[Bell Historians] Re: Warner headstocks

matthewhigby at a... matthewhigby at a...
Wed Dec 8 11:44:47 GMT 2004


In a message dated 08/12/2004 11:23:18 GMT Standard Time, 
david at b... writes:

> Unfortunately yes - the back two are quite hard to get up on the 
> side and are a little sluggish to ring. All except the 7th had new 
> fitted prior to the 1995 restoration but twiddle pins were added 
in 1995.

So what exactly did the rehang entail? I've rung there a couple of 
times in the last few months, and had noticed that the back bells 
(particularly the 7th) were a little sluggish.


Bob Parker rehung them with new gudgeons and bearings in the late 1980's 
(from memory). The 7th had been fitted with ball bearings prior to this although 
these were relaced as part of the scheme. They sounded rather wierd, the 2&7 
being 1912 Warner, a bright 1950's Taylor 6th (Which was almost the same 
note as the 5th) and the remainder Rudhall. The sound before retuning still 
makes me cringe when I think about it.

During 1994-5 they were taken out and retuned by Whitechapel (one of the 
best retuning jobs I have heard to this day) and are now a very grand ring for 
their weight. The other bells were brought up in tonal quality to match the 
good 6th, although the treble and 3rd aren't quite as good as the others. The 
tenor now weighs 14-1-9 in E flat. Apart from gudgeons & bearings and the odd 
clapper or two, thay are still on the 1912 frame and fittings. Sadly the 
central holes aren't quite large enough to iron out all odd-struckness using the 
twiddle pins, but thay're not bad at all.


Matthew Higby & Company Ltd,
Church Bell Engineers,
Jasmine Cottage,
The Street,
BA3 4HN.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ringingworld.co.uk/pipermail/bell-historians/attachments/20041208/cebf8d1c/attachment.html>

More information about the Bell-historians mailing list