[Bell Historians] Re: W. L. Bowles on tuning church bells

[whrrr1978]

James Wells recast the 2nd two years  before (1826) so perhaps they 
were still full of enthusiasm for the recently restored bells and 
altered sound of the new bell. Other than this, they remained as they 
were in 1828 until 2001 apart from new fittings at some point in the 
early C20th.

It can be the same today. After rehanging, the locals can be very up-
beat and positive about the work and it's only a few years later that 
it wears off, sometimes with an altered view that maybe they're not 
quite as good as they had thought. This is particularly noticable in 
those who have overseen projects, which is understandable. I name no 
examples :)

--- In bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com, "Anne Willis" <zen16073 at ...> 
wrote:
>
> 
> 
> >It's interesting to note how perceptions change. The bells of 
> >Bremhill, which I have a rather personal interest in, would 
certainly 
> >not have been considered "so well in tune that the commonest ear 
> >would pronounce them musical" prior to their re-tuning in 2001. I 
> >think Bill Hibbert's site contains recordings of them before and 
> >after the 2001 tuning. Still, I suppose in 1828 there wasn't 
really 
> >the chance to hear bells accurately tuned in the way that we do 
now.
> 
> >Mark W.
> 
> 
> 
> I ought to know, but I don't, but were any of the bells at Bremhill 
altered
> after William Bowles time?
> 
> John Aubrey considered Broadchalke to be 'the most tunable' set of 
bells in
> Wiltshire in the seventeenth century, but I suppose we will never 
know how
> they sounded.
> 
> Anne
>