[Bell Historians] Tenor Weights

Chris Pickford c.j.pickford at t...
Sun Sep 15 17:28:26 BST 2002

Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Peterborough: Okay, we know the sources, but they're all secondary ones. =
Someone - Ron Dove would have done this in the past - needs to contact Whit=
echapel, point out that there is a discrepancy and ask for confirmation of =
which is correct. That way it can be resolved once an for all - especially=
if the person who makes the enquiry is kind enough to post the answer to t=
his list.

Ash by Sandwich: For practical reasons, Taylors weigh bells with the resin =
pads cast on. In such cases, a slight increase in weight will be noted (e.g=
. Sutton Coldfield, Kempston and - by the sound of it - Ash)


----- Original Message -----=20
From: Nick Bowden=20
To: bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com=20
Sent: Friday, September 13, 2002 7:41 PM
Subject: Re: [Bell Historians] Tenor Weights

MessageAs the originator of this thread (which has been most interesting)=
still do not appear to have a definitive answer for Peterborough Cathedra=
tenor. The ONLY references I've seen to it weighing 21-2-20 are Dove 9 an=
RW 3938. Dove 7 & 8 both have 21-1-20 as do all other references I have
seen. I believe the latter to be the correct weight on the basis that
21-2-20 was a typo in the "Foundry Focus" (a not uncommon feature of an
otherwise excellent, informative and much missed series) and it would fit=
with CP's 21-2-0 at St.John the Divine were he not now doubting the accur=
of his student notes.

P.S. I'm surprised DLC or DrL haven't mentioned the "growing tenor" at As=
next Sandwich, 21-1-18 to 21-3-0.

----- Original Message -----
From: Chris Pickford
To: bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2002 11:40 AM
Subject: Re: [Bell Historians] Tenor Weights

Michael Lee's book on Peterborough gives as the notice and the archive,
except 4 as 5-2-10 and tenor as 21-0-0. As this was probably taken from t=
same notice, I can only assume student (proper spelling this time!) error=
having noted it as 21-2-0, but it does show the treble weights were "give=
out" as 4-2-27 and 5-0-17.

But can GAD shed light on what's right for the 4th? 5-2-10 or 5-2-20?

I see RW 3976 gives the weights of 3 and 4 at Peterborough as 4-0-17 and

The articles in RW 3938 and 3976 (17 Oct.1986 p.913 and 10 July 1987 p.61=
for those who prefer full references) are both in the "Foundry Focus"
series. The first only gives the tenor weight - as 21-2-20 in E flat. Th=
latter gives all the weights, the twelve as 4-1-1, 4-0-17, 4-0-17, 4-2-18=
5-1-12, 5-2-12, 6-3-8, 7-3-10, 9-1-18, 10-2-6, 14-1-12 and 21-1-20 in E
flat. Sharp second 4-0-11, and old tenor 27-0-9 in C (was 29-3-9 before

Comparison seems to indicate that the bells were weighed - but not retune=
d -
in 1986. Hence minor variations - though minor is debatable for 1-2/10!


Yahoo! Groups Sponsor=20

This message was sent to you via the Bell Historians' Mailing List. To un=
subscribe from the list send an email to bellhistorians-unsubscribe at yahoogr=

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.=20

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ringingworld.co.uk/pipermail/bell-historians/attachments/20020915/c5688477/attachment.html>

More information about the Bell-historians mailing list