G&J tuning

Bill Hibbert bill at h...
Tue Jun 15 08:05:43 BST 2004

I am following this discussion with great interest, and learning 
fast. Some questions and points of interest:

David Cawley:
> St Nicolas Leicester bourdon had 15 partials tuned.
This is quite unusual: was it just that 15 partial frequencies were 
noted, or that there was some actual attempt to tune them?

Nigel Taylor:
> Tuning figures for the Riverside bourdon.
The as-cast figures are pretty remarkably good. It seems that the 
bell was getting worse as they tuned it!
> Beats between hum and second partial.
How rapid were the beats?. It's not clear to me that there is any 
physical mechanism that would give rise to audible beats between 
these partials. If the beats were slow, it might be due to a doublet 
on the hum, which would also explain the tuning error.

What pitch is the secondary strike of this bell? Does anyone have a 

Wolverhampton, and G&J major thirds:
> We might have Simpson to blame for these, after all he does suggest 
in his second paper that major tierces might sound nice. A carillon 
correspondent suggests that the reason why major-third bells sound so 
odd is that the sharper tierce gives rise to a virtual pitch (like a 
secondary strike, but lower rather than higher). I have now proved 
that the tierce is absolutely critical to forming the note we hear in 
the bell, moving it too far could give rise to all sorts of odd 

Let's have more on G&J, I'm finding it fascinating.

Bill H

More information about the Bell-historians mailing list