[Bell Historians] Ludlow

Mon Nov 24 13:03:03 GMT 2008

I think this has varying degrees of success.

Some bells just wont go true harmonic and its best not to try.

I wonder what Taylor's did at Leigh, Gtr Manchester. They were tuned at the
last rehung by them and sound really good. Definitely not true harmonic nor
would I want them to be.

Aye

On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 11:18 AM, Andrew Bull <a_m_bull at ar8a7Rj159EWgN-CDZ9Sb-fFkvxaosJKxIAoKKJdVVCnkHU6yXopFtTqdktQ7zg54bKJ48iawGbjYwfTH5o.yahoo.invalid> wrote:

>    Ah, that would be Geoff Stickland then!!!! I only looked up the tuning
> figures because Ruth (Stickland) kept going on about how much weight the
> bells had lost in tuning - did she really ask for a refund for the "lost"
> metal? She seemed satisfied when I explained to her what had been done.
>
> I never rang at Quedgeley before the retuning, but have rung on them very
> regularly since moving to Dursley in 1994 (my wife and I have known the
> Sticklands for many years, and they are godparents to our younger son). I
> think the bells are quite pleasant tonally, and a good example of how old
> bells can be retuned to near true-harmonic standards without losing their
> "character".
>
> I have the figures "as received" in 1993, and they were definitely
> old-style. I would be very interested to know how the bellfoundries decide
> how to approach retuning of old bells. For example, Berkeley in
> Gloucestershire were retuned by Taylors in 1978, but all that was done was
> to adjust the nominals slightly - the partials were not altered. Certainly
> these bells could have done with some Quedgeley-style treatment (and perhaps
> the four trebles recasting!). What criteria govern how much tuning can be
> done?
>
> Andrew Bull
>
> *Andrew Higson <andrew.higson at RWBaazsLqhgqfnvHN58lQWSH5Ue9OyTRUT7RQTGFpbT6sbc_yJMQfEXJFThmfOrVlLD-tGR_hp3B9Alc9pmaMpVnc0vK.yahoo.invalid>* wrote:
>
>   The latter.
>  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
>  ------------------------------
>  *From:* bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com [mailto:
> bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com] *On Behalf Of *Andrew Bull
> *Sent:* 24 November 2008 10:52
> *To:* bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com
> *Subject:* RE: [Bell Historians] Ludlow
>    Was this the retuning at Ludlow, or the retuning at Quedgeley?
>   Andrew Bull
>
> *Andrew Higson <andrew.higson at RWBaazsLqhgqfnvHN58lQWSH5Ue9OyTRUT7RQTGFpbT6sbc_yJMQfEXJFThmfOrVlLD-tGR_hp3B9Alc9pmaMpVnc0vK.yahoo.invalid>* wrote:
>
>   They weren't overly sharp before I started. The incumbent was very
> grumpy about what I had done until the organist observed how pleasant and
> musical the bells were after the retune.
>  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
>  ------------------------------
>  *From:* bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com [mailto:
> bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com] *On Behalf Of *Richard Offen
> *Sent:* 23 November 2008 21:40
> *To:* bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com
> *Subject:* RE: [Bell Historians] Ludlow
>    Did they really manage to get octave hum notes out of the Rudhall bells
> at Quedgley?
>  R
>  ------------------------------
>  *From:* bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com [mailto:
> bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com] *On Behalf Of *Andrew Bull
> *Sent:* Monday, 24 November 2008 12:55 AM
> *To:* bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com
> *Subject:* RE: [Bell Historians] Ludlow
>    I imagine that the present 5th and treble will have to be recast, as
> they would need to be sharpened by a semitone to make 9th and 4th of ten
> with the present 7th as tenor. Presumably the others would be retuned as
> well, though I believe they were in fact retuned in 1988 (as well as 1890).
> It would be interesting to know who is doing the job, and whether the new
> bells will be old-style or true-harmonic. Quedgeley, in Gloucester, also
> largely Rudhall 1732, were retuned in 1993 and converted into a
> true-harmonic ring, which the exception of the 1850 Taylor sixth, which
> obviously caused the tuned some problems.
>  Andrew Bull
>  ------------------------------
>  *From:* bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com [mailto:
> bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com] *On Behalf Of *Richard Offen
> *Sent:* 23 November 2008 15:42
> *To:* bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com
> *Subject:* RE: [Bell Historians] Ludlow
>    I hope they are going to be tuned, the present 6th is horribly flat
> (almost a ¼ semitone)!
>  R
>  ------------------------------
>  *From:* bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com [mailto:
> bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com] *On Behalf Of *Andrew Watkins
> *Sent:* Sunday, 23 November 2008 11:46 PM
> *To:* bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com
> *Subject:* RE: [Bell Historians] Ludlow
>
> Ludlow are going to be made into a 10, with the present 7th as the tenor.
> The bells are coming out on the 3rd December. Sorry I can't tell you much
> more at present.
>
> Andrew Watkins
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  ========================================
> Message Received: Nov 23 2008, 12:58 PM
> From: "Richard Offen"
> To: bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com
> Cc:
> Subject: RE: [Bell Historians] Ludlow
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  I guess they are either going up to ten or twelve, as has been planned
> for
> the last five years or so - they have two of the Gillett bells from the old
> ring at Kidderminster in store.
>
> R
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com <bellhistorians%40yahoogroups.com>[mailto:
> bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com <bellhistorians%40yahoogroups.com>]
> On Behalf Of David Bryaant
> Sent: Sunday, 23 November 2008 9:41 PM
> To: bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com <bellhistorians%40yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Bell Historians] Ludlow
>
> What's happening at Ludlow, then?
>
> http://www.campanophile.co.uk/show.aspx?Code=74540
> <http://www.campanophile.co.uk/show.aspx?Code=74540>
>
> Is the augmentation to 12+2# proposed a few years ago now going ahead?
>
> David
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
> Version: 8.0.175 / Virus Database: 270.9.9/1806 - Release Date: 11/22/2008
> 6:59 PM
>
>  No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
> Version: 8.0.175 / Virus Database: 270.9.9/1806 - Release Date: 11/22/2008
> 6:59 PM
>  No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
> Version: 8.0.175 / Virus Database: 270.9.9/1808 - Release Date: 11/23/2008
> 6:59 PM
>
>
>
>
>  
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ringingworld.co.uk/pipermail/bell-historians/attachments/20081124/99ae94ba/attachment.html>