Re (3): [Bell Historians] Bootle (Everton) and Fenham
Richard Offen
richard at s...
Thu Sep 30 12:41:21 BST 2004
>
> The point I was rather elliptically driving at is, in plain terms,
what the hell
> does it mean when WBF repeatedly refer to it. In the absence of an
answer from
> Nigel, we can only deduce from his last posting that he refers to
A452, which
> represents the dizzy heights to which it rose during the last half
of the 19th
> century.
[Old Concert Pitch has A set at 454 Hz, not 452, and was the standard
adopted by many leading orchestras during the late 19th century.
When an old ring falls between the notes of the International Concert
Pitch setting (agreed at an International Congress in 1939) it has
always been Whitechapel's policy to tune to another recognised
standard pitch rather than tune to the flattest bell (avoiding the
need to remove too much metal from thin bells in order to get them to
International Pitch). It may seem odd to you Mr Ivin, but it
obviously seemed sensible to those who made that decision (probably
Bill Hughes) many years ago.]
> The effect is that a bell of a note qualified by 'O C P' is about
half a
> semitone higher than the same note in modern (A440) parlance. (OK -
46.58 cents
> higher, to save you another posting!)
>
> Maybe one day we shall elicit a response, but the fact seems to be
that beyond
> Whitechapel it has no precise and universally recognised meaning.
>
> Another peculiar illogicality which is emerging is the dreaded
Kirnberger III
> scale. The whole point of these historic temperaments was that each
key was
> playable (as opposed to meantone) _but_ each key signature
differred from the
> rest in subtle and not-so-subtle ways. Now we hear that such and
such a ring of
> bells is tuned in Kirnberger III, which _ought_ to mean that
different intervals
> ought to be found between the bells according to the pitch - i.e.
Swineshead (RW p 800)
> keynote F-49c might be expected to use the K III F or E scale
intervals, and
> Milton, Berks keynote B, the B scale intervals, but in practice
both use the
> C scale intervals. I ask you! (It is also arguable that if one must
pick a single
> scale for the preferred one, then the G intervals are a rather
better choice.)
[On what basis do you make this assertion? Have you pitched these
rings?
Readers may be interested to look at Nigel Taylor's web site on
tuning for further information: http://www.kirnberger.fsnet.co.uk/.
One of the accusations I've regularly heard about 'modern' rings of
bells is that they all sound the same. Using another temperament,
which gives each key a 'different colour' addresses this criticism
and is intended to bring some character to modern rings. A good
idea if you ask me!]
Richard (equally ill tempered!)
More information about the Bell-historians
mailing list