[Bell Historians] Major third bells

Susan & Christopher Dalton dalton.family at OHXGg0tZzEdC2cJHX41hBkxK1sT8KvZ1hE9BSmuP511B1V-hg_QQQ6mWMnoO0uGdfBW9FiJKmYQPUIF_BMBvFeOPgA.yahoo.invalid
Mon Oct 16 10:11:27 BST 2006

> I was looking at the tuning of the old tenor at Kidderminster for some
> other purposes and happened to notice that it had a major tierce:
> 821.5 cents below the nominal or 378.5 cents above the strike -
> sharper than the tierce of the major third bell in Taylor's museum.
> The bell, of course, was Mears 1857 and I assume had no trace of a
> bulge in the waist. (Mind you, the rest of the partials were pretty
> chaotic!) Accident or design?
As a sweeping generalisation, major-third tierces only become
interesting/remarkable when the nominal, hum (and preferably fundamental
also) are in unison, i.e. in 'true-harmonic' bells.

And they can certainly be achieved without bulging midriffs.  But are they



More information about the Bell-historians mailing list