[Bell Historians] Nominal or hum

[Richard Offen]

I would suggest "4 x y" -(where y = hum note of bell) would be the least
confusing way of doing it.

 

Just out of interests, at what diameter do you swap from nominal to hum?

 

Richard

 

  _____  

From: bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com [mailto:bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com]
On Behalf Of Andrew Higson
Sent: Tuesday, 15 April 2008 3:43 PM
To: bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Bell Historians] Nominal or hum

 

John Baldwin and I have been discussing the best way to display the details
of the new carillon bells at the Minster in the Dove entry.

 

One thing we are unsure about is how best to show the pitch of the smallest
bells, this being because their pitch is more determined by the hum than the
nominal. In fact the nominals of these small bells are very weak and almost
un-measurable. 

 

In the Taylor records we show the hum for the smaller bells; would this
cause confusion or would it be better to put a hypothetical 4xhum note
value?

 

We would welcome your comments.

 

TIA

 

Andrew Higson

Taylors Eayre and Smith Ltd

The Bellfoundry

Freehold Street

Loughborough

LE11 1AR

Telephone: 01509 212241 Fax: 01509 263305 Registered in England No. 1352309

 

 

           
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ringingworld.co.uk/pipermail/bell-historians/attachments/20080415/55e55c93/attachment.html>