[r-t] New Grandsire [was Old methods]

[Mark Davies]

Don writes,

> Starting methods with hunt bells in different places generally means you
> have a different hunt bell. To most ringers I think this would feel like a
> more radical change.

Hmm, I don't really think so. It would feel unfamiliar to someone not used
to ringing, say, variable hunt, but not to someone who is.

It would certainly be very ugly indeed to treat one class of methods
differently to another in this regard. You're saying that methods without
hunt bells can be rotated and still considered the "same" method, but
methods with hunt bells are not. Unpleasant I'm afraid!

> If New Grandsire were rung with the usual Grandsire calls, but so arranged
> that the 3 was the permanent hunt bell, with early thirds as the 3 comes
> to lead and thirds always made as the "other" hunt bell takes the 3 off
> lead, then, yes, it would feel like just the same method as Grandsire.

Ah, I think I see your and Eddie's point. You're saying that, because you've
rotated Grandsire to a new starting point, a new type of call makes sense.
The rotation plus the new type of call makes it look like a totally new
method.

But that seems rather silly to me, too. You could still ring New Grandsire 
with the ordinary Grandsire calls. Or, presumably, you could ring Grandsire 
with New Grandsire calls. The call isn't part of the method.

MBD