[Bell Historians] Lucy tuning

[Andrew Higson]

Isn't the best way to get a better idea to actually cast and tune some
bells along the lines of Charles' proposals rather than dismissing them
out of hand? Whilst I doubt that many would want them as a ringing peal
in their church, there are other uses of bells for which this might
actually be appropriate.

 

Given that he was one of the parties who put in a bid on the foundry he
clearly has the wherewithal to fund such a project and put his money
where his ears are.

 

Andrew Higson

John Taylor & Co.

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 nigelsdtaylor
Sent: 15 October 2009 20:31
To: bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Bell Historians] Lucy tuning

 

  

I must confess that this is not a system that I would wish to use for
bells. As I have stated elsewhere, it is best suited for playing music
in minor key. The major thirds are flat of a pure 3rd, and the leading
notes are very flat. Lucy tuning falls between Salinas' 1/3rd comma
meantone, and Zarlino's 2/7 comma. 

Personally, if I wanted to play in all 24 keys equally well, I would use
19-notes to an octave 1/4 comma meantone. I tune my own keyboard
instrument in a modified meantone, which allows me to play in most keys.

I think that extreme tunings would not please the majority of ringers,
particularly flat major 3rds and very large semitones!!

Nigel Taylor



           
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ringingworld.co.uk/pipermail/bell-historians/attachments/20091016/eaa96387/attachment.html>