[Bell Historians] Copy of a letter to the RW re Church bells.

David Bryant david at b...
Mon Apr 5 22:02:33 BST 2004

> Absolute tosh!
> How can you say that it is not worth trying to improve a ring just
> becuase they are a three?

I'm not saying it isn't worthwhile, just less so that if there are more
bells - e.g. if the three are in a minor key then they could be left like
that, whereas if they were augmented to six it would probably be a good idea
to tune them - not that I have anything against minor sixes, but many people
seem to.

> Unfortunately there is another leading York ringer who seems to
> share this attitude towards lower numbers: that threes are only
> there as potential sixes and should either be hung dead or augmented.

Actually, the York ringer you mean is currently involved in the restoration
of a ring of three. The treble is out of tune and he did suggest to the
parish that it should be tuned but they decided not to - their decision, not

> If I was in charge of restoring an out-of-tune ring of three, I
> would definitely consider having them retuned to improve the sound
> coming out of the tower a little. To leave them out of tune just
> because they are a three is just plain daft, especially considering
> the cost of retuning if the bells have to come out of the tower
> anyway.

Yes, I agree in principal. My point was just that it if they are in a mode
other than Major it may not be so important to tune them as it would be
where there are more bells. I like rings of three, four and (especially)
five, and I think some in modes other than Major adds variety, so long as
they sound pleasant.


More information about the Bell-historians mailing list