The old bells at Coventry

Bill Hibbert bill at h...
Thu Apr 29 11:52:13 BST 2004

When I got home last night, I checked the Coventry tuning figures 
found by Dickon against Mancroft. They are very comparable, the 
Coventry bells are a little better than Mancroft (less flat primes, 
some better hums etc.). Based on the similarity of the tuning, and 
following a suggestion from Mike Chester, I put together a recording 
of 'Coventry' based on recordings I had of Mancroft, tuned to the 
Coventry nominals. I didn't need to use Mancroft tenor, which of 
course comes from a different stable.

In my view, for an old style peal, the 'Coventry' bells sound very 
good indeed. I can now understand why the old fogies at the court 
case had such fond memories of them. If they were in a church I 
attended, I would be proud to ring on them. It was quite a remarkable 
experience listening to the recording while reflecting on the 
fascinating history of the bells.

Unfortunately, I cannot access the Internet from home to upload the 
recording for all to hear because a thunderstorm took out my phone 
line. You'll have to wait until BT sort me out . . .

Jim Phillips:
> How do we know the figures were correct? Were they independantly 

There are two reasons I believe the figures posted by Dickon: first, 
the nominals agree to 1 Hz with those taken by A. A. Hughes in Nov. 
1925 and included in his report. I know Bert Hughes' report is 
printed correctly in E. A. Young's book because the figures for 
frequency and intervals he gives calculate exactly correct.

Second, the Coventry and Mancroft tuning figures agree very well, 
both for inner and outer tuning, except that the 2nd and 9th at 
Coventry are somewhat flat - but not enough to spoil the effect in 

Bill H

More information about the Bell-historians mailing list