[Bell Historians] Tuning figures

[Andrew Bull]

Nasty! The tenor seems to be the only bell with anything like reasonable
partials. As for the fifth – fundamental 147 cents sharp, hum 151 cents flat
of the true-harmonic values, with Matthew’s revised figure for the hum. Must
be a truly extraordinary bell – no wonder Mr Dalton is perplexed. Some of
the rest of the bells have what must be unpleasantly flat fundamentals –
that of the third is 220 cents sharp of the octave with the nominal. The
nominal of the fifth is also somewhat out – 76 cents sharp if one takes the
tenor as datum, though looking at the figures it looks like the tenor is
around 17- 20 cents flat for the rest of the ring. The quint of the fourth
comes out as 510 cents flat!

 

Andrew Bull

 

  _____  

From: bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com [mailto:bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com]
On Behalf Of matthewhigby at BeBhYGYC9rnWqekL0RWxAC98OV-NaVpO8yxuWfIQoUzifRtQuqJnfrUCpmy-_dKMlpCntXUx_20NDIE.yahoo.invalid
Sent: 17 January 2007 19:49
To: bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Bell Historians] Tuning figures

 

In a message dated 17/01/2007 18:54:21 GMT Standard Time,
dalton.family at RMmRLpRNXR1q-XDvY8aFt3-YVsARh-TIKBGQvwKLiGItA2B_sIdgt8BTeVYN5qKRhTrwuIse1TzmyeRgc1K_ZA.yahoo.invalid writes:

Anybody else taken the pitches at Aldbourne? I find I am in trouble with
figures for the Warner 1915 5th which, in fairness, does have some very
strange partial tones indeed.

1  333  576  746  ?  1257

2  307  538  695  ?  1182

3  275  465  625  778 1056

4  248  439  564  524  938

5  248  468  499  625  860

6  211  361  468  590  785

7  191  338  421  469  700

8  160  313  374  421  617

 

Matthew

 

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

 

           
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ringingworld.co.uk/pipermail/bell-historians/attachments/20070117/cf757cb8/attachment.html>