[Bell Historians] Mini rings

[David Bagley]

How small does a bell have to be before it is no longer a bell?

David

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "John Harrison" <john at iGS8R--MePAgi0ouIsnGEtNkaSt_9ZAORX0bM5JAX5oafmMFaN6psrBJxAn-bLt5KsMi7ceh4KjOblGkPQ.yahoo.invalid>
To: <bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2010 11:29 AM
Subject: [Bell Historians] Mini rings


>> Dove-online listing includes weights of 1/2cwt and upwards while the
>> Mini Ring Directory includes weights up to about 2cwt. There seems to be
>> an overlap.
>
> There is an overlap, because the distinctions that people wish to make 
> when
> using the term are fuzzy, and different people want to make different
> distinctions.
>
> Logically, 'mini ring' ought to refer simply to weight.  On that basis,
> there seems to be a clear natural divide, with no rings between 22lb and
> 63lb, but plenty lighter and heavier.  On that basis, maybe 40lb would be 
> a
> safe dividing line.
>
> But many people seem less interested in size per se than in the status of
> the ring, making an instinctive distinction between 'towers' and 'non
> towers', which probably equates to 'public' and 'private', since the
> defining feature of a public ring is that some sort of structure 
> containing
> louvres protrudes upwards from the building, whereas private rings have no
> such requirement (and probably a desire not to radiate much sound) and so
> tend to be built within the confines of natural roof lines.
>
> This latter distinction clearly doesn't permit a weight cut-off, since
> Warden Hill is barely 1/2 cwt, while several private rings are well over
> 1cwt.
>
> So you pay your money and take your choice.  Either use 'mini' for size, 
> in
> which case there is a clear dividing line around 40lb, or go with the
> majority tendency to use mini-ring as a code for 'not a proper tower', in
> which case you have to forget about weight as a delineator.  You can't 
> have
> both.
>
> Regards
>
> -- 
> John Harrison
> http://www.jaharrison.me.uk
> Message sent from an Iyonix running RISC-OS 5
>