------=_NextPart_000_0022_01C543A3.1D9BB0C0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I also looked at the 1897 back 8 at Towcester a few weeks ago - and wasn't = surprised to see very little tuning marks - in fact, is the 9th a maiden be= ll?=20 To me these bells sound different (and better) to a lot of other Taylor rin= gs, but why? Is it=20 1) down to the profiles being different?=20 2) Is it due to the (lack of) tuning?=20 3) Is it all down to the fab tower acoustics?=20 Hmm - I am inclined to think that it's all three! Don't forget that a number of rings of this era are quite heavy for they ke= ynote - these are certainly one; Heavitree are another. Both are first-clas= s rings. The thickness could be an important factor in the sound they produ= ce. I know that Taylors changed their profiles sometime during the 1930's to pr= ovide a sharper tierce, mainly for the carillon trade I am told. Round about 1924-5, although I don't think a complete set of new gauges was= made at once. York Minster bells (1925) are all the newer profile (which h= ave more rounded shoulders) apart from the 8th, with is the earlier style. = I understand the change in profile was to give an equal rather than just te= mpered tierce, mainly for the carillon trade. Interestingly, both of the examples which you mention are from the very ear= ly years of true harmonic tuning. When did it become usual Taylor practice = to cast bells thicker than required and tune them down, I wonder? Andrew H = may know. I'll have to have a look at the tuning marks on the two Beverley = tens (St Mary's 1900, Minster 1901 incorporating two bells of 1896), to see= what tuning marks they have. As I say, Exeter tenor of 1902 has been heavi= ly tuned - I've looked. It would be interesting to know about Redcliffe (19= 03) - perhaps Philip Pratt could have a look? There is a maiden Taylor bell of 1895 at Stockton on Forest, just outside Y= ork. The back four of the present six were supplied by Taylor's in 1895 alo= ng with anf H frame and fittings including CI stocks; although of reasonabl= y good tone the bells do not have true harmonics. David ------=_NextPart_000_0022_01C543A3.1D9BB0C0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I also looked at the 1897 = back 8 at=20 Towcester a few weeks ago - and wasn't surprised to see very little tuning = marks=20 - in fact, is the 9th a maiden bell?
To me these bells sound di= fferent=20 (and better) to a lot of other Taylor rings, but why? Is it
1) down to the profiles be= ing=20 different?
2) Is it due to the (lack = of)=20 tuning? 
3) Is it all down to the f= ab tower=20 acoustics? 
Hmm - I am inclined to thi= nk that=20 it's all three!
 
Don't forget that a number= of rings=20 of this era are quite heavy for they keynote - these are certainly one;=20 Heavitree are another. Both are first-class rings. The thickness could be a= n=20 important factor in the sound they produce.
 
I know that Taylors change= d their=20 profiles sometime during the 1930's to provide a sharper tierce, mainly for= the=20 carillon trade I am told.
 
Round about 1924-5, althou= gh I don't=20 think a complete set of new gauges was made at once. York Minster bells=20 (1925) are all the newer profile (which have more rounded shoulders) a= part=20 from the 8th, with is the earlier style. I understand the change in pr= ofile=20 was to give an equal rather than just tempered tierce, mainly for the caril= lon=20 trade.
 
Interestingly, both of the examples which you me= ntion=20 are from the very early years of true harmonic tuning. When did it become u= sual=20 Taylor practice to cast bells thicker than required and tune them down, I=20 wonder? Andrew H may know. I'll have to have a look at the tuning marks on = the=20 two Beverley tens (St Mary's 1900, Minster 1901 incorporating two bells of= =20 1896), to see what tuning marks they have. As I say, Exeter tenor of 1902 h= as=20 been heavily tuned - I've looked. It would be interesting to know about=20 Redcliffe (1903) - perhaps Philip Pratt could have a look?
 
There is a maiden Taylor bell of 1895 at Stockto= n on=20 Forest, just outside York. The back four of the present six were supplied b= y=20 Taylor's in 1895 along with anf H frame and fittings including CI stocks;=20 although of reasonably good tone the bells do not have true=20 harmonics.
 
David
------=_NextPart_000_0022_01C543A3.1D9BB0C0--