<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
mso-fareast-language:EN-US;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
mso-fareast-language:EN-US;}
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-GB link="#0563C1" vlink="#954F72" style='word-wrap:break-word'><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal>I have been following the debate on note-names with amused detachment, trying to understand why it matters :-) Tim Jackson’s explanation of the rules traditionally adopted by Dove sounds about right to me. All that is required is that someone with a moderate appreciation for music can look at the notes given for a peal and see there is a musical scale. A scale of Bb is easier to appreciate than a scale of A# because there are less accidentals.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>As someone who I suspect spends more time than many analysing bell partials (around 300 bells in the last month alone), I never bother too much with the note names shown in Dove, any reasonable scheme seems fine to me.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>As regards Andrew Wilby’s question about the rationale for A=440, it is an old source, but Alexander Ellis’ paper on The History of Musical Pitch in Europe, on pp 495 onwards in my 1954 edition of Helmholtz ‘On the Sensations of Tone’ gives values for A based on historical instruments and tuning forks from around 380 (Low Church Pitch) to 505 (Highest Church Pitch). He explains that originally pitches were quite low (Handel’s A fork was 422.5Hz) but then in the 19<sup>th</sup> century pitches of military bands started to rise to make regimental music sound brighter, until, as Ellis says ‘The mania spread throughout Europe . . . [and] reached A=448 at the Paris Opera in 1858, and the musical world took fright’.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>For bells, except possibly carillons, of course the absolute pitch standard is irrelevant provided the bells are all in tune with each other.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Regards,<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Bill H<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div></body></html>