals away from churches. For music, the misplaced addition of carpets, etc., further mitigated strongly against anyone wanting to make music in the places. (Carpet being so dampening to the acoustic as to make performance both difficult and unrewarding.)

I have noticed, in several places where enthusiasm for reordering has driven away stalwarts of the church, especially choirs, whose membership often includes those who simultaneously provide much of the person-power to make things happen in the building, who stand for PCC membership, become churchwardens, sacristans, vergers, sides-people, provision of refreshments, running fundraising events, and whom are often the largest financial contributors to the church. Once driven away, they seldom return.

The organ (not choral) world has responded by setting up methods to relocate instruments to places where they will be welcome. Initially, this was to transplant them to other, more welcoming, churches - though, often, the physical process would involved not only tonal alterations to fit the new space, but layout changes, too. More recently - over several years - instruments from this nation are snapped up by church overseas, particularly in Benelux and France. Enquirers from those places are astounded at how many neglected but easily refurbished instruments are available at relatively low cost. They cannot understand the mentality of British church custodians who voluntarily give up sought after elements of heritage. There are, in the organ world, a few builders who will actively seek redundant instruments, refurbish them, and make contact with others who wish to acquire them. These individuals perform a fine service to the presence of the 'English heritage' of instruments - even if the instruments end up in another nation. However, they are few in number, and have to sustain their main work. They enable preservation of a tradition.

It seems that bells may go the same way. Is there a similar body to that which I have described above which can act, at least, as a clearing point? Keeping a watching brief for wherever redundant rings may find a new home, and preferably an active notification policy for what and where is available, is needed. As has been noted, though, the trend for increased physical comfort on the part of congregations (and clergy) by using secular or other edifices supplied, often, with the sort of heating which produces wild changes of humidity and temperature must provide both bells, ringers, musicians, and instruments with an almost intractable problem for preservation. The organ world has such entities as BIOS (British Institute of Organ Studies) which, inter alia, has a variety of volunteers who assess and document instruments in well-known and also obscure buildings. Those especially worth preservation are provided with various certifications of aspects of special interest and significance. These, in the Anglican sense, can make destruction, etc., less easy as DACs take the certificate into account. (Perhaps some other denominations also have such bodies, but I do not know.) Dioceses, too, have, a competent adviser to the DAC, usually named as Diocesan Organ Adviser - and these individuals report to the DAC as to whether an instrument should be enabled for removal or should be maintained/rebuilt. Thus there exists at least some protection.

Perhaps there is some sharing of ideas between ringers and those organists and enthusiasts working for preservation in their own fields. I hope so - otherwise such perhaps might be instituted and coordinated.

Indeed. If I said or implied that I used to memorise the grid it was inadvertant. The thing was to memorise the PN in its purest form, and to use it 'in action' to derive a moving 'window' of four or so rows as one went along. Of course, as a peal, for exmaple, progresses the visual repetition would ease the process - but that is my 'looking back' on the process from the present day. From what I recall, it was an initial challenge to enjoy while ringing.

(I suspect such visualisation usages are most used by those who tend to think visually in normal life.)

Yes, I used a PN grid - back in the days when I was an active ringer. It was the principal one of several systems which one would use dependent on what else was going on at the time. To answer the OP's questions, naturally on a personal basis, the process I used was to memorise the place notation(s) in their purest form (e.g. for a method like Yorkshire, the minimal form would be a half-lead, for Bristol 8 a quarter lead). So it was straighforward then to rotate them in the mind. The 'visual' part of it then would appear, and this again is a personal phenomenon, like a highlit 'window' of a few rolling rows of the grid, with the next row in the centre, and with a superimposed onto a larger set of rows, 'greyed' out. (That, I should think, is an idiosyncratic manifestation of using the grid: no doubt everyone would evolve their own version.)

I have not, nor ever had, any idea of how this came about, it just seemed to emerge possibly because I was too lazy to want to memorise more than the absolute minimum. It's also possible that it was prompted by being given a PN over the 'phone, on several occasions, relatively shortly prior to a peal of whatever it might be - necessity being the mother of unconscious invention. As, mentioned above, though, it's as well to have, as it were, several systems available in case one loses track of whichever one has been using. If they are 'there' in the mind, then swapping them in necessity shouldn't be a great problem.

Definitely not, it would be a disgrace to include ringers who may well (as in the general population) be atheists.

I've been away from ringing for some years now, but recall ringing on higher numbers (mainly 12), with 'closed handstrokes' - whereby there is not a small gap left bewteen the start fo every other row. This could, over a peal or more, make a small difference to the total peal length. (I have the impression, from somewhere, that this practice may have died out a little.)

Furthermore, compositions for peals on seven would be 5040 rows to obtain the 'extent', and no more because that would necessarily make the peal 'false', by means of repetition. On higher numbers it becomes easier to devise compositions which tend towards 5000 rows.

With compositions for odd numbers of bells which actually produce the changes, it is 'usual' to provide an n+1 bell (usually the heaviest) in each row. Thus, a peal of triples (i.e. seven bells actually changing in each row) would have eight bells ringing, with the heaviest not participating in the changes but always sounding (and striking) at the end of each row. (Personally, for me, a bete noir.)

The other issue related to timings is that on almost any weight of bells, and provided excellent striking is maintained, there is a premium for faster ringing to enable more time in the pub afterwards. (Of course, not completing the peal enables further rounds to be consumed.)

Simon Linford - exactly, the mental effort is the main thing, far above any physical aspects.

The lack of visual, or any other aids, is surely part of the process which animates individuals to indulge in ringing. If one adjudges the process to be worth performing, then surely a small addition to the challenge (i.e. a modicum of memorising, and some intelligent deduction - for example, from the grid categorisation) is to be welcomed. Certainly, in a peal or longer, one needs something to keep the mind alive.

Also, as a musician, I learn the technicalities of a piece (or, perhaps more accurately, apply my knowledge of the period of music to inform my performance). One allies this with, with the part, or score when I'm conducting, acting as an aide memoire. After all, no audience member would care (and pay) to hear a performance which is not as perfect as one can make it. The unspoken contract is that I as performer must do my utmost based on study and performance practice, to strive as pure as experience of the music as is possible. With the canon of music in repertoire from the 11th century to the present day, it would be somewhat of a chore to try to memorise it all.

Sounds ghastly. I'd avoid it.
(As an ex-IT person, now thankfully away from all that, I use VERY few 'apps'.)

Relating to Mr Linford's earlier musing upon how it works for organists, here is how I and others approach it.

Frst, the ISM,RSCM,RCO provide standard contracts for the relationship between Incombent (in the CofE) and the principal musician. The Incumbent employs the Director of Music, Organist & Choirmaster, organist, or whichever title is used (depending on responsibilities), and the PCC has the responsibility to pay the agreed (in the contract with the Incumbent) remuneration.

Secondly, according to Canon B20 of the CofE, the Incumbent must pay due attention and weight to points of musical matters raised by the church's principal musician.

Thirdly, the contract provided contains clauses about 'incidental fees, etc.. Thus, for weddings a fee is agreed at the start of the contract, with periodical reviews, for the basic aspect of playing for a wedding, and interviewing the protagonists before the event. (This basic aspect includes playing the music, and guiding the choices for suitability of music, what is appropriate aesthetically and religiously, what can the instrument reasonably do.) If audio or video recordings are likely to be used, an additional fee will usually be charged - with the proviso that no recordings may be made without the agreement and the fee, and the player is entitled to refuse to allow such recordings. Any recordings of the player's performance are subject to the usual legal restraints. A video would normally attract a fee of 100% of the basic contract fee.

Fourthly, the full fee(s) are payable to the resident organist, even if someone else is employed (with the resident organist's permission in advance) to perform.

Fifthly, the impact of photographers overreaching themselves (both professional and amateur), and other disgraceful matters (CDs, etc.) have now led many musicians to refuse to play for weddings - or to play on a freelance basis for very few, provided the fee is high enough (i.e. considerably higher than the contract rates.)

Sixthly, the contracts above, and the rates dependent on the type of church, the status (professional or amateur) of the musician, the need or otherwise to direct a choir, as well as the terms and conditions, are updated regularly.

Seventhly, the contract element of weddings often includes a clause such as to allow the musician to leave after a wait for a bride of 10 mins after the agreed starting time. Many musicians may well have a schedule of weddings in different places to attend during a day.

I guess the CCCBR is the relevant body to provide a pro forma contract for wedding ringers in churches, and is the only such body.

The ISM/RSCM/RCO contracts for musicians are, in my experience, very helpful. Particularly in present times, when fees are being attacked from all sides, including those which might be expected to be aware of the need to make a living. (In the sense, that, being a church musician, or a ringer, requires considerable skill, talent, and experience, acquired at considerable cost and time - and this should be taken into account alongside the costs of being available if agreed, at the appropriate time.

Finally, if my grammar, punctuation, spelling, and syntax is awry, above, I plead the fact of have cataract surgery yesterday p.m., and as yet somewhat blurred eyesight

Simon Linford: I'm not sure we've met - I gave up ringing many years ago in the face of a greatly increased musical and, more latterly, academic workload.
I'm not sure how (I should say that I am thinking now about getting back to ringing, if I can find anywhere in my area which has any interesting ringing) a training session relates to a stimulating 'practice', in the context of paying. It was the latter of which I was thinking. If someone went to a tower event in the hope of a stimulating evening based on the apparent local reputation, but found that the reality fell short, why might one wish to part with funds?