Re: [Bell Historians] You & Yours

[David Bryant]

CD:

> [I agree entirely. All that ought to be required is justification for the
> re-tuning. In my view the situation at Ridge, Herts., where no tuning was
> permitted to a bell which - from memory - was a third of a semitone out
(and
> therefore well within the audibly perceptible range), was entirely
> unsatisfactory. CD]

Dickon:

> That is a rather sweeping statement Mr Bryant. Maybe the bells have been
> listed owing to their unusual tuning. No-one would ever dream of retuning
> Petham (for example). Each case should be judged on its own merit and the
> reasons for the listing taken into account.

Yes, I agree that each case should be considered on its merits, and the
reason for listing taken into account. However, I would suggest that there
are very few bells listed for their tuning, although that will no doubt
change with more modern rings being listed on account of their tonal
quality.

I think the practice of only allowing tuning of the nominal of a listed bell
is a daft idea - it can make the bell individually sound worse, and it will
have been tuned and altered in any case - why not do it properly and do the
best possible with the tuning of the harmonics?

Re. Ridge, I believe I am correct in saying that the bell in question was
not even listed!

David